Is it fair to say you’re not a fan of the current Government Alan? Better get used to it - we’ve probably got 15 years with this lot! 😂
Those of us who work in manufacturing have been used to this shit for the last 30 years.
Well indeed, the article actually says in the middle that this is a policy proposed under the last government, but then you link it and say it is Miliband that is responsible.
Though having a more user pays energy system seems entirely reasonable to me, if you want to invest in manufacturing and get cheaper energy because you invest closer to where the energy is produced so there's lower transmission costs then that seems good for those manufacturing firms.
Bad for those firms who expect others to carry their costs for them.
There is no differnce between Labour and the Tories on this they have both been negligent and driven industry off shore. However Miliband is the man in the hot seat and he will accelerate job losses rather than create properity.
Nearly three quarters of graduates earn less than £29,120 — the average salary of those aged 22 to 29 — more than 15 months after leaving university, according to official figures from the Higher Education Statistics Agency (Hesa).
Five years later, they have still not caught up. A separate study of graduate tax data in the same year, by the Department for Education, reveals that they earned £3,300 a year less than the median salary for their age group by this later stage.
I listen to LBC far too much, and there's an awful lot of talk that "students can't afford the debt from student fees, I know let's return funding to the public sector and limit places to the elite 7%".
Keep the riff-raff out of higher education for their own good, could be a policy on the next Tory manifesto
The 'riff-raff' who would be kept out of universities if they returned to a 20-25% level would be the less academic half of middle class teens.
Only a generation ago it was perfectly normal for middle class kids to enter the workforce at 18, or even 16.
The hole in the workforce is partly caused by too many undergraduates and Osbornes early retirement wheeze to get people drawing pensions at 55. Together these could have taken 1 million people out of the workforce.
It might be possible in the 2060s to be drawing on your pension while still paying student loans.
Looking at that field, I would say there's a non-trivial chance that whoever the winner is, the Tories will end up feeling positively nostalgic for the days of IDS.
There is also an even chance that whoever is chosen becomes the next Prime Minister.
Looking at that field, I would say there's a non-trivial chance that whoever the winner is, the Tories will end up feeling positively nostalgic for the days of IDS.
There is also an even chance that whoever is chosen becomes the next Prime Minister.
Really?
That's a new definition of 'even chance' I'm not familiar with.
If Starmer bombs the chances are he'll be forced out.
If he doesn't, it's very hard to see a path back to power for the Tories in just one term.
It's really really hard to see the government of 2024-9 failing to the degree that the one of 2019-24 did. Doing some things that annoy pensioners isn't going to do it. Though that might just be wishful thinking on my part, what with having an interest in living somewhere well-run.
And if it does fail, there's no reason to think that the Conservatives will be the beneficiaries. You also need the Lib Dems to fall apart in the way that the SNP did.
There is a palpable lack of enthusiasm for Starmers government. We are in a very different place to 1997. In part this is a legacy of a low energy GE campaign that failed to enthuse or engage with Labour voters, but also in part because of the timing. Labour's honeymoon fell in the summer fallow season of politics. Things are likely to get going again in the autumn with the conferences and budget.
However there's even less enthusiasm for the Tories. They seem to have a pretty poor choice between Reform-lite and the blandest thing on the menu for their next leader.
There is a palpable lack of enthusiasm for politics generally because for a long time politics has not delivered anything very much in the way of positive results. That is not going to change after five weeks or five months. But we are a long way from the next general election. We have got so used to drama and regime change since 2015 that we seem to have forgotten this.
I certainly think that the next couple of years will be a grind to get the national finances and public services back in functioning order. It's going to be an uninspiring grind and while both Reeves and Starmer are uninspiring grinders, they will probably succeed, not least because the economy is growing again, and some progress happening on waiting lists etc. There is no instant formula to magic away all the problems of the nation while the Tories obsessed with fripperies.
There will be a need to freshen up in the run up to the next GE, just as the Democrats freshened up their offer. I don't think Starmer will run for a second term, and I don't think Reeves will get the gig. Of all the new faces in Cabinet it is Phillipson on that impresses me. Smart, poised, articulate and Northern working class.
Is it fair to say you’re not a fan of the current Government Alan? Better get used to it - we’ve probably got 15 years with this lot! 😂
Those of us who work in manufacturing have been used to this shit for the last 30 years.
Well indeed, the article actually says in the middle that this is a policy proposed under the last government, but then you link it and say it is Miliband that is responsible.
Though having a more user pays energy system seems entirely reasonable to me, if you want to invest in manufacturing and get cheaper energy because you invest closer to where the energy is produced so there's lower transmission costs then that seems good for those manufacturing firms.
Bad for those firms who expect others to carry their costs for them.
There is no differnce between Labour and the Tories on this they have both been negligent and driven industry off shore. However Miliband is the man in the hot seat and he will accelerate job losses rather than create properity.
Big state low growth.
The proposal, to charge costs based more on actual cost rather than having a nationwide pricing structure, is actually rolling back the size of the state a bit.
Don't you believe in a user pays economy? Should those with higher costs not be responsible for their own costs?
Looking at that field, I would say there's a non-trivial chance that whoever the winner is, the Tories will end up feeling positively nostalgic for the days of IDS.
There is also an even chance that whoever is chosen becomes the next Prime Minister.
Really?
That's a new definition of 'even chance' I'm not familiar with.
If Starmer bombs the chances are he'll be forced out.
If he doesn't, it's very hard to see a path back to power for the Tories in just one term.
It's really really hard to see the government of 2024-9 failing to the degree that the one of 2019-24 did. Doing some things that annoy pensioners isn't going to do it. Though that might just be wishful thinking on my part, what with having an interest in living somewhere well-run.
And if it does fail, there's no reason to think that the Conservatives will be the beneficiaries. You also need the Lib Dems to fall apart in the way that the SNP did.
There is a palpable lack of enthusiasm for Starmers government. We are in a very different place to 1997. In part this is a legacy of a low energy GE campaign that failed to enthuse or engage with Labour voters, but also in part because of the timing. Labour's honeymoon fell in the summer fallow season of politics. Things are likely to get going again in the autumn with the conferences and budget.
However there's even less enthusiasm for the Tories. They seem to have a pretty poor choice between Reform-lite and the blandest thing on the menu for their next leader.
There is a palpable lack of enthusiasm for politics generally because for a long time politics has not delivered anything very much in the way of positive results. That is not going to change after five weeks or five months. But we are a long way from the next general election. We have got so used to drama and regime change since 2015 that we seem to have forgotten this.
I certainly think that the next couple of years will be a grind to get the national finances and public services back in functioning order. It's going to be an uninspiring grind and while both Reeves and Starmer are uninspiring grinders, they will probably succeed, not least because the economy is growing again, and some progress happening on waiting lists etc. There is no instant formula to magic away all the problems of the nation while the Tories obsessed with fripperies.
There will be a need to freshen up in the run up to the next GE, just as the Democrats freshened up their offer. I don't think Starmer will run for a second term, and I don't think Reeves will get the gig. Of all the new faces in Cabinet it is Phillips on that impresses me. Smart, poised, articulate and Northern working class.
Do you mean Bridget Phillipson? She's long been my tip for next Labour leader. I agree that Reeves won't be. But my guess is that Starmer will run again, if Labour look like winning. If they don't, he'll stand down as PM and as an MP.
Nearly three quarters of graduates earn less than £29,120 — the average salary of those aged 22 to 29 — more than 15 months after leaving university, according to official figures from the Higher Education Statistics Agency (Hesa).
Five years later, they have still not caught up. A separate study of graduate tax data in the same year, by the Department for Education, reveals that they earned £3,300 a year less than the median salary for their age group by this later stage.
I listen to LBC far too much, and there's an awful lot of talk that "students can't afford the debt from student fees, I know let's return funding to the public sector and limit places to the elite 7%".
Keep the riff-raff out of higher education for their own good, could be a policy on the next Tory manifesto
The 'riff-raff' who would be kept out of universities if they returned to a 20-25% level would be the less academic half of middle class teens.
Only a generation ago it was perfectly normal for middle class kids to enter the workforce at 18, or even 16.
150 years ago they could sweep chimneys at six, so your point is?
Plenty of 18 year old skilled working class kids are plumbers or electricians earning £30k plus by 21 when arts graduates leave universities seeking their first wage, probably no higher and often lower.
University gives a big wage premium still to STEM graduates, law and medicine and economics graduates, not many others though
Whilst Badenoch is undoubtedly weird, she is hardly alone. Reflecting on U.K. politics, it’s hard to pinpoint politicians that aren’t weird. It’s not just the Tories. Sunak and Truss are weird. Johnson is weird. Starmer is weird. Davey is weird. Farage is weird. Blair started out normal ish and ended up really weird.
To rise to the top of our system, you have to be, well how can I put it, weird.
Of the current crop of Tory hopefuls arguably Cleverly is the least weird, but he’s still weird.
He has a head shaped like a globe and his beard starts just under his eyelids.
Is it fair to say you’re not a fan of the current Government Alan? Better get used to it - we’ve probably got 15 years with this lot! 😂
Those of us who work in manufacturing have been used to this shit for the last 30 years.
Well indeed, the article actually says in the middle that this is a policy proposed under the last government, but then you link it and say it is Miliband that is responsible.
Though having a more user pays energy system seems entirely reasonable to me, if you want to invest in manufacturing and get cheaper energy because you invest closer to where the energy is produced so there's lower transmission costs then that seems good for those manufacturing firms.
Bad for those firms who expect others to carry their costs for them.
There is no differnce between Labour and the Tories on this they have both been negligent and driven industry off shore. However Miliband is the man in the hot seat and he will accelerate job losses rather than create properity.
Big state low growth.
The proposal, to charge costs based more on actual cost rather than having a nationwide pricing structure, is actually rolling back the size of the state a bit.
Don't you believe in a user pays economy? Should those with higher costs not be responsible for their own costs?
I believe the government will screw up any changes and the net result will be everyone pays more.
As a matter of interest it is worth reading the sentencing remarks of the judge in the 'just stop oil' case as it is often cited in comparison with the current round of sentencing.
The participants got 4 years in jail rising to 5 for the leader. There was however intent to cause significant disruption, no guilty pleas, no mitigation, and concern about how they had conducted themselves in the trial. Also, those involved had previous convictions, in all but one case, they had multiple convictions connected to direct action protest.
This appears to indicate to a determination to use imprisonment as a way to manage protest, consistent with the 'far right' protests, but it is notable in the Just Stop Oil cases, the fate of imprisonment seems to have been reserved for repeat offenders.
But you aren't really comparing like with like.
Two major aggravating factors with the racist riots is the violence and racism therein.
Climbing oneself to the top of the Dartford Crossing Bridge to bring the M25 to a standstill should justify an appropriate sentence. However, we have posters on here who seem to believe climbing on the bridge over the Thames at Dartford warrants a longer sentence than attempting to burn down a Holiday Inn Express full of guests. Madness!
If the police thought there was a genuine risk of that place being burnt down, then armed police would have been called and the perpetrators would have been shot.
This isn't to defend the knuckle draggers who were doing it.
I agree, though history is littered with cases where a judgment of "no real danger" turned out to be mistaken.
With jails full, presumably judgments need to be made about the relative sentences imposed foi (a) violent rioting (b) expensive sabotage and (c) routine law-breaking. The severe sentences on riots seem to have snuffed out the temptation to have more, for now at least. In all three cases, the fact that Norwegian reoffending is half that in Britain suggests that serious investment in persuading prisoners that there's a sensible alternative pays off in the long term.
Nearly three quarters of graduates earn less than £29,120 — the average salary of those aged 22 to 29 — more than 15 months after leaving university, according to official figures from the Higher Education Statistics Agency (Hesa).
Five years later, they have still not caught up. A separate study of graduate tax data in the same year, by the Department for Education, reveals that they earned £3,300 a year less than the median salary for their age group by this later stage.
Depends on the course 'It is mostly arts and social sciences graduates earning salaries below the £29,120 threshold...Across all UK universities, the highest-earning subjects 15 months after graduating were dentistry and veterinary medicine, with median graduate salaries of £42,000 and £35,000 respectively... Some leading law firms offer starting salaries to newly qualified lawyers, generally aged 25 or 26, of £170,000 or £180,000 a year.'
As a matter of interest it is worth reading the sentencing remarks of the judge in the 'just stop oil' case as it is often cited in comparison with the current round of sentencing.
The participants got 4 years in jail rising to 5 for the leader. There was however intent to cause significant disruption, no guilty pleas, no mitigation, and concern about how they had conducted themselves in the trial. Also, those involved had previous convictions, in all but one case, they had multiple convictions connected to direct action protest.
This appears to indicate to a determination to use imprisonment as a way to manage protest, consistent with the 'far right' protests, but it is notable in the Just Stop Oil cases, the fate of imprisonment seems to have been reserved for repeat offenders.
But you aren't really comparing like with like.
Two major aggravating factors with the racist riots is the violence and racism therein.
Almost all the JSO offenders given jail sentences had already been previously let off with suspended sentences but broken them. The rioters however were nearly all sent to jail straight away without passing go even after pleading guilty and if they showed some remorse given the damage they caused. Fair enough on both counts one would think
All the reporting of jailed protestors so far seem to have a series of past offences too.
It seems to be the usual criminal suspects who've engaged in criminality and found out that this time the Plod and courts were interested.
Oh well, how sad, nevermind.
This woman was jailed and had never had a previous conviction for example
Nearly three quarters of graduates earn less than £29,120 — the average salary of those aged 22 to 29 — more than 15 months after leaving university, according to official figures from the Higher Education Statistics Agency (Hesa).
Five years later, they have still not caught up. A separate study of graduate tax data in the same year, by the Department for Education, reveals that they earned £3,300 a year less than the median salary for their age group by this later stage.
I listen to LBC far too much, and there's an awful lot of talk that "students can't afford the debt from student fees, I know let's return funding to the public sector and limit places to the elite 7%".
Keep the riff-raff out of higher education for their own good, could be a policy on the next Tory manifesto
The 'riff-raff' who would be kept out of universities if they returned to a 20-25% level would be the less academic half of middle class teens.
Only a generation ago it was perfectly normal for middle class kids to enter the workforce at 18, or even 16.
As we look across the world, all our economic competitors and peers have similar numbers going on to tertiary education as as. The future is a knowledge and service economy.
Our problem is not the numbers going on to higher education, it is the often poor quality of courses that are run by Universities that focus on selling the undergraduate experience rather than the course.
Looking at that field, I would say there's a non-trivial chance that whoever the winner is, the Tories will end up feeling positively nostalgic for the days of IDS.
There is also an even chance that whoever is chosen becomes the next Prime Minister.
Really?
That's a new definition of 'even chance' I'm not familiar with.
If Starmer bombs the chances are he'll be forced out.
If he doesn't, it's very hard to see a path back to power for the Tories in just one term.
It's really really hard to see the government of 2024-9 failing to the degree that the one of 2019-24 did. Doing some things that annoy pensioners isn't going to do it. Though that might just be wishful thinking on my part, what with having an interest in living somewhere well-run.
And if it does fail, there's no reason to think that the Conservatives will be the beneficiaries. You also need the Lib Dems to fall apart in the way that the SNP did.
There is a palpable lack of enthusiasm for Starmers government. We are in a very different place to 1997. In part this is a legacy of a low energy GE campaign that failed to enthuse or engage with Labour voters, but also in part because of the timing. Labour's honeymoon fell in the summer fallow season of politics. Things are likely to get going again in the autumn with the conferences and budget.
However there's even less enthusiasm for the Tories. They seem to have a pretty poor choice between Reform-lite and the blandest thing on the menu for their next leader.
There is a palpable lack of enthusiasm for politics generally because for a long time politics has not delivered anything very much in the way of positive results. That is not going to change after five weeks or five months. But we are a long way from the next general election. We have got so used to drama and regime change since 2015 that we seem to have forgotten this.
I certainly think that the next couple of years will be a grind to get the national finances and public services back in functioning order. It's going to be an uninspiring grind and while both Reeves and Starmer are uninspiring grinders, they will probably succeed, not least because the economy is growing again, and some progress happening on waiting lists etc. There is no instant formula to magic away all the problems of the nation while the Tories obsessed with fripperies.
There will be a need to freshen up in the run up to the next GE, just as the Democrats freshened up their offer. I don't think Starmer will run for a second term, and I don't think Reeves will get the gig. Of all the new faces in Cabinet it is Phillips on that impresses me. Smart, poised, articulate and Northern working class.
Do you mean Bridget Phillipson? She's long been my tip for next Labour leader. I agree that Reeves won't be. But my guess is that Starmer will run again, if Labour look like winning. If they don't, he'll stand down as PM and as an MP.
Yes, autocorrect edited to Phillips, then I corrected it.
Is it fair to say you’re not a fan of the current Government Alan? Better get used to it - we’ve probably got 15 years with this lot! 😂
Those of us who work in manufacturing have been used to this shit for the last 30 years.
Well indeed, the article actually says in the middle that this is a policy proposed under the last government, but then you link it and say it is Miliband that is responsible.
Though having a more user pays energy system seems entirely reasonable to me, if you want to invest in manufacturing and get cheaper energy because you invest closer to where the energy is produced so there's lower transmission costs then that seems good for those manufacturing firms.
Bad for those firms who expect others to carry their costs for them.
There is no differnce between Labour and the Tories on this they have both been negligent and driven industry off shore. However Miliband is the man in the hot seat and he will accelerate job losses rather than create properity.
Big state low growth.
The proposal, to charge costs based more on actual cost rather than having a nationwide pricing structure, is actually rolling back the size of the state a bit.
Don't you believe in a user pays economy? Should those with higher costs not be responsible for their own costs?
I believe the government will screw up any changes and the net result will be everyone pays more.
Well that's an entirely different speculation not linked to the article.
Hypothetically if the change is net cost neutral, but results in firms responsible for lower transmission costs seeing their costs fall, while firms responsible for higher transmission costs see their costs rise - is there anything wrong with that in principle?
Is there any reason we should not have user pays in your eyes?
Whenever the Field Marshal posts some old shite from the Telegraph can we have a community note from the moderators highlighting his source is the Telegraph?
When the author is Allister Heath can this community note be highlighted in bold italics please?
Do you work in manufacturing ? Do you face P&Ls which force people out of jobs and businesses to close down ?
I suspect not.
No of course you are right I have spent my entire career as a public sector journeyman with no instincts for balancing books. Oh wait, I've only ever worked in the private sector...
Nearly three quarters of graduates earn less than £29,120 — the average salary of those aged 22 to 29 — more than 15 months after leaving university, according to official figures from the Higher Education Statistics Agency (Hesa).
Five years later, they have still not caught up. A separate study of graduate tax data in the same year, by the Department for Education, reveals that they earned £3,300 a year less than the median salary for their age group by this later stage.
Depends on the course 'It is mostly arts and social sciences graduates earning salaries below the £29,120 threshold...Across all UK universities, the highest-earning subjects 15 months after graduating were dentistry and veterinary medicine, with median graduate salaries of £42,000 and £35,000 respectively... Some leading law firms offer starting salaries to newly qualified lawyers, generally aged 25 or 26, of £170,000 or £180,000 a year.'
This is why Labour expanded and normalised university education. The question is whether these increased earnings mooted are robust, or is it simply that there are limited numbers of well-paid jobs that in the past would have gone to A-level leavers and now go to graduates? Is degrees-4-all expanding the economy and generating more lucrative jobs?
I think Badenoch's big issue is her time in office. Ditching the EU Reform and Revocation Bill could be seen as pragmatic (I see it as pathetic), but the bits of EU law she ended up repealing really were a sorry list - laws relating to the 2012 Olympics and suchlike. There were very significant one she should have marked for the shitcan, and dared Sunak to oppose her. Where Jenrick is now reflects how he played it in office - doing what he could and resigning on principle when he was blocked.
Nearly three quarters of graduates earn less than £29,120 — the average salary of those aged 22 to 29 — more than 15 months after leaving university, according to official figures from the Higher Education Statistics Agency (Hesa).
Five years later, they have still not caught up. A separate study of graduate tax data in the same year, by the Department for Education, reveals that they earned £3,300 a year less than the median salary for their age group by this later stage.
I listen to LBC far too much, and there's an awful lot of talk that "students can't afford the debt from student fees, I know let's return funding to the public sector and limit places to the elite 7%".
Keep the riff-raff out of higher education for their own good, could be a policy on the next Tory manifesto
The 'riff-raff' who would be kept out of universities if they returned to a 20-25% level would be the less academic half of middle class teens.
Only a generation ago it was perfectly normal for middle class kids to enter the workforce at 18, or even 16.
As we look across the world, all our economic competitors and peers have similar numbers going on to tertiary education as as. The future is a knowledge and service economy.
Our problem is not the numbers going on to higher education, it is the often poor quality of courses that are run by Universities that focus on selling the undergraduate experience rather than the course.
The future is lifetime learning with practical experience, continual professional development and retraining as the world changes.
A purely academic experience between the ages of 18 and 21, often (as you say) poor quality and based more on 'lifestyle' is not going to produce the skilled workforce the country and the individuals themselves require.
As a matter of interest it is worth reading the sentencing remarks of the judge in the 'just stop oil' case as it is often cited in comparison with the current round of sentencing.
The participants got 4 years in jail rising to 5 for the leader. There was however intent to cause significant disruption, no guilty pleas, no mitigation, and concern about how they had conducted themselves in the trial. Also, those involved had previous convictions, in all but one case, they had multiple convictions connected to direct action protest.
This appears to indicate to a determination to use imprisonment as a way to manage protest, consistent with the 'far right' protests, but it is notable in the Just Stop Oil cases, the fate of imprisonment seems to have been reserved for repeat offenders.
But you aren't really comparing like with like.
Two major aggravating factors with the racist riots is the violence and racism therein.
Almost all the JSO offenders given jail sentences had already been previously let off with suspended sentences but broken them. The rioters however were nearly all sent to jail straight away without passing go even after pleading guilty and if they showed some remorse given the damage they caused. Fair enough on both counts one would think
All the reporting of jailed protestors so far seem to have a series of past offences too.
It seems to be the usual criminal suspects who've engaged in criminality and found out that this time the Plod and courts were interested.
Oh well, how sad, nevermind.
This woman was jailed and had never had a previous conviction for example
Nearly three quarters of graduates earn less than £29,120 — the average salary of those aged 22 to 29 — more than 15 months after leaving university, according to official figures from the Higher Education Statistics Agency (Hesa).
Five years later, they have still not caught up. A separate study of graduate tax data in the same year, by the Department for Education, reveals that they earned £3,300 a year less than the median salary for their age group by this later stage.
I listen to LBC far too much, and there's an awful lot of talk that "students can't afford the debt from student fees, I know let's return funding to the public sector and limit places to the elite 7%".
Keep the riff-raff out of higher education for their own good, could be a policy on the next Tory manifesto
The 'riff-raff' who would be kept out of universities if they returned to a 20-25% level would be the less academic half of middle class teens.
Only a generation ago it was perfectly normal for middle class kids to enter the workforce at 18, or even 16.
150 years ago they could sweep chimneys at six, so your point is?
Plenty of 18 year old skilled working class kids are plumbers or electricians earning £30k plus by 21 when arts graduates leave universities seeking their first wage, probably no higher and often lower.
University gives a big wage premium still to STEM graduates, law and medicine and economics graduates, not many others though
I have no issue with those who choose a trade career to choose a career trade. They wouldn't survive off me however as I only contract tradesmen as a last resort. But that is beside the point though.
If anyone wants to experience three years at University and incur a liability that is their business. Your branch of the nanny state Conservative Party would like to remove that option from them.
As a matter of interest it is worth reading the sentencing remarks of the judge in the 'just stop oil' case as it is often cited in comparison with the current round of sentencing.
The participants got 4 years in jail rising to 5 for the leader. There was however intent to cause significant disruption, no guilty pleas, no mitigation, and concern about how they had conducted themselves in the trial. Also, those involved had previous convictions, in all but one case, they had multiple convictions connected to direct action protest.
This appears to indicate to a determination to use imprisonment as a way to manage protest, consistent with the 'far right' protests, but it is notable in the Just Stop Oil cases, the fate of imprisonment seems to have been reserved for repeat offenders.
But you aren't really comparing like with like.
Two major aggravating factors with the racist riots is the violence and racism therein.
Almost all the JSO offenders given jail sentences had already been previously let off with suspended sentences but broken them. The rioters however were nearly all sent to jail straight away without passing go even after pleading guilty and if they showed some remorse given the damage they caused. Fair enough on both counts one would think
All the reporting of jailed protestors so far seem to have a series of past offences too.
It seems to be the usual criminal suspects who've engaged in criminality and found out that this time the Plod and courts were interested.
Oh well, how sad, nevermind.
This woman was jailed and had never had a previous conviction for example
As a matter of interest it is worth reading the sentencing remarks of the judge in the 'just stop oil' case as it is often cited in comparison with the current round of sentencing.
The participants got 4 years in jail rising to 5 for the leader. There was however intent to cause significant disruption, no guilty pleas, no mitigation, and concern about how they had conducted themselves in the trial. Also, those involved had previous convictions, in all but one case, they had multiple convictions connected to direct action protest.
This appears to indicate to a determination to use imprisonment as a way to manage protest, consistent with the 'far right' protests, but it is notable in the Just Stop Oil cases, the fate of imprisonment seems to have been reserved for repeat offenders.
But you aren't really comparing like with like.
Two major aggravating factors with the racist riots is the violence and racism therein.
Almost all the JSO offenders given jail sentences had already been previously let off with suspended sentences but broken them. The rioters however were nearly all sent to jail straight away without passing go even after pleading guilty and if they showed some remorse given the damage they caused. Fair enough on both counts one would think
All the reporting of jailed protestors so far seem to have a series of past offences too.
It seems to be the usual criminal suspects who've engaged in criminality and found out that this time the Plod and courts were interested.
Oh well, how sad, nevermind.
This woman was jailed and had never had a previous conviction for example
Murder doesn't require prior convictions to be taken seriously.
I find such a defence by posters like HY (and he is not alone) abominable.
When defenders of people like this woman also claim to live their lives on strict Christian moral codes the hypocrisy stinks.
I agree with the former but not the latter.
Christians have routinely advocated for the murder of heathens and those whom they dislike.
The idea Christianity is about being nice to others is for the fairies. Much of what Christ said is about that, to be fair, but then much of the rest of the Bible (both New and Old Testament) is not and that's the bit too many Christians throughout history, like HY, choose to concentrate on.
HY has always had more in common with Paul than Christ.
I think Badenoch's big issue is her time in office. Ditching the EU Reform and Revocation Bill could be seen as pragmatic (I see it as pathetic), but the bits of EU law she ended up repealing really were a sorry list - laws relating to the 2012 Olympics and suchlike. There were very significant one she should have marked for the shitcan, and dared Sunak to oppose her. Where Jenrick is now reflects how he played it in office - doing what he could and resigning on principle when he was blocked.
Not relevant to the Tory member market she's playing to, but her pragmatism in ditching the obvious nonsense of the EU law sunset bill against her ideological bent maybe shows there's some potential capability lurking in there. Just occasionally she says something sensible.
I think Badenoch's big issue is her time in office. Ditching the EU Reform and Revocation Bill could be seen as pragmatic (I see it as pathetic), but the bits of EU law she ended up repealing really were a sorry list - laws relating to the 2012 Olympics and suchlike. There were very significant one she should have marked for the shitcan, and dared Sunak to oppose her. Where Jenrick is now reflects how he played it in office - doing what he could and resigning on principle when he was blocked.
Not relevant to the Tory member market she's playing to, but her pragmatism in ditching the obvious nonsense of the EU law sunset bill against her ideological bent maybe shows there's some potential capability lurking in there. Just occasionally she says something sensible.
It wasn't at all pragmatic, apart from in terms of immediate political expediency - which was perhaps what you meant. I find it rather stupid from a rejoin perspective too - why would the EU even want us to rejoin if a) we're obeying all their crappy competition-destroying laws anyway and b) we're an economically moribund basket case? Remainers are like pathetic exes keeping all their partner's habits and totally failing to move on - it's the least likely strategy to attract that person back.
As a matter of interest it is worth reading the sentencing remarks of the judge in the 'just stop oil' case as it is often cited in comparison with the current round of sentencing.
The participants got 4 years in jail rising to 5 for the leader. There was however intent to cause significant disruption, no guilty pleas, no mitigation, and concern about how they had conducted themselves in the trial. Also, those involved had previous convictions, in all but one case, they had multiple convictions connected to direct action protest.
This appears to indicate to a determination to use imprisonment as a way to manage protest, consistent with the 'far right' protests, but it is notable in the Just Stop Oil cases, the fate of imprisonment seems to have been reserved for repeat offenders.
But you aren't really comparing like with like.
Two major aggravating factors with the racist riots is the violence and racism therein.
Almost all the JSO offenders given jail sentences had already been previously let off with suspended sentences but broken them. The rioters however were nearly all sent to jail straight away without passing go even after pleading guilty and if they showed some remorse given the damage they caused. Fair enough on both counts one would think
All the reporting of jailed protestors so far seem to have a series of past offences too.
It seems to be the usual criminal suspects who've engaged in criminality and found out that this time the Plod and courts were interested.
Oh well, how sad, nevermind.
This woman was jailed and had never had a previous conviction for example
Murder doesn't require prior convictions to be taken seriously.
Yes, she did advocate murder, but is there a question of degree? She did not provide instruction on where to buy or how to manufacture explosives, or advice on placing them to achieve maximum carnage. So was she really jailed for seriously advocating murder or for just mouthing off?
As a thought experiment, should police now trawl social media for anyone suggesting motorists should run over orange-clad demonstrators sitting in the road?
As a matter of interest it is worth reading the sentencing remarks of the judge in the 'just stop oil' case as it is often cited in comparison with the current round of sentencing.
The participants got 4 years in jail rising to 5 for the leader. There was however intent to cause significant disruption, no guilty pleas, no mitigation, and concern about how they had conducted themselves in the trial. Also, those involved had previous convictions, in all but one case, they had multiple convictions connected to direct action protest.
This appears to indicate to a determination to use imprisonment as a way to manage protest, consistent with the 'far right' protests, but it is notable in the Just Stop Oil cases, the fate of imprisonment seems to have been reserved for repeat offenders.
But you aren't really comparing like with like.
Two major aggravating factors with the racist riots is the violence and racism therein.
Almost all the JSO offenders given jail sentences had already been previously let off with suspended sentences but broken them. The rioters however were nearly all sent to jail straight away without passing go even after pleading guilty and if they showed some remorse given the damage they caused. Fair enough on both counts one would think
The JSO neither carried out nor threatened violence to people is the big difference.
What about pure vandalism ?
Is that ok ?
Vandalism is obviously not OK and they were sent to jail.
As a matter of interest it is worth reading the sentencing remarks of the judge in the 'just stop oil' case as it is often cited in comparison with the current round of sentencing.
The participants got 4 years in jail rising to 5 for the leader. There was however intent to cause significant disruption, no guilty pleas, no mitigation, and concern about how they had conducted themselves in the trial. Also, those involved had previous convictions, in all but one case, they had multiple convictions connected to direct action protest.
This appears to indicate to a determination to use imprisonment as a way to manage protest, consistent with the 'far right' protests, but it is notable in the Just Stop Oil cases, the fate of imprisonment seems to have been reserved for repeat offenders.
But you aren't really comparing like with like.
Two major aggravating factors with the racist riots is the violence and racism therein.
Almost all the JSO offenders given jail sentences had already been previously let off with suspended sentences but broken them. The rioters however were nearly all sent to jail straight away without passing go even after pleading guilty and if they showed some remorse given the damage they caused. Fair enough on both counts one would think
All the reporting of jailed protestors so far seem to have a series of past offences too.
It seems to be the usual criminal suspects who've engaged in criminality and found out that this time the Plod and courts were interested.
Oh well, how sad, nevermind.
This woman was jailed and had never had a previous conviction for example
Murder doesn't require prior convictions to be taken seriously.
Yes, she did advocate murder, but is there a question of degree? She did not provide instruction on where to buy or how to manufacture explosives, or advice on placing them to achieve maximum carnage. So was she really jailed for seriously advocating murder or for just mouthing off?
As a thought experiment, should police now trawl social media for anyone suggesting motorists should run over orange-clad demonstrators sitting in the road?
She did, however, make her comments in a context where such sorts of activities were being attempted, which makes them more serious than mouthing off about some hypothetical.
Kemi isn't ready. Cleverly is probably another Saj. So it's Jenrick or Tugendhat for me.
I prefer the latter but doubt he has what's necessary to cut through.
What's wrong with Saj ?
Both Saj and Cleverly seem to be people you'd be happy to have as a neighbour or as a boss.
Jenrick fails on both counts.
He proposed cracking down on social media firms for not doing enough to stop extremism. Today's Tories consider that an evil attack on freedom of speech.
Nearly three quarters of graduates earn less than £29,120 — the average salary of those aged 22 to 29 — more than 15 months after leaving university, according to official figures from the Higher Education Statistics Agency (Hesa).
Five years later, they have still not caught up. A separate study of graduate tax data in the same year, by the Department for Education, reveals that they earned £3,300 a year less than the median salary for their age group by this later stage.
I was earning £15,000 a year five years after I left university. My wife was earning a little bit more as a teacher. We had just bought our first place: a two bedroomed garden flat in London N19. It cost £60,000. That was in 1992. I reckon the equivalent combined salaries today for the jobs we did would be around £60,000. The flat would be over £500,000. My generation is the luckiest there has ever been.
Largely due to an idiocy created by a confluence of interests.
The Green Belt was supposed to be about protecting agriculture.
As the population growth slowed in the later part of the 20th cent. policies that massively restricted home construction didn’t have a negative effect. At first.
So the system became fixed on (and depended on) a shortage of housing. The eternally rising house prices, the telephone number values, everything selling/renting no matter how appalling……
In many other countries, the idea that you restrict home building, if there is any demand, is rightly seen as anti-population. “I hate the people” is a political platform for *some*, but rarely successful.
One thing that has been forgotten is that humans need space. There is plenty of literature on the physiological effects of over crowding. It is worth noting that in many of the ugly tower blocks built to replace the slums, space was *added* per family - more sq ft than what they replaced. This was a deliberate policy, in many cases, to improve the lot of the people living in them.
Every time I hear someone championing “micro homes” I have a strong desire to shove them in an oubliette.
I think Badenoch's big issue is her time in office. Ditching the EU Reform and Revocation Bill could be seen as pragmatic (I see it as pathetic), but the bits of EU law she ended up repealing really were a sorry list - laws relating to the 2012 Olympics and suchlike. There were very significant one she should have marked for the shitcan, and dared Sunak to oppose her. Where Jenrick is now reflects how he played it in office - doing what he could and resigning on principle when he was blocked.
Not relevant to the Tory member market she's playing to, but her pragmatism in ditching the obvious nonsense of the EU law sunset bill against her ideological bent maybe shows there's some potential capability lurking in there. Just occasionally she says something sensible.
Like many tories in the post 2016 evolution of the party she probably never believed in brexit anyway. It was obvious to anybody with more than 12 functioning neurons that it was going to be a cock and balls show. Plenty of tories had to pretend that it was a sublime idea, sublimely executed in order to borrow the votes of the type of person who's idea of a great day out is drunken bingo followed by a riot in Hartlepool.
Whenever the Field Marshal posts some old shite from the Telegraph can we have a community note from the moderators highlighting his source is the Telegraph?
When the author is Allister Heath can this community note be highlighted in bold italics please?
Do you work in manufacturing ? Do you face P&Ls which force people out of jobs and businesses to close down ?
I suspect not.
No of course you are right I have spent my entire career as a public sector journeyman with no instincts for balancing books. Oh wait, I've only ever worked in the private sector...
Mind you, no manufacturing experience since 1994.
so youve missed the last 30 years. It's a different environment these days.
Nearly three quarters of graduates earn less than £29,120 — the average salary of those aged 22 to 29 — more than 15 months after leaving university, according to official figures from the Higher Education Statistics Agency (Hesa).
Five years later, they have still not caught up. A separate study of graduate tax data in the same year, by the Department for Education, reveals that they earned £3,300 a year less than the median salary for their age group by this later stage.
I listen to LBC far too much, and there's an awful lot of talk that "students can't afford the debt from student fees, I know let's return funding to the public sector and limit places to the elite 7%".
Keep the riff-raff out of higher education for their own good, could be a policy on the next Tory manifesto
The 'riff-raff' who would be kept out of universities if they returned to a 20-25% level would be the less academic half of middle class teens.
Only a generation ago it was perfectly normal for middle class kids to enter the workforce at 18, or even 16.
150 years ago they could sweep chimneys at six, so your point is?
Plenty of 18 year old skilled working class kids are plumbers or electricians earning £30k plus by 21 when arts graduates leave universities seeking their first wage, probably no higher and often lower.
University gives a big wage premium still to STEM graduates, law and medicine and economics graduates, not many others though
I have no issue with those who choose a trade career to choose a career trade. They wouldn't survive off me however as I only contract tradesmen as a last resort. But that is beside the point though.
If anyone wants to experience three years at University and incur a liability that is their business. Your branch of the nanny state Conservative Party would like to remove that option from them.
The more I think about it, the more I like the following solution.
Degrees for everyone & everything
If you have a trade that needs years of study and a fair bit of theoretical work - degree.
A plumber who can install a house worth of plumbing and get it right has something like a degrees worth of knowledge in his head.
By merging the “technical” and “academic” we can get rid of the last of the stupid snobberies.
Further, we can encourage mixing and merging - get the plumber to read some Proust as a module and get the History undergrads at Oxford to learn some welding.
Many of the jobs we have spaces for require a mix of book and practical skills.
Nearly three quarters of graduates earn less than £29,120 — the average salary of those aged 22 to 29 — more than 15 months after leaving university, according to official figures from the Higher Education Statistics Agency (Hesa).
Five years later, they have still not caught up. A separate study of graduate tax data in the same year, by the Department for Education, reveals that they earned £3,300 a year less than the median salary for their age group by this later stage.
I was earning £15,000 a year five years after I left university. My wife was earning a little bit more as a teacher. We had just bought our first place: a two bedroomed garden flat in London N19. It cost £60,000. That was in 1992. I reckon the equivalent combined salaries today for the jobs we did would be around £60,000. The flat would be over £500,000. My generation is the luckiest there has ever been.
Largely due to an idiocy created by a confluence of interests.
The Green Belt was supposed to be about protecting agriculture.
As the population growth slowed in the later part of the 20th cent. policies that massively restricted home construction didn’t have a negative effect. At first.
So the system became fixed on (and depended on) a shortage of housing. The eternally rising house prices, the telephone number values, everything selling/renting no matter how appalling……
In many other countries, the idea that you restrict home building, if there is any demand, is rightly seen as anti-population. “I hate the people” is a political platform for *some*, but rarely successful.
One thing that has been forgotten is that humans need space. There is plenty of literature on the physiological effects of over crowding. It is worth noting that in many of the ugly tower blocks built to replace the slums, space was *added* per family - more sq ft than what they replaced. This was a deliberate policy, in many cases, to improve the lot of the people living in them.
Every time I hear someone championing “micro homes” I have a strong desire to shove them in an oubliette.
Like all these things though, there is a balance between harms and good. Do I think in an ideal world everyone should be able to have a lovely spacious home with outside space etc? Yes, but we have a growing population and we have to balance the building we do (which I fully agree is needed) with protecting our natural environment and biodiversity. It is a balancing game. Does that mean that some housing needs to be more high density? Most likely it does. But there are ways of making that less problematic by creating shared spaces/areas.
Looking at that field, I would say there's a non-trivial chance that whoever the winner is, the Tories will end up feeling positively nostalgic for the days of IDS.
It only takes 18 MPs to now trigger a VONC.
Pretty low bar.
Though 18 MPs is a higher percentage of the non-payroll vote than ever before.
It could be considerably harder to find 18 MPs willing to put their names down.
Anyone know how the payroll rules work in opposition? Are there any rules at all? Government has 100 or so ministers. If the Conservatives try to shadow those on a 1:1 basis, that will need all but the most callow or silly to have jobs.
WTF, jobs for the boys right enough, a 100 troughers pretending they have a clue. If you listen to Cooper , Reeves , Rayner etc this mob are determined to make the Tories look talented.
More investment from the Dublin government into Northern Ireland referred to in this article. London really doesn't give a shit, unification with the Republic feels inevitable, time to speed the process up and make the transition as easy and painless as possible?
With recent bumper receipts from Corporation Tax, the Republic will probably never again have the fiscal headroom to take the place on, and Britain really could do with divesting itself of the financial burden.
Whenever the Field Marshal posts some old shite from the Telegraph can we have a community note from the moderators highlighting his source is the Telegraph?
When the author is Allister Heath can this community note be highlighted in bold italics please?
Do you work in manufacturing ? Do you face P&Ls which force people out of jobs and businesses to close down ?
I suspect not.
No of course you are right I have spent my entire career as a public sector journeyman with no instincts for balancing books. Oh wait, I've only ever worked in the private sector...
Mind you, no manufacturing experience since 1994.
so youve missed the last 30 years. It's a different environment these days.
The attitude that industry - in *actuality*, rather than theory - is barely tolerated, for example.
The ironic bit is that a modern factory is often a tidy (outside and in) building, with little noise for the neighbours and strictly controlled emissions. Much better neighbour than a street of food places…
Nearly three quarters of graduates earn less than £29,120 — the average salary of those aged 22 to 29 — more than 15 months after leaving university, according to official figures from the Higher Education Statistics Agency (Hesa).
Five years later, they have still not caught up. A separate study of graduate tax data in the same year, by the Department for Education, reveals that they earned £3,300 a year less than the median salary for their age group by this later stage.
I listen to LBC far too much, and there's an awful lot of talk that "students can't afford the debt from student fees, I know let's return funding to the public sector and limit places to the elite 7%".
Keep the riff-raff out of higher education for their own good, could be a policy on the next Tory manifesto
The 'riff-raff' who would be kept out of universities if they returned to a 20-25% level would be the less academic half of middle class teens.
Only a generation ago it was perfectly normal for middle class kids to enter the workforce at 18, or even 16.
The hole in the workforce is partly caused by too many undergraduates and Osbornes early retirement wheeze to get people drawing pensions at 55. Together these could have taken 1 million people out of the workforce.
Exactly , the clown who came up with the idea of the riff raff getting there in the first place should hav eunspeakable things done to them. They could hav egone straight to pub jobs etc and saved teh country a fortune and prevented the troughing at these second rate universities that teach next to feck all.
Nearly three quarters of graduates earn less than £29,120 — the average salary of those aged 22 to 29 — more than 15 months after leaving university, according to official figures from the Higher Education Statistics Agency (Hesa).
Five years later, they have still not caught up. A separate study of graduate tax data in the same year, by the Department for Education, reveals that they earned £3,300 a year less than the median salary for their age group by this later stage.
I listen to LBC far too much, and there's an awful lot of talk that "students can't afford the debt from student fees, I know let's return funding to the public sector and limit places to the elite 7%".
Keep the riff-raff out of higher education for their own good, could be a policy on the next Tory manifesto
The 'riff-raff' who would be kept out of universities if they returned to a 20-25% level would be the less academic half of middle class teens.
Only a generation ago it was perfectly normal for middle class kids to enter the workforce at 18, or even 16.
The hole in the workforce is partly caused by too many undergraduates and Osbornes early retirement wheeze to get people drawing pensions at 55. Together these could have taken 1 million people out of the workforce.
It might be possible in the 2060s to be drawing on your pension while still paying student loans.
LOL not just possible but likely !
I thought that the Student Loan was written off before retirement age?
She's on holiday but Kemi's got time to write hypocritical filth for the Mail on Sunday.
We shouldn't dismiss everyone who took part in the recent disorder as fanatics, says Kemi Badenoch, shortly after dismissing everyone who took part in the recent pro-Palestinian protests as anti-semites.
What exactly is the rationale for Conservative challengers to promote the idea that a two-tier Britain exists and it is especially unfair to white supremacist football hooligans?
The notion (which some of the leadership challengers are promoting) of a "two -tier" Britain is particularly troublesome for the Conservatives bearing in mind they were overseeing "two- tier" Britain until six weeks ago. Although I suspect Kemi Badenoch's idea of a "two tier" Britain is somewhat different to my own, and she doesn't believe it existed before July 5th.
It's simple. No excuse for the violence which came from a tiny minority of thugs. But a need to acknowledge that around 40/50% of people from all parties want immigration controlled and are not racist for thinking that. At the very least people deserve a clear explanation as to the difficulties associated with control of immigration.
Nearly three quarters of graduates earn less than £29,120 — the average salary of those aged 22 to 29 — more than 15 months after leaving university, according to official figures from the Higher Education Statistics Agency (Hesa).
Five years later, they have still not caught up. A separate study of graduate tax data in the same year, by the Department for Education, reveals that they earned £3,300 a year less than the median salary for their age group by this later stage.
I listen to LBC far too much, and there's an awful lot of talk that "students can't afford the debt from student fees, I know let's return funding to the public sector and limit places to the elite 7%".
Keep the riff-raff out of higher education for their own good, could be a policy on the next Tory manifesto
The 'riff-raff' who would be kept out of universities if they returned to a 20-25% level would be the less academic half of middle class teens.
Only a generation ago it was perfectly normal for middle class kids to enter the workforce at 18, or even 16.
150 years ago they could sweep chimneys at six, so your point is?
Plenty of 18 year old skilled working class kids are plumbers or electricians earning £30k plus by 21 when arts graduates leave universities seeking their first wage, probably no higher and often lower.
University gives a big wage premium still to STEM graduates, law and medicine and economics graduates, not many others though
I have no issue with those who choose a trade career to choose a career trade. They wouldn't survive off me however as I only contract tradesmen as a last resort. But that is beside the point though.
If anyone wants to experience three years at University and incur a liability that is their business. Your branch of the nanny state Conservative Party would like to remove that option from them.
The more I think about it, the more I like the following solution.
Degrees for everyone & everything
If you have a trade that needs years of study and a fair bit of theoretical work - degree.
A plumber who can install a house worth of plumbing and get it right has something like a degrees worth of knowledge in his head.
By merging the “technical” and “academic” we can get rid of the last of the stupid snobberies.
Further, we can encourage mixing and merging - get the plumber to read some Proust as a module and get the History undergrads at Oxford to learn some welding.
Many of the jobs we have spaces for require a mix of book and practical skills.
Personally, I feel the key skill that I would like drilling into the youth of today is an ability to take on board constructive criticism. You know, to help them understand that constructive criticism is an attempt to make them better at their jobs, and not some kind of attack that requires a complaint to Human Resources.
I would focus the first two years of University on learning this skill.
Nearly three quarters of graduates earn less than £29,120 — the average salary of those aged 22 to 29 — more than 15 months after leaving university, according to official figures from the Higher Education Statistics Agency (Hesa).
Five years later, they have still not caught up. A separate study of graduate tax data in the same year, by the Department for Education, reveals that they earned £3,300 a year less than the median salary for their age group by this later stage.
I listen to LBC far too much, and there's an awful lot of talk that "students can't afford the debt from student fees, I know let's return funding to the public sector and limit places to the elite 7%".
Keep the riff-raff out of higher education for their own good, could be a policy on the next Tory manifesto
The 'riff-raff' who would be kept out of universities if they returned to a 20-25% level would be the less academic half of middle class teens.
Only a generation ago it was perfectly normal for middle class kids to enter the workforce at 18, or even 16.
150 years ago they could sweep chimneys at six, so your point is?
Plenty of 18 year old skilled working class kids are plumbers or electricians earning £30k plus by 21 when arts graduates leave universities seeking their first wage, probably no higher and often lower.
University gives a big wage premium still to STEM graduates, law and medicine and economics graduates, not many others though
I have no issue with those who choose a trade career to choose a career trade. They wouldn't survive off me however as I only contract tradesmen as a last resort. But that is beside the point though.
If anyone wants to experience three years at University and incur a liability that is their business. Your branch of the nanny state Conservative Party would like to remove that option from them.
The more I think about it, the more I like the following solution.
Degrees for everyone & everything
If you have a trade that needs years of study and a fair bit of theoretical work - degree.
A plumber who can install a house worth of plumbing and get it right has something like a degrees worth of knowledge in his head.
By merging the “technical” and “academic” we can get rid of the last of the stupid snobberies.
Further, we can encourage mixing and merging - get the plumber to read some Proust as a module and get the History undergrads at Oxford to learn some welding.
Many of the jobs we have spaces for require a mix of book and practical skills.
In the old days, an employer invested in you through an apprenticeship and you spent many years repaying that investment. Nowadays, people move job all the time and employers want the flexibility of hiring and firing, so the costs of training move on to the individual or the state.
Talking of industry - had a conversation with the chap I previously mentioned, who is running a solar farm, a very small business park and now putting in battery storage.
When he was discussing his plans, he mentioned the idea of selling his leccy, at cost plus a tiny amount, to people using his small business units (old farm buildings). The reaction from some has been hilarious - electricity *should* be expensive and he is evil. Despite his leccy being all solar…
Nearly three quarters of graduates earn less than £29,120 — the average salary of those aged 22 to 29 — more than 15 months after leaving university, according to official figures from the Higher Education Statistics Agency (Hesa).
Five years later, they have still not caught up. A separate study of graduate tax data in the same year, by the Department for Education, reveals that they earned £3,300 a year less than the median salary for their age group by this later stage.
I was earning £15,000 a year five years after I left university. My wife was earning a little bit more as a teacher. We had just bought our first place: a two bedroomed garden flat in London N19. It cost £60,000. That was in 1992. I reckon the equivalent combined salaries today for the jobs we did would be around £60,000. The flat would be over £500,000. My generation is the luckiest there has ever been.
Largely due to an idiocy created by a confluence of interests.
The Green Belt was supposed to be about protecting agriculture.
As the population growth slowed in the later part of the 20th cent. policies that massively restricted home construction didn’t have a negative effect. At first.
So the system became fixed on (and depended on) a shortage of housing. The eternally rising house prices, the telephone number values, everything selling/renting no matter how appalling……
In many other countries, the idea that you restrict home building, if there is any demand, is rightly seen as anti-population. “I hate the people” is a political platform for *some*, but rarely successful.
One thing that has been forgotten is that humans need space. There is plenty of literature on the physiological effects of over crowding. It is worth noting that in many of the ugly tower blocks built to replace the slums, space was *added* per family - more sq ft than what they replaced. This was a deliberate policy, in many cases, to improve the lot of the people living in them.
Every time I hear someone championing “micro homes” I have a strong desire to shove them in an oubliette.
Like all these things though, there is a balance between harms and good. Do I think in an ideal world everyone should be able to have a lovely spacious home with outside space etc? Yes, but we have a growing population and we have to balance the building we do (which I fully agree is needed) with protecting our natural environment and biodiversity. It is a balancing game. Does that mean that some housing needs to be more high density? Most likely it does. But there are ways of making that less problematic by creating shared spaces/areas.
falling birthrate but rising population says it all, bad government is the issue.
Nearly three quarters of graduates earn less than £29,120 — the average salary of those aged 22 to 29 — more than 15 months after leaving university, according to official figures from the Higher Education Statistics Agency (Hesa).
Five years later, they have still not caught up. A separate study of graduate tax data in the same year, by the Department for Education, reveals that they earned £3,300 a year less than the median salary for their age group by this later stage.
I listen to LBC far too much, and there's an awful lot of talk that "students can't afford the debt from student fees, I know let's return funding to the public sector and limit places to the elite 7%".
Keep the riff-raff out of higher education for their own good, could be a policy on the next Tory manifesto
The 'riff-raff' who would be kept out of universities if they returned to a 20-25% level would be the less academic half of middle class teens.
Only a generation ago it was perfectly normal for middle class kids to enter the workforce at 18, or even 16.
150 years ago they could sweep chimneys at six, so your point is?
Plenty of 18 year old skilled working class kids are plumbers or electricians earning £30k plus by 21 when arts graduates leave universities seeking their first wage, probably no higher and often lower.
University gives a big wage premium still to STEM graduates, law and medicine and economics graduates, not many others though
I have no issue with those who choose a trade career to choose a career trade. They wouldn't survive off me however as I only contract tradesmen as a last resort. But that is beside the point though.
If anyone wants to experience three years at University and incur a liability that is their business. Your branch of the nanny state Conservative Party would like to remove that option from them.
The more I think about it, the more I like the following solution.
Degrees for everyone & everything
If you have a trade that needs years of study and a fair bit of theoretical work - degree.
A plumber who can install a house worth of plumbing and get it right has something like a degrees worth of knowledge in his head.
By merging the “technical” and “academic” we can get rid of the last of the stupid snobberies.
Further, we can encourage mixing and merging - get the plumber to read some Proust as a module and get the History undergrads at Oxford to learn some welding.
Many of the jobs we have spaces for require a mix of book and practical skills.
Personally, I feel the key skill that I would like drilling into the youth of today is an ability to take on board constructive criticism. You know, to help them understand that constructive criticism is an attempt to make them better at their jobs, and not some kind of attack that requires a complaint to Human Resources.
I would focus the first two years of University on learning this skill.
That skill should have been taught in the first nine years at school, would be ready to leave education at 14
Nearly three quarters of graduates earn less than £29,120 — the average salary of those aged 22 to 29 — more than 15 months after leaving university, according to official figures from the Higher Education Statistics Agency (Hesa).
Five years later, they have still not caught up. A separate study of graduate tax data in the same year, by the Department for Education, reveals that they earned £3,300 a year less than the median salary for their age group by this later stage.
I was earning £15,000 a year five years after I left university. My wife was earning a little bit more as a teacher. We had just bought our first place: a two bedroomed garden flat in London N19. It cost £60,000. That was in 1992. I reckon the equivalent combined salaries today for the jobs we did would be around £60,000. The flat would be over £500,000. My generation is the luckiest there has ever been.
Largely due to an idiocy created by a confluence of interests.
The Green Belt was supposed to be about protecting agriculture.
As the population growth slowed in the later part of the 20th cent. policies that massively restricted home construction didn’t have a negative effect. At first.
So the system became fixed on (and depended on) a shortage of housing. The eternally rising house prices, the telephone number values, everything selling/renting no matter how appalling……
In many other countries, the idea that you restrict home building, if there is any demand, is rightly seen as anti-population. “I hate the people” is a political platform for *some*, but rarely successful.
One thing that has been forgotten is that humans need space. There is plenty of literature on the physiological effects of over crowding. It is worth noting that in many of the ugly tower blocks built to replace the slums, space was *added* per family - more sq ft than what they replaced. This was a deliberate policy, in many cases, to improve the lot of the people living in them.
Every time I hear someone championing “micro homes” I have a strong desire to shove them in an oubliette.
Like all these things though, there is a balance between harms and good. Do I think in an ideal world everyone should be able to have a lovely spacious home with outside space etc? Yes, but we have a growing population and we have to balance the building we do (which I fully agree is needed) with protecting our natural environment and biodiversity. It is a balancing game. Does that mean that some housing needs to be more high density? Most likely it does. But there are ways of making that less problematic by creating shared spaces/areas.
The amount of land “saved” is tiny. It’s bullshit tinkering to make someone feel better. Trying to believe that an endlessly growing population is compatible with better biodiversity.
Because, if you start believing that the two are linked, you will be accused of not liking immigration. Which means you set fire to hotels on weekends.
Nearly three quarters of graduates earn less than £29,120 — the average salary of those aged 22 to 29 — more than 15 months after leaving university, according to official figures from the Higher Education Statistics Agency (Hesa).
Five years later, they have still not caught up. A separate study of graduate tax data in the same year, by the Department for Education, reveals that they earned £3,300 a year less than the median salary for their age group by this later stage.
I listen to LBC far too much, and there's an awful lot of talk that "students can't afford the debt from student fees, I know let's return funding to the public sector and limit places to the elite 7%".
Keep the riff-raff out of higher education for their own good, could be a policy on the next Tory manifesto
The 'riff-raff' who would be kept out of universities if they returned to a 20-25% level would be the less academic half of middle class teens.
Only a generation ago it was perfectly normal for middle class kids to enter the workforce at 18, or even 16.
150 years ago they could sweep chimneys at six, so your point is?
Plenty of 18 year old skilled working class kids are plumbers or electricians earning £30k plus by 21 when arts graduates leave universities seeking their first wage, probably no higher and often lower.
University gives a big wage premium still to STEM graduates, law and medicine and economics graduates, not many others though
I have no issue with those who choose a trade career to choose a career trade. They wouldn't survive off me however as I only contract tradesmen as a last resort. But that is beside the point though.
If anyone wants to experience three years at University and incur a liability that is their business. Your branch of the nanny state Conservative Party would like to remove that option from them.
The more I think about it, the more I like the following solution.
Degrees for everyone & everything
If you have a trade that needs years of study and a fair bit of theoretical work - degree.
A plumber who can install a house worth of plumbing and get it right has something like a degrees worth of knowledge in his head.
By merging the “technical” and “academic” we can get rid of the last of the stupid snobberies.
Further, we can encourage mixing and merging - get the plumber to read some Proust as a module and get the History undergrads at Oxford to learn some welding.
Many of the jobs we have spaces for require a mix of book and practical skills.
In the old days, an employer invested in you through an apprenticeship and you spent many years repaying that investment. Nowadays, people move job all the time and employers want the flexibility of hiring and firing, so the costs of training move on to the individual or the state.
Hence the ending of the old apprenticeships - which were seen as indentured labour by the Unions…
Kemi isn't ready. Cleverly is probably another Saj. So it's Jenrick or Tugendhat for me.
I prefer the latter but doubt he has what's necessary to cut through.
As a leftie, Jenrick and Patel are the two I least want to see win.
I think both have fallen below the standards we should expect of people in public life - Patel more seriously in the events that led to May sacking her from Cabinet.
But I think it is Jenrick who is most likely to lead Conservative voters down the path of radicalisation, and reuniting the Right under the banner of the views of Reform voters - rejecting democratic norms and advocating extreme and divisive measures. This would lead to replicating the political division seen in the US in the UK.
But, as we have seen in the US, that might be the easiest path in the short-term for the Right to return to office. Particularly as I don't think any other Conservative politician has offered an alternate strategy, let alone demonstrated they have the ability to implement it.
Nearly three quarters of graduates earn less than £29,120 — the average salary of those aged 22 to 29 — more than 15 months after leaving university, according to official figures from the Higher Education Statistics Agency (Hesa).
Five years later, they have still not caught up. A separate study of graduate tax data in the same year, by the Department for Education, reveals that they earned £3,300 a year less than the median salary for their age group by this later stage.
I listen to LBC far too much, and there's an awful lot of talk that "students can't afford the debt from student fees, I know let's return funding to the public sector and limit places to the elite 7%".
Keep the riff-raff out of higher education for their own good, could be a policy on the next Tory manifesto
The 'riff-raff' who would be kept out of universities if they returned to a 20-25% level would be the less academic half of middle class teens.
Only a generation ago it was perfectly normal for middle class kids to enter the workforce at 18, or even 16.
150 years ago they could sweep chimneys at six, so your point is?
Now they can't even bleed radiators. Where are your Pisa tables now?
Why can 't they bleed radiators?
All my tenants can do that, and get a bleeding key in the welcome package.
But thwn they are not urban yuppies who just want to own a house.that they do not kniw how to care for, and need the LL to change a lightbulb. :-*)
Idle curiosity department: I'm 74, and have finally stood down from my job and from the Council (there will be a by-election). I had a stroke a new months ago which has left no physical traces and only the odd lapse of memory, but is a reminder of mortality.
I'm trying to avoid rushing into new commitments, but also from sinking into apathy. I'm mostly living near Oxford so looking at some of their one-off courses that don't leed to a degree. Any recommendations in this or any other activity?
Idle curiosity department: I'm 74, and have finally stood down from my job and from the Council (there will be a by-election). I had a stroke a new months ago which has left no physical traces and only the odd lapse of memory, but is a reminder of mortality.
I'm trying to avoid rushing into new commitments, but also from sinking into apathy. I'm mostly living near Oxford so looking at some of their one-off courses that don't leed to a degree. Any recommendations in this or any other activity?
As I previously suggested - give St Anthonys College, Oxford a bell. With your background they would probably have all kinds of interesting ideas for you.
I think Badenoch's big issue is her time in office. Ditching the EU Reform and Revocation Bill could be seen as pragmatic (I see it as pathetic), but the bits of EU law she ended up repealing really were a sorry list - laws relating to the 2012 Olympics and suchlike. There were very significant one she should have marked for the shitcan, and dared Sunak to oppose her. Where Jenrick is now reflects how he played it in office - doing what he could and resigning on principle when he was blocked.
Not relevant to the Tory member market she's playing to, but her pragmatism in ditching the obvious nonsense of the EU law sunset bill against her ideological bent maybe shows there's some potential capability lurking in there. Just occasionally she says something sensible.
It wasn't at all pragmatic, apart from in terms of immediate political expediency - which was perhaps what you meant. I find it rather stupid from a rejoin perspective too - why would the EU even want us to rejoin if a) we're obeying all their crappy competition-destroying laws anyway and b) we're an economically moribund basket case? Remainers are like pathetic exes keeping all their partner's habits and totally failing to move on - it's the least likely strategy to attract that person back.
The sunset clause was a nonsense because, deliberately, no consideration could be given to what if anything replaced the legislation. Take the Working Time Directive. The only effect of the Sunset Bill would be to remove all worker protections. Even if you think that's a good idea, surely no protections should be an explicit policy rather happening by default. And by the way, government policy at the time was working time protections should be kept at a level stricter than necessary under Working Time Directive.
Nearly three quarters of graduates earn less than £29,120 — the average salary of those aged 22 to 29 — more than 15 months after leaving university, according to official figures from the Higher Education Statistics Agency (Hesa).
Five years later, they have still not caught up. A separate study of graduate tax data in the same year, by the Department for Education, reveals that they earned £3,300 a year less than the median salary for their age group by this later stage.
I listen to LBC far too much, and there's an awful lot of talk that "students can't afford the debt from student fees, I know let's return funding to the public sector and limit places to the elite 7%".
Keep the riff-raff out of higher education for their own good, could be a policy on the next Tory manifesto
The 'riff-raff' who would be kept out of universities if they returned to a 20-25% level would be the less academic half of middle class teens.
Only a generation ago it was perfectly normal for middle class kids to enter the workforce at 18, or even 16.
150 years ago they could sweep chimneys at six, so your point is?
Plenty of 18 year old skilled working class kids are plumbers or electricians earning £30k plus by 21 when arts graduates leave universities seeking their first wage, probably no higher and often lower.
University gives a big wage premium still to STEM graduates, law and medicine and economics graduates, not many others though
I have no issue with those who choose a trade career to choose a career trade. They wouldn't survive off me however as I only contract tradesmen as a last resort. But that is beside the point though.
If anyone wants to experience three years at University and incur a liability that is their business. Your branch of the nanny state Conservative Party would like to remove that option from them.
The more I think about it, the more I like the following solution.
Degrees for everyone & everything
If you have a trade that needs years of study and a fair bit of theoretical work - degree.
A plumber who can install a house worth of plumbing and get it right has something like a degrees worth of knowledge in his head.
By merging the “technical” and “academic” we can get rid of the last of the stupid snobberies.
Further, we can encourage mixing and merging - get the plumber to read some Proust as a module and get the History undergrads at Oxford to learn some welding.
Many of the jobs we have spaces for require a mix of book and practical skills.
Better, more accessible further education pathways which don't involve three years of study - there are plenty of people who can learn useful skills in shorter time, and don't have the opportunity in their jobs - could be part of the mix. The c. 50% of the population doing three year univ courses, of the kind currently offered, doesn't seem a particularly sustainable model.
As a matter of interest it is worth reading the sentencing remarks of the judge in the 'just stop oil' case as it is often cited in comparison with the current round of sentencing.
The participants got 4 years in jail rising to 5 for the leader. There was however intent to cause significant disruption, no guilty pleas, no mitigation, and concern about how they had conducted themselves in the trial. Also, those involved had previous convictions, in all but one case, they had multiple convictions connected to direct action protest.
This appears to indicate to a determination to use imprisonment as a way to manage protest, consistent with the 'far right' protests, but it is notable in the Just Stop Oil cases, the fate of imprisonment seems to have been reserved for repeat offenders.
But you aren't really comparing like with like.
Two major aggravating factors with the racist riots is the violence and racism therein.
Almost all the JSO offenders given jail sentences had already been previously let off with suspended sentences but broken them. The rioters however were nearly all sent to jail straight away without passing go even after pleading guilty and if they showed some remorse given the damage they caused. Fair enough on both counts one would think
All the reporting of jailed protestors so far seem to have a series of past offences too.
It seems to be the usual criminal suspects who've engaged in criminality and found out that this time the Plod and courts were interested.
Oh well, how sad, nevermind.
This woman was jailed and had never had a previous conviction for example
Murder doesn't require prior convictions to be taken seriously.
I suppose Jo Brand was obviously joking and not to be taken seriously - this is ouslam bird territory. Personally I think the woman was both unpleasant and foolish. I think a key thing should be whether a reported victim realistically felt threatened. If we locked everyone up who was unpleasant and foolish I must admit I would be fairly lonely.
Talking of industry - had a conversation with the chap I previously mentioned, who is running a solar farm, a very small business park and now putting in battery storage.
When he was discussing his plans, he mentioned the idea of selling his leccy, at cost plus a tiny amount, to people using his small business units (old farm buildings). The reaction from some has been hilarious - electricity *should* be expensive and he is evil. Despite his leccy being all solar…
I thought that totally logical; one field covered with solar panels plus farm buildings roofed with same. Surely that would make the park self-sufficient. Rest of 'farm's' fields sold/leased off for conventional agriculture.
Nearly three quarters of graduates earn less than £29,120 — the average salary of those aged 22 to 29 — more than 15 months after leaving university, according to official figures from the Higher Education Statistics Agency (Hesa).
Five years later, they have still not caught up. A separate study of graduate tax data in the same year, by the Department for Education, reveals that they earned £3,300 a year less than the median salary for their age group by this later stage.
I listen to LBC far too much, and there's an awful lot of talk that "students can't afford the debt from student fees, I know let's return funding to the public sector and limit places to the elite 7%".
Keep the riff-raff out of higher education for their own good, could be a policy on the next Tory manifesto
The 'riff-raff' who would be kept out of universities if they returned to a 20-25% level would be the less academic half of middle class teens.
Only a generation ago it was perfectly normal for middle class kids to enter the workforce at 18, or even 16.
150 years ago they could sweep chimneys at six, so your point is?
Now they can't even bleed radiators. Where are your Pisa tables now?
Why can 't they bleed radiators?
All my tenants can do that, and get a bleeding key in the welcome package.
But thwn they are not urban yuppies who just want to own a house.that they do not kniw how to care for, and need the LL to change a lightbulb. :-*)
Don't all tenants get bleeding keys ... how else would they unlock the bleeding front door ?
Nearly three quarters of graduates earn less than £29,120 — the average salary of those aged 22 to 29 — more than 15 months after leaving university, according to official figures from the Higher Education Statistics Agency (Hesa).
Five years later, they have still not caught up. A separate study of graduate tax data in the same year, by the Department for Education, reveals that they earned £3,300 a year less than the median salary for their age group by this later stage.
I listen to LBC far too much, and there's an awful lot of talk that "students can't afford the debt from student fees, I know let's return funding to the public sector and limit places to the elite 7%".
Keep the riff-raff out of higher education for their own good, could be a policy on the next Tory manifesto
The 'riff-raff' who would be kept out of universities if they returned to a 20-25% level would be the less academic half of middle class teens.
Only a generation ago it was perfectly normal for middle class kids to enter the workforce at 18, or even 16.
150 years ago they could sweep chimneys at six, so your point is?
Plenty of 18 year old skilled working class kids are plumbers or electricians earning £30k plus by 21 when arts graduates leave universities seeking their first wage, probably no higher and often lower.
University gives a big wage premium still to STEM graduates, law and medicine and economics graduates, not many others though
I have no issue with those who choose a trade career to choose a career trade. They wouldn't survive off me however as I only contract tradesmen as a last resort. But that is beside the point though.
If anyone wants to experience three years at University and incur a liability that is their business. Your branch of the nanny state Conservative Party would like to remove that option from them.
The more I think about it, the more I like the following solution.
Degrees for everyone & everything
If you have a trade that needs years of study and a fair bit of theoretical work - degree.
A plumber who can install a house worth of plumbing and get it right has something like a degrees worth of knowledge in his head.
By merging the “technical” and “academic” we can get rid of the last of the stupid snobberies.
Further, we can encourage mixing and merging - get the plumber to read some Proust as a module and get the History undergrads at Oxford to learn some welding.
Many of the jobs we have spaces for require a mix of book and practical skills.
Better, more accessible further education pathways which don't involve three years of study - there are plenty of people who can learn useful skills in shorter time, and don't have the opportunity in their jobs - could be part of the mix. The c. 50% of the population doing three year univ courses, of the kind currently offered, doesn't seem a particularly sustainable model.
Idle curiosity department: I'm 74, and have finally stood down from my job and from the Council (there will be a by-election). I had a stroke a new months ago which has left no physical traces and only the odd lapse of memory, but is a reminder of mortality.
I'm trying to avoid rushing into new commitments, but also from sinking into apathy. I'm mostly living near Oxford so looking at some of their one-off courses that don't leed to a degree. Any recommendations in this or any other activity?
As I previously suggested - give St Anthonys College, Oxford a bell. With your background they would probably have all kinds of interesting ideas for you.
Have a look at u3acommunities.org. One of the issues I've found with considerably reduced mobility is varied discussion; one tends to meet the same people when ones actually gets out and about.
As a matter of interest it is worth reading the sentencing remarks of the judge in the 'just stop oil' case as it is often cited in comparison with the current round of sentencing.
The participants got 4 years in jail rising to 5 for the leader. There was however intent to cause significant disruption, no guilty pleas, no mitigation, and concern about how they had conducted themselves in the trial. Also, those involved had previous convictions, in all but one case, they had multiple convictions connected to direct action protest.
This appears to indicate to a determination to use imprisonment as a way to manage protest, consistent with the 'far right' protests, but it is notable in the Just Stop Oil cases, the fate of imprisonment seems to have been reserved for repeat offenders.
But you aren't really comparing like with like.
Two major aggravating factors with the racist riots is the violence and racism therein.
Almost all the JSO offenders given jail sentences had already been previously let off with suspended sentences but broken them. The rioters however were nearly all sent to jail straight away without passing go even after pleading guilty and if they showed some remorse given the damage they caused. Fair enough on both counts one would think
All the reporting of jailed protestors so far seem to have a series of past offences too.
It seems to be the usual criminal suspects who've engaged in criminality and found out that this time the Plod and courts were interested.
Oh well, how sad, nevermind.
This woman was jailed and had never had a previous conviction for example
Murder doesn't require prior convictions to be taken seriously.
I suppose Jo Brand was obviously joking and not to be taken seriously - this is ouslam bird territory. Personally I think the woman was both unpleasant and foolish. I think a key thing should be whether a reported victim realistically felt threatened. If we locked everyone up who was unpleasant and foolish I must admit I would be fairly lonely.
What Jo Brand said would have been fine in a comedy club, to a live audience expecting edgy jokes, but very unwise in any other situation. The BBC really should have cut the joke from a pre-recorded programme before broadcast.
I think Badenoch's big issue is her time in office. Ditching the EU Reform and Revocation Bill could be seen as pragmatic (I see it as pathetic), but the bits of EU law she ended up repealing really were a sorry list - laws relating to the 2012 Olympics and suchlike. There were very significant one she should have marked for the shitcan, and dared Sunak to oppose her. Where Jenrick is now reflects how he played it in office - doing what he could and resigning on principle when he was blocked.
Not relevant to the Tory member market she's playing to, but her pragmatism in ditching the obvious nonsense of the EU law sunset bill against her ideological bent maybe shows there's some potential capability lurking in there. Just occasionally she says something sensible.
It wasn't at all pragmatic, apart from in terms of immediate political expediency - which was perhaps what you meant. I find it rather stupid from a rejoin perspective too - why would the EU even want us to rejoin if a) we're obeying all their crappy competition-destroying laws anyway and b) we're an economically moribund basket case? Remainers are like pathetic exes keeping all their partner's habits and totally failing to move on - it's the least likely strategy to attract that person back.
The sunset clause was a nonsense because, deliberately, no consideration could be given to what if anything replaced the legislation. Take the Working Time Directive. The only effect of the Sunset Bill would be to remove all worker protections. Even if you think that's a good idea, surely no protections should be an explicit policy rather happening by default. And by the way, government policy at the time was working time protections should be kept at a level stricter than necessary under Working Time Directive.
This isn't an argument about the EU Reform and Revocation Bill - my argument is that having canned it (or been forced to, you decide), Badenoch should have picked some more significant laws to abolish as part of her 'slimmed down bill', rather than trimming legislation about an already passed Olympic event. She fluffed it.
Talking of industry - had a conversation with the chap I previously mentioned, who is running a solar farm, a very small business park and now putting in battery storage.
When he was discussing his plans, he mentioned the idea of selling his leccy, at cost plus a tiny amount, to people using his small business units (old farm buildings). The reaction from some has been hilarious - electricity *should* be expensive and he is evil. Despite his leccy being all solar…
I thought that totally logical; one field covered with solar panels plus farm buildings roofed with same. Surely that would make the park self-sufficient. Rest of 'farm's' fields sold/leased off for conventional agriculture.
He’s doing sheep farming where the panels are. The plan is to keep expanding the solar, I believe.
The interesting bit in this, is that attitudes are (currently) that energy *must* be expensive. Bit like the strange belief that water *must* be rationed in the U.K.
But prices for solar and storage are heading south…
Historically, cheap energy has resulted in productivity gains and growth.
Talking of industry - had a conversation with the chap I previously mentioned, who is running a solar farm, a very small business park and now putting in battery storage.
When he was discussing his plans, he mentioned the idea of selling his leccy, at cost plus a tiny amount, to people using his small business units (old farm buildings). The reaction from some has been hilarious - electricity *should* be expensive and he is evil. Despite his leccy being all solar…
It's called 'the real price of energy'. These people are: a) psychopathic zealots b) at it c) an expedient combination of both
Talking of industry - had a conversation with the chap I previously mentioned, who is running a solar farm, a very small business park and now putting in battery storage.
When he was discussing his plans, he mentioned the idea of selling his leccy, at cost plus a tiny amount, to people using his small business units (old farm buildings). The reaction from some has been hilarious - electricity *should* be expensive and he is evil. Despite his leccy being all solar…
I thought that totally logical; one field covered with solar panels plus farm buildings roofed with same. Surely that would make the park self-sufficient. Rest of 'farm's' fields sold/leased off for conventional agriculture.
He’s doing sheep farming where the panels are. The plan is to keep expanding the solar, I believe.
The interesting bit in this, is that attitudes are (currently) that energy *must* be expensive. Bit like the strange belief that water *must* be rationed in the U.K.
But prices for solar and storage are heading south…
Historically, cheap energy has resulted in productivity gains and growth.
Nearly three quarters of graduates earn less than £29,120 — the average salary of those aged 22 to 29 — more than 15 months after leaving university, according to official figures from the Higher Education Statistics Agency (Hesa).
Five years later, they have still not caught up. A separate study of graduate tax data in the same year, by the Department for Education, reveals that they earned £3,300 a year less than the median salary for their age group by this later stage.
I listen to LBC far too much, and there's an awful lot of talk that "students can't afford the debt from student fees, I know let's return funding to the public sector and limit places to the elite 7%".
Keep the riff-raff out of higher education for their own good, could be a policy on the next Tory manifesto
The 'riff-raff' who would be kept out of universities if they returned to a 20-25% level would be the less academic half of middle class teens.
Only a generation ago it was perfectly normal for middle class kids to enter the workforce at 18, or even 16.
The hole in the workforce is partly caused by too many undergraduates and Osbornes early retirement wheeze to get people drawing pensions at 55. Together these could have taken 1 million people out of the workforce.
It might be possible in the 2060s to be drawing on your pension while still paying student loans.
LOL not just possible but likely !
I thought that the Student Loan was written off before retirement age?
Today yes, but given were broke and the history of the student loan programme has been mission creep if HMG can extend a tax what do you think will happen.
Talking of industry - had a conversation with the chap I previously mentioned, who is running a solar farm, a very small business park and now putting in battery storage.
When he was discussing his plans, he mentioned the idea of selling his leccy, at cost plus a tiny amount, to people using his small business units (old farm buildings). The reaction from some has been hilarious - electricity *should* be expensive and he is evil. Despite his leccy being all solar…
It's called 'the real price of energy'. These people are: a) psychopathic zealots b) at it c) an expedient combination of both
Sure - one joy from the Cold Fusion bollocks was the people who actually screamed in horror at cheap, pollutionless energy generation.
The again, it did spark (ha!) an excellent episode of the Outer Limits.
Talking of industry - had a conversation with the chap I previously mentioned, who is running a solar farm, a very small business park and now putting in battery storage.
When he was discussing his plans, he mentioned the idea of selling his leccy, at cost plus a tiny amount, to people using his small business units (old farm buildings). The reaction from some has been hilarious - electricity *should* be expensive and he is evil. Despite his leccy being all solar…
I thought that totally logical; one field covered with solar panels plus farm buildings roofed with same. Surely that would make the park self-sufficient. Rest of 'farm's' fields sold/leased off for conventional agriculture.
He’s doing sheep farming where the panels are. The plan is to keep expanding the solar, I believe.
The interesting bit in this, is that attitudes are (currently) that energy *must* be expensive. Bit like the strange belief that water *must* be rationed in the U.K.
But prices for solar and storage are heading south…
Historically, cheap energy has resulted in productivity gains and growth.
Talking of industry - had a conversation with the chap I previously mentioned, who is running a solar farm, a very small business park and now putting in battery storage.
When he was discussing his plans, he mentioned the idea of selling his leccy, at cost plus a tiny amount, to people using his small business units (old farm buildings). The reaction from some has been hilarious - electricity *should* be expensive and he is evil. Despite his leccy being all solar…
I thought that totally logical; one field covered with solar panels plus farm buildings roofed with same. Surely that would make the park self-sufficient. Rest of 'farm's' fields sold/leased off for conventional agriculture.
He’s doing sheep farming where the panels are. The plan is to keep expanding the solar, I believe.
The interesting bit in this, is that attitudes are (currently) that energy *must* be expensive. Bit like the strange belief that water *must* be rationed in the U.K.
But prices for solar and storage are heading south…
Historically, cheap energy has resulted in productivity gains and growth.
Somebody is making a killing out of it
More that social systems have system policies. Once they are set, very hard to force the system to do anything else. So “make energy expensive and reduce usage” is now the religion.
See the current comedy in the new government with Sue Gray. My guess is that all the departments thought that the new government would stop opposition to the various internal dept. policies. As opposed to coming in with their own policies.
The Russians are trying their best to deny it to their own people, but to the natives of Western Russia it’s now really clear there’s something not quite right in the last few weeks, as the war comes to their own region.
Still nothing that looks like an army coming to defend Kursk Oblast either, only a bunch of conscripts very keen to wave white flags when confronted with Ukranian forces. Which of course the Ukranian army, unlike the Russian army, actually respects and takes the PoWs alive rather than shooting them.
Shes been invited to my constituency and not responded, shame as I was all in her for her to win. She is pure Corbyn for the membership, hopefully she isn't like that for the rest of the population though. If she's in the final two she will win hands down.
Simon Kitchen, chief executive of Bipolar UK, warned: "People are being left to their own devices. This is a recipe for disaster"
p2 (cont.)
"before adding; everything is great, isn't the world beautiful?"
sorry, couldn't resist.
I don't get why he thinks people are being left to their own devices. There's a Serious Shortage Protocol (SSP) out for the bipolar med to use a set of lower dose meds together to get the prescribed higher dose (e.g. 4 x 50mg to get 200mg).
Unless the SSP is already out of date and the 50 or 100mg also now not available?
Talking of industry - had a conversation with the chap I previously mentioned, who is running a solar farm, a very small business park and now putting in battery storage.
When he was discussing his plans, he mentioned the idea of selling his leccy, at cost plus a tiny amount, to people using his small business units (old farm buildings). The reaction from some has been hilarious - electricity *should* be expensive and he is evil. Despite his leccy being all solar…
It's called 'the real price of energy'. These people are: a) psychopathic zealots b) at it c) an expedient combination of both
Sure - one joy from the Cold Fusion bollocks was the people who actually screamed in horror at cheap, pollutionless energy generation.
The again, it did spark (ha!) an excellent episode of the Outer Limits.
You cant have degrowth with cheap limitless energy... The degrowthers are like some weird death cult.
I've just spent part of the morning at Oundle School for an event. I went to two private schools 35-odd years ago, and the standard of facilities at Oundle are... well, let's just say that they're better than superb (I only saw the sports side of things). It makes my old school look like Beanotown School.
Then I came home and saw the yearly prices... Over £50k by the time everything is counted.
Not all private schools are equal. I bet Oundle will survive Labour's nasty little VAT scheme. Other schools... not so much.
As a matter of interest it is worth reading the sentencing remarks of the judge in the 'just stop oil' case as it is often cited in comparison with the current round of sentencing.
The participants got 4 years in jail rising to 5 for the leader. There was however intent to cause significant disruption, no guilty pleas, no mitigation, and concern about how they had conducted themselves in the trial. Also, those involved had previous convictions, in all but one case, they had multiple convictions connected to direct action protest.
This appears to indicate to a determination to use imprisonment as a way to manage protest, consistent with the 'far right' protests, but it is notable in the Just Stop Oil cases, the fate of imprisonment seems to have been reserved for repeat offenders.
But you aren't really comparing like with like.
Two major aggravating factors with the racist riots is the violence and racism therein.
Almost all the JSO offenders given jail sentences had already been previously let off with suspended sentences but broken them. The rioters however were nearly all sent to jail straight away without passing go even after pleading guilty and if they showed some remorse given the damage they caused. Fair enough on both counts one would think
All the reporting of jailed protestors so far seem to have a series of past offences too.
It seems to be the usual criminal suspects who've engaged in criminality and found out that this time the Plod and courts were interested.
Oh well, how sad, nevermind.
This woman was jailed and had never had a previous conviction for example
Murder doesn't require prior convictions to be taken seriously.
I suppose Jo Brand was obviously joking and not to be taken seriously - this is ouslam bird territory. Personally I think the woman was both unpleasant and foolish. I think a key thing should be whether a reported victim realistically felt threatened. If we locked everyone up who was unpleasant and foolish I must admit I would be fairly lonely.
What Jo Brand said would have been fine in a comedy club, to a live audience expecting edgy jokes, but very unwise in any other situation. The BBC really should have cut the joke from a pre-recorded programme before broadcast.
Remember how the BBC ruined Carol Thatcher's career after a comment she made in the Green Room, that was not broadcast.
What Brand said was far worse, and was broadcast. It's fairly clear that there's one rule for left-wingers at the BBC, and another for right-wingers.
Talking of industry - had a conversation with the chap I previously mentioned, who is running a solar farm, a very small business park and now putting in battery storage.
When he was discussing his plans, he mentioned the idea of selling his leccy, at cost plus a tiny amount, to people using his small business units (old farm buildings). The reaction from some has been hilarious - electricity *should* be expensive and he is evil. Despite his leccy being all solar…
It's called 'the real price of energy'. These people are: a) psychopathic zealots b) at it c) an expedient combination of both
Sure - one joy from the Cold Fusion bollocks was the people who actually screamed in horror at cheap, pollutionless energy generation.
The again, it did spark (ha!) an excellent episode of the Outer Limits.
You cant have degrowth with cheap limitless energy... The degrowthers are like some weird death cult.
The Russians are trying their best to deny it to their own people, but to the natives of Western Russia it’s now really clear there’s something not quite right in the last few weeks, as the war comes to their own region.
Still nothing that looks like an army coming to defend Kursk Oblast either, only a bunch of conscripts very keen to wave white flags when confronted with Ukranian forces. Which of course the Ukranian army, unlike the Russian army, actually respects and takes the PoWs alive rather than shooting them.
Taking prisoners alive is smart warfare as it means the next enemy confronted knows they can lay down their weapons rather than fighting to the death as they've nothing left to lose.
Shes been invited to my constituency and not responded, shame as I was all in her for her to win. She is pure Corbyn for the membership, hopefully she isn't like that for the rest of the population though. If she's in the final two she will win hands down.
If she were to win the leadership, pretty sure Badenoch would be relatively happy with 2019 Corbyn GE numbers, let alone those of 2017 Corbyn.
Shes been invited to my constituency and not responded, shame as I was all in her for her to win. She is pure Corbyn for the membership, hopefully she isn't like that for the rest of the population though. If she's in the final two she will win hands down.
If she were to win the leadership, pretty sure Badenoch would be relatively happy with 2019 Corbyn GE numbers, let alone those of 2017 Corbyn.
Charlotte Clymer 🇺🇦 @cmclymer The Medal of Honor is so revered that it's the only decoration specially emblazoned on headstones in Arlington National Cemetery.
The Medal of Honor is so revered that when an Active Duty recipient wears it in uniform, it is customary, though not technically required, for all officers, no matter their seniority, to initiate a salute.
The Medal of Honor is so revered that all living recipients are entitled to an invitation to every presidential inauguration and inaugural ball.
Shes been invited to my constituency and not responded, shame as I was all in her for her to win. She is pure Corbyn for the membership, hopefully she isn't like that for the rest of the population though. If she's in the final two she will win hands down.
If she were to win the leadership, pretty sure Badenoch would be relatively happy with 2019 Corbyn GE numbers, let alone those of 2017 Corbyn.
Touché.
Wasn't having a go, but it is amazing how context and a few years changes everything. A few weeks in the context of US politics.
Comments
Big state low growth.
There will be a need to freshen up in the run up to the next GE, just as the Democrats freshened up their offer. I don't think Starmer will run for a second term, and I don't think Reeves will get the gig. Of all the new faces in Cabinet it is Phillipson on that impresses me. Smart, poised, articulate and Northern working class.
Don't you believe in a user pays economy? Should those with higher costs not be responsible for their own costs?
University gives a big wage premium still to STEM graduates, law and medicine and economics graduates, not many others though
With jails full, presumably judgments need to be made about the relative sentences imposed foi (a) violent rioting (b) expensive sabotage and (c) routine law-breaking. The severe sentences on riots seem to have snuffed out the temptation to have more, for now at least. In all three cases, the fact that Norwegian reoffending is half that in Britain suggests that serious investment in persuading prisoners that there's a sensible alternative pays off in the long term.
The world has changed massively over the last fifty years, with globalisation and AI it might do even more so in the next fifty.
The skills in demand now are different to what they were then and likely what they will be in the future.
Certainly a young Neville Hope now would not struggle to find work.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cz6x105wgz5o
Our problem is not the numbers going on to higher education, it is the often poor quality of courses that are run by Universities that focus on selling the undergraduate experience rather than the course.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMC9y4BUWd8
Hypothetically if the change is net cost neutral, but results in firms responsible for lower transmission costs seeing their costs fall, while firms responsible for higher transmission costs see their costs rise - is there anything wrong with that in principle?
Is there any reason we should not have user pays in your eyes?
Mind you, no manufacturing experience since 1994.
I think Badenoch's big issue is her time in office. Ditching the EU Reform and Revocation Bill could be seen as pragmatic (I see it as pathetic), but the bits of EU law she ended up repealing really were a sorry list - laws relating to the 2012 Olympics and suchlike. There were very significant one she should have marked for the shitcan, and dared Sunak to oppose her. Where Jenrick is now reflects how he played it in office - doing what he could and resigning on principle when he was blocked.
A purely academic experience between the ages of 18 and 21, often (as you say) poor quality and based more on 'lifestyle' is not going to produce the skilled workforce the country and the individuals themselves require.
Murder doesn't require prior convictions to be taken seriously.
If anyone wants to experience three years at University and incur a liability that is their business. Your branch of the nanny state Conservative Party would like to remove that option from them.
When defenders of people like this woman also claim to live their lives on strict Christian moral codes the hypocrisy stinks.
Christians have routinely advocated for the murder of heathens and those whom they dislike.
The idea Christianity is about being nice to others is for the fairies. Much of what Christ said is about that, to be fair, but then much of the rest of the Bible (both New and Old Testament) is not and that's the bit too many Christians throughout history, like HY, choose to concentrate on.
HY has always had more in common with Paul than Christ.
One is a billionaire, the other was a minister in the Taiwanese government, who transformed its digital communications.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/aug/17/audrey-tang-toxic-social-media-fake-news-taiwan-trans-government-internet
https://www.tabletmag.com/feature/american-vulcan-palmer-luckey-anduril
As a thought experiment, should police now trawl social media for anyone suggesting motorists should run over orange-clad demonstrators sitting in the road?
I prefer the latter but doubt he has what's necessary to cut through.
Both Saj and Cleverly seem to be people you'd be happy to have as a neighbour or as a boss.
Jenrick fails on both counts.
The Green Belt was supposed to be about protecting agriculture.
As the population growth slowed in the later part of the 20th cent. policies that massively restricted home construction didn’t have a negative effect. At first.
So the system became fixed on (and depended on) a shortage of housing. The eternally rising house prices, the telephone number values, everything selling/renting no matter how appalling……
In many other countries, the idea that you restrict home building, if there is any demand, is rightly seen as anti-population. “I hate the people” is a political platform for *some*, but rarely successful.
One thing that has been forgotten is that humans need space. There is plenty of literature on the physiological effects of over crowding. It is worth noting that in many of the ugly tower blocks built to replace the slums, space was *added* per family - more sq ft than what they replaced. This was a deliberate policy, in many cases, to improve the lot of the people living in them.
Every time I hear someone championing “micro homes” I have a strong desire to shove them in an oubliette.
Degrees for everyone & everything
If you have a trade that needs years of study and a fair bit of theoretical work - degree.
A plumber who can install a house worth of plumbing and get it right has something like a degrees worth of knowledge in his head.
By merging the “technical” and “academic” we can get rid of the last of the stupid snobberies.
Further, we can encourage mixing and merging - get the plumber to read some Proust as a module and get the History undergrads at Oxford to learn some welding.
Many of the jobs we have spaces for require a mix of book and practical skills.
With recent bumper receipts from Corporation Tax, the Republic will probably never again have the fiscal headroom to take the place on, and Britain really could do with divesting itself of the financial burden.
https://www.irishtimes.com/life-style/2024/08/18/northern-ireland-is-in-its-terminal-phase-this-place-never-made-any-ethical-or-economic-sense/
The ironic bit is that a modern factory is often a tidy (outside and in) building, with little noise for the neighbours and strictly controlled emissions. Much better neighbour than a street of food places…
I would focus the first two years of University on learning this skill.
When he was discussing his plans, he mentioned the idea of selling his leccy, at cost plus a tiny amount, to people using his small business units (old farm buildings). The reaction from some has been hilarious - electricity *should* be expensive and he is evil. Despite his leccy being all solar…
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/exclusive-half-the-country-believes-nigel-farage-is-responsible-for-the-riots_uk_66bf6523e4b0d9d5eb7dc499
(I post with trepidation, but if we can't do polling analysis, what is the point of the site?)
Responsible comments only, please.
Because, if you start believing that the two are linked, you will be accused of not liking immigration. Which means you set fire to hotels on weekends.
We need to adapt to the world we have.
I think both have fallen below the standards we should expect of people in public life - Patel more seriously in the events that led to May sacking her from Cabinet.
But I think it is Jenrick who is most likely to lead Conservative voters down the path of radicalisation, and reuniting the Right under the banner of the views of Reform voters - rejecting democratic norms and advocating extreme and divisive measures. This would lead to replicating the political division seen in the US in the UK.
But, as we have seen in the US, that might be the easiest path in the short-term for the Right to return to office. Particularly as I don't think any other Conservative politician has offered an alternate strategy, let alone demonstrated they have the ability to implement it.
All my tenants can do that, and get a bleeding key in the welcome package.
But thwn they are not urban yuppies who just want to own a house.that they do not kniw how to care for, and need the LL to change a lightbulb. :-*)
I'm trying to avoid rushing into new commitments, but also from sinking into apathy. I'm mostly living near Oxford so looking at some of their one-off courses that don't leed to a degree. Any recommendations in this or any other activity?
If she wins now it could be like William Hague ... Great Expectations that never quite happen. She needs fo be next leader imo.
Simon Kitchen, chief executive of Bipolar UK, warned: "People are being left to their own devices. This is a recipe for disaster"
p2 (cont.)
"before adding; everything is great, isn't the world beautiful?"
sorry, couldn't resist.
The c. 50% of the population doing three year univ courses, of the kind currently offered, doesn't seem a particularly sustainable model.
Rest of 'farm's' fields sold/leased off for conventional agriculture.
Let a thousand flowers bloom
One of the issues I've found with considerably reduced mobility is varied discussion; one tends to meet the same people when ones actually gets out and about.
The interesting bit in this, is that attitudes are (currently) that energy *must* be expensive. Bit like the strange belief that water *must* be rationed in the U.K.
But prices for solar and storage are heading south…
Historically, cheap energy has resulted in productivity gains and growth.
a) psychopathic zealots
b) at it
c) an expedient combination of both
The again, it did spark (ha!) an excellent episode of the Outer Limits.
https://x.com/DougJBalloon/status/1825048673467695336
🔵 Harris 50% (+5)
🔴 Trump 45%
Last poll vs Biden - 🔴 Trump +1
IPSOS #B - LV - 8/13
https://x.com/PpollingNumbers/status/1825052371992354990
See the current comedy in the new government with Sue Gray. My guess is that all the departments thought that the new government would stop opposition to the various internal dept. policies. As opposed to coming in with their own policies.
Phillips P. OBrien
"an instance of successfully achieving something difficult."
https://x.com/osinttechnical/status/1825087090893230403
The Russians are trying their best to deny it to their own people, but to the natives of Western Russia it’s now really clear there’s something not quite right in the last few weeks, as the war comes to their own region.
Still nothing that looks like an army coming to defend Kursk Oblast either, only a bunch of conscripts very keen to wave white flags when confronted with Ukranian forces. Which of course the Ukranian army, unlike the Russian army, actually respects and takes the PoWs alive rather than shooting them.
If she's in the final two she will win hands down.
Tim Walz’s net worth is less than the average American’s, per FORTUNE.
Together with his wife, Gwen, his net worth is $330,000, per WSJ..
https://x.com/unusual_whales/status/1824838849773654397
(That can't include the value of their pensions, of course.)
Unless the SSP is already out of date and the 50 or 100mg also now not available?
@OldKingCole may know more?
I've just spent part of the morning at Oundle School for an event. I went to two private schools 35-odd years ago, and the standard of facilities at Oundle are... well, let's just say that they're better than superb (I only saw the sports side of things). It makes my old school look like Beanotown School.
Then I came home and saw the yearly prices...
Not all private schools are equal. I bet Oundle will survive Labour's nasty little VAT scheme. Other schools... not so much.
What Brand said was far worse, and was broadcast. It's fairly clear that there's one rule for left-wingers at the BBC, and another for right-wingers.
@cmclymer
The Medal of Honor is so revered that it's the only decoration specially emblazoned on headstones in Arlington National Cemetery.
The Medal of Honor is so revered that when an Active Duty recipient wears it in uniform, it is customary, though not technically required, for all officers, no matter their seniority, to initiate a salute.
The Medal of Honor is so revered that all living recipients are entitled to an invitation to every presidential inauguration and inaugural ball.
https://x.com/cmclymer/status/1824656141411856677