Sort of on topic, the real savings are probably in the types of treatment and care than extend, say, the life of a 85 year old in poor health by 18-24 months in slightly less poor health but with chronic conditions and in some pain, before they diminish again and die. And that won't be just cancer treatment, and nor will it be cheap.
I'm not sure how you'd quantity that, though, or deprioritise over a childhood or mainstream working adult cancer because you then start to go against the hypocratic oath.
Isn't this what the Quality Adjusted Life Year metric is supposed to address? The QA part accounts for that year in pain with chronic conditions being different from a year where a younger adult is in remission and doesn't have those extra conditions, and the LY part rates "we cured a child's cancer and they got an extra 60 years" as worth sixty times more than "an elderly person got another year". Medicine has to prioritise, because we can't give it infinite resources.
Looking forward, one of the challenges the Conservatives have is coming up with a shared story about the Truss days. At the moment, the gap between those who think the disaster was electing her and those who think the disaster was dumping her is just too big.
Going back to Thatcher, hardly anyone holds a candle for the Community Charge now.
The Community Charge would be fine, were it a very low amount.
The TV licence is effectively a poll tax, as are many bills and basic subscriptions, but it doesn't wash when it gets substantial.
The attempt to take property out of local Government funding was an interesting one and not wholly without merit. The single person in the big house was, it was argued, a lesser use of Council Services than five adults living in a property who created more rubbish for example.
Service use isn't of course based purely on population and property - the family with three small children uses education and leisure services, the single elderly man or woman more likely to be a user of social care and so on so it was as flawed a basis for funding as property values.
Short of individual household contracts (if you only need your rubbish collected fortnightly or every three weeks and you bin has the barcode indicating frequency of collection) you pay less than a house needing the bin emptied twice a week or even individual citizen contracts (imagine the bureaucracy), you're left with some rather blunt instruments.
There's no "fair" way of funding local Government because no two areas are the same. If they were, it would be easy but Newham isn't Surrey and Liverpool isn't Cornwall. Applying a uniform funding mechanism is clearly flawed so it may be different areas need different funding mechanisms - property values in some areas, a local sales or income tax in others. The problem is the need to redistribute funds from the richer areas which tend to have fewer needs to the poorer areas which do.
Sort of on topic, the real savings are probably in the types of treatment and care than extend, say, the life of a 85 year old in poor health by 18-24 months in slightly less poor health but with chronic conditions and in some pain, before they diminish again and die. And that won't be just cancer treatment, and nor will it be cheap.
I'm not sure how you'd quantity that, though, or deprioritise over a childhood or mainstream working adult cancer because you then start to go against the hypocratic oath.
The entire discipline of health economics is predicated on that dilemma.
And we have an organisation whose entire remit is to work on the problem. https://www.nice.org.uk
Truss is another reason why leadership of the Parliamentary parties should not be outsourced to the wider membership of any party.
The first reason is it’s essentially unconstitutional. The PM is supposed to be the person who commands the confidence of the majority of the House. Truss didn’t. (Neither did Corbyn have the confidence of his Parliamentary party but failed to get a majority even against TMay).
The second reason is that people who pay however much it costs to join a political party (any party) tend to represent a narrow part of public opinion.
Then if the public want a say in who leads a party, they should join a party.
Truss is another reason why leadership of the Parliamentary parties should not be outsourced to the wider membership of any party.
The first reason is it’s essentially unconstitutional. The PM is supposed to be the person who commands the confidence of the majority of the House. Truss didn’t. (Neither did Corbyn have the confidence of his Parliamentary party but failed to get a majority even against TMay).
The second reason is that people who pay however much it costs to join a political party (any party) tend to represent a narrow part of public opinion.
Then if the public want a say in who leads a party, they should join a party.
Join a political party??? Sound finances, a functioning health service, defence, law and order are all very important, but not that important......
Sort of on topic, the real savings are probably in the types of treatment and care than extend, say, the life of a 85 year old in poor health by 18-24 months in slightly less poor health but with chronic conditions and in some pain, before they diminish again and die. And that won't be just cancer treatment, and nor will it be cheap.
I'm not sure how you'd quantity that, though, or deprioritise over a childhood or mainstream working adult cancer because you then start to go against the hypocratic oath.
Isn't this what the Quality Adjusted Life Year metric is supposed to address? The QA part accounts for that year in pain with chronic conditions being different from a year where a younger adult is in remission and doesn't have those extra conditions, and the LY part rates "we cured a child's cancer and they got an extra 60 years" as worth sixty times more than "an elderly person got another year". Medicine has to prioritise, because we can't give it infinite resources.
That’s exactly what QALYs are for. My father was involved in promulgating usage in the NHS.
Looking forward, one of the challenges the Conservatives have is coming up with a shared story about the Truss days. At the moment, the gap between those who think the disaster was electing her and those who think the disaster was dumping her is just too big.
Going back to Thatcher, hardly anyone holds a candle for the Community Charge now.
That's a bit like attitudes to Nick Clegg. Was breaking the promise on tuition fees the mistake?, or making the promise in the first place?
Should be custodial. Not sure if related to prisons being full, but got me wondering if a judge could sentence someone to a prison term that starts at a time when we have sufficient prison capacity, rather than immediately? If not, could we quickly introduce that?
On topic, usually I'd say I doubt this is true, and politically motivated, particularly since civil servants do put forth crazy options, but with Truss who knows.
TRUSS, you say? And you are only saying what many are thinking. That it is her time. Time for her to lead, and others to follow.
You are warming on a TRUSS revival, and who I am to say your instincts are wrong?
Looking forward, one of the challenges the Conservatives have is coming up with a shared story about the Truss days. At the moment, the gap between those who think the disaster was electing her and those who think the disaster was dumping her is just too big.
Going back to Thatcher, hardly anyone holds a candle for the Community Charge now.
The Community Charge would be fine, were it a very low amount.
The TV licence is effectively a poll tax, as are many bills and basic subscriptions, but it doesn't wash when it gets substantial.
The attempt to take property out of local Government funding was an interesting one and not wholly without merit. The single person in the big house was, it was argued, a lesser use of Council Services than five adults living in a property who created more rubbish for example.
Service use isn't of course based purely on population and property - the family with three small children uses education and leisure services, the single elderly man or woman more likely to be a user of social care and so on so it was as flawed a basis for funding as property values.
Short of individual household contracts (if you only need your rubbish collected fortnightly or every three weeks and you bin has the barcode indicating frequency of collection) you pay less than a house needing the bin emptied twice a week or even individual citizen contracts (imagine the bureaucracy), you're left with some rather blunt instruments.
There's no "fair" way of funding local Government because no two areas are the same. If they were, it would be easy but Newham isn't Surrey and Liverpool isn't Cornwall. Applying a uniform funding mechanism is clearly flawed so it may be different areas need different funding mechanisms - property values in some areas, a local sales or income tax in others. The problem is the need to redistribute funds from the richer areas which tend to have fewer needs to the poorer areas which do.
The sensible solution to me is to make property a national tax and use it to fund local expenditure that is required by national diktats.
Eg SEN, Care etc are all required by national regulations and make up most of supposedly-local expenditure. Levy the property tax nationally and give the money as a grant.
Locally raised expenditure should go on local choices not national ones.
Looking forward, one of the challenges the Conservatives have is coming up with a shared story about the Truss days. At the moment, the gap between those who think the disaster was electing her and those who think the disaster was dumping her is just too big.
Going back to Thatcher, hardly anyone holds a candle for the Community Charge now.
That's a bit like attitudes to Nick Clegg. Was breaking the promise on tuition fees the mistake?, or making the promise in the first place?
Making the promise central to their campaign having already decided to sacrifice it if there was a chance of power, then being part of bringing in a far worse system.
I've never understood why Clegg still seems to get the benefit of the doubt when his post-politics career, earning megabucks running corporate whitewashing for Meta, clearly shows him in his truelight, someone happy to make money promoting suicide to teens.
On topic, usually I'd say I doubt this is true, and politically motivated, particularly since civil servants do put forth crazy options, but with Truss who knows.
TRUSS, you say? And you are only saying what many are thinking. That it is her time. Time for her to lead, and others to follow.
You are warming on a TRUSS revival, and who I am to say your instincts are wrong?
Of many bonkers memes on pb.com, this is by a country mile the most bonkers.
It seems anomalous, even through there is a package of unpaid work etc. He has quite the record - here he is in 2019 (same name, address, age correlates) sentenced to 6 months in prison after he was banned from driving them drove off dangerously in his car which he had parked on a 2Y line outside the Magistrate's Court. He was also in Court for offences of Drug Driving.
All Alone Road is a prosperous area; he thinks he is above the law. IMO an indeterminate or permanent driving ban is indicated, as he has abused the privilege of driving on multiple occasions. It's quite the account and worth a read.
Should be custodial. Not sure if related to prisons being full, but got me wondering if a judge could sentence someone to a prison term that starts at a time when we have sufficient prison capacity, rather than immediately? If not, could we quickly introduce that?
That's how it works in the USA. They set a date for the criminal to report to prison, partly because they have to allow for Appeals etc. Observable in the Steve Bannon case, who successfully delayed his 4-month sentence for Contempt of Congress for a couple of years, but did not quite make it to the point where an election winning Trump would have sprung him from prison.
Im sure all of those taking the piss out of Harris's economic policies will want to weigh in here ?
Vance: Our corrupt leadership said if you put tariffs on China, prices will go up. Instead, Donald Trump did that, manufacturing came back and prices went down for American citizens. They went up for the Chinese but went down for our people. https://x.com/Acyn/status/1828494553030291901
On topic, usually I'd say I doubt this is true, and politically motivated, particularly since civil servants do put forth crazy options, but with Truss who knows.
TRUSS, you say? And you are only saying what many are thinking. That it is her time. Time for her to lead, and others to follow.
You are warming on a TRUSS revival, and who I am to say your instincts are wrong?
Of many bonkers memes on pb.com, this is by a country mile the most bonkers.
Knock it off.
I asked the Lizard Men who work for the Grey Aliens, who work for the Grand Council of the Illuminati.
They think that The Lettuce wasn’t real. That she was a prank played on them by The Real Conspiracy.
Looking forward, one of the challenges the Conservatives have is coming up with a shared story about the Truss days. At the moment, the gap between those who think the disaster was electing her and those who think the disaster was dumping her is just too big.
Going back to Thatcher, hardly anyone holds a candle for the Community Charge now.
That's a bit like attitudes to Nick Clegg. Was breaking the promise on tuition fees the mistake?, or making the promise in the first place?
Making the promise central to their campaign having already decided to sacrifice it if there was a chance of power, then being part of bringing in a far worse system.
I've never understood why Clegg still seems to get the benefit of the doubt when his post-politics career, earning megabucks running corporate whitewashing for Meta, clearly shows him in his truelight, someone happy to make money promoting suicide to teens.
Who are these folk giving Clegg the benefit of the doubt ?
This story definitely has a ring of plausibility about it. The people Liz is now hanging out with in the US regard state-provided health care as a kind of slavery: the government literally imposing its authority over the bodies of it citizens. So one can see how Liz would regard abolishing NHS services both as a facilitation of her great calling - growth, growth, growth - and as human emancipation. Two birds with one stone and all that.
It seems anomalous, even through there is a package of unpaid work etc. He has quite the record - here he is in 2019 (same name, address, age correlates) sentenced to 6 months in prison after he was banned from driving them drove off dangerously in his car which he had parked on a 2Y line outside the Magistrate's Court. He was also in Court for offences of Drug Driving.
All Alone Road is a prosperous area; he thinks he is above the law. IMO an indeterminate or permanent driving ban is indicated, as he has abused the privilege of driving on multiple occasions. It's quite the account and worth a read.
Sort of on topic, the real savings are probably in the types of treatment and care than extend, say, the life of a 85 year old in poor health by 18-24 months in slightly less poor health but with chronic conditions and in some pain, before they diminish again and die. And that won't be just cancer treatment, and nor will it be cheap.
I'm not sure how you'd quantity that, though, or deprioritise over a childhood or mainstream working adult cancer because you then start to go against the hypocratic oath.
Isn't this what the Quality Adjusted Life Year metric is supposed to address? The QA part accounts for that year in pain with chronic conditions being different from a year where a younger adult is in remission and doesn't have those extra conditions, and the LY part rates "we cured a child's cancer and they got an extra 60 years" as worth sixty times more than "an elderly person got another year". Medicine has to prioritise, because we can't give it infinite resources.
Yes, but I believe with two caveats.
Firstly, the politicians have meddled with this, and overridden the system, with regard to certain cancer drugs in particular, as it happens. Often in response to newspaper campaigns.
Secondly, it operates in relation to elective treatments and interventions, and not to acute emergency care. If an old person is brought to A&E after falling and breaking a hip, there isn't a situation where the NHS will tell them that patching them up doesn't earn enough QALYs to be worth their while and turns them away. They will be admitted to hospital and the best done for them, and their broken hip, at great expense.
Not sure I'd want an old person to be put down in that scenario, but it is an example of where the QALY calculation doesn't apply.
Im sure all of those taking the piss out of Harris's economic policies will want to weigh in here ?
Vance: Our corrupt leadership said if you put tariffs on China, prices will go up. Instead, Donald Trump did that, manufacturing came back and prices went down for American citizens. They went up for the Chinese but went down for our people. https://x.com/Acyn/status/1828494553030291901
A trade war helps no one. Anti dumping measures is one thing but what Trump is proposing is somewhat reckless.
It seems anomalous, even through there is a package of unpaid work etc. He has quite the record - here he is in 2019 (same name, address, age correlates) sentenced to 6 months in prison after he was banned from driving them drove off dangerously in his car which he had parked on a 2Y line outside the Magistrate's Court. He was also in Court for offences of Drug Driving.
All Alone Road is a prosperous area; he thinks he is above the law. IMO an indeterminate or permanent driving ban is indicated, as he has abused the privilege of driving on multiple occasions. It's quite the account and worth a read.
I wonder why the Telegraph is covering this particular case?
Normal service is resumed in the courts, then.
Serial offender gets a suspended sentence.
For some reason, I think putting him in the stocks would be an appropriate sentence.
Summary from The Magistrate's Blog:
Prosecutor Philip Adams told the Judge that Hassan turned up to Bradford Magistrates' Court on 9th September in his car. He was sentenced to a 12-month community order and banned again for three years for drink driving and a public order offence. No sooner had he left the court building, CCTV cameras caught Hassan getting into his vehicle and driving away. https://magistrates.blogspot.com/2019/10/bradford-man-jailed-for-dangerous.html
And from the previous thread does Harris have any plans to increase any taxes or are her promises of more giveaways to be funded by even more borrowing ?
Im sure all of those taking the piss out of Harris's economic policies will want to weigh in here ?
Vance: Our corrupt leadership said if you put tariffs on China, prices will go up. Instead, Donald Trump did that, manufacturing came back and prices went down for American citizens. They went up for the Chinese but went down for our people. https://x.com/Acyn/status/1828494553030291901
A trade war helps no one. Anti dumping measures is one thing but what Trump is proposing is somewhat reckless.
Well, yes. But Vance is just spouting plain nonsense there.
It seems anomalous, even through there is a package of unpaid work etc. He has quite the record - here he is in 2019 (same name, address, age correlates) sentenced to 6 months in prison after he was banned from driving them drove off dangerously in his car which he had parked on a 2Y line outside the Magistrate's Court. He was also in Court for offences of Drug Driving.
All Alone Road is a prosperous area; he thinks he is above the law. IMO an indeterminate or permanent driving ban is indicated, as he has abused the privilege of driving on multiple occasions. It's quite the account and worth a read.
I wonder why the Telegraph is covering this particular case?
Normal service is resumed in the courts, then.
Serial offender gets a suspended sentence.
For some reason, I think putting him in the stocks would be an appropriate sentence.
Summary from The Magistrate's Blog:
Prosecutor Philip Adams told the Judge that Hassan turned up to Bradford Magistrates' Court on 9th September in his car. He was sentenced to a 12-month community order and banned again for three years for drink driving and a public order offence. No sooner had he left the court building, CCTV cameras caught Hassan getting into his vehicle and driving away. https://magistrates.blogspot.com/2019/10/bradford-man-jailed-for-dangerous.html
There is an urban legend that a car thief, given a suspended sentences at Oxford Crown Court, stole a court official's car. From the car park. When he left the court.
Believed by most people in Oxford, back in the day.
Judge Colin Burn said: “Whatever the motivation was for this, it’s still utterly inadequate to justify the violence that you perpetrated against [the victims] when they were sitting in a car effectively cowering from you.
“The three people on the receiving end of your violence were women who were in a vulnerable situation.
“This was an extremely abusive, controlling and violent incident.”
And from the previous thread does Harris have any plans to increase any taxes or are her promises of more giveaways to be funded by even more borrowing ?
Well it's the USA so normal country borrowing rules don't apply, as in they can and do borrow more because they are the 900 lb gorilla in the room. Overcook it though and it's the world's problem not just the USA.
Looking forward, one of the challenges the Conservatives have is coming up with a shared story about the Truss days. At the moment, the gap between those who think the disaster was electing her and those who think the disaster was dumping her is just too big.
Going back to Thatcher, hardly anyone holds a candle for the Community Charge now.
To be perfectly honest I'm not sure any of the current leadership candidates disagrees that Truss becoming leader of their party was self-evidently a bad idea, even if they didn't realise that until it was too late.
To draw a parallel between this Conservative leadership election and the 2020 Labour one, I don't think any of the candidates needs to curry favour with party activists by claiming that Truss was their best buddy ever and they will carry on her proud and principled movement - they can move on to the 'yes, I supported her, but it's ok because I really thought she was awful' stage right away.
(An Alan Partridge quote for the morning, no less)
I did Twelfth Night at School. It was pretty good.
I also did 12N at school. Never liked his romcoms though - always preferred the grittier plays like Macbeth and Henry V.
For the record I also preferred Game of Thrones and Breaking Bad to Friends and Sex and the City.
Breaking Bad is the greatest TV show ever after Chernobyl.
BB isn't all brilliant.
Some of the plot twists were pretty unbelievable.
There was the notorious episode with the fly.
The female characters, as usual in these shows, are basically just a kind of nagging chorus at the back while the men get on with the serious business of drug dealing and murder.
But overall yes it was amazing.
The fly episode is what happens when you’ve totally blown your budget and are an episode short, you need to produce a really cheap hour of TV somehow. Two actors, one camera, one existing location…
This story definitely has a ring of plausibility about it. The people Liz is now hanging out with in the US regard state-provided health care as a kind of slavery: the government literally imposing its authority over the bodies of it citizens. So one can see how Liz would regard abolishing NHS services both as a facilitation of her great calling - growth, growth, growth - and as human emancipation. Two birds with one stone and all that.
Truss is a very odd character and appears to have little in the way of basic empathy. In some situations I could see her being actually quite helpful - the person in the room happy to think outside the box and throw up ideas - so long as there’s a leader in place to contain her and manage that. She is the wrong fit for being a leader herself.
It seems anomalous, even through there is a package of unpaid work etc. He has quite the record - here he is in 2019 (same name, address, age correlates) sentenced to 6 months in prison after he was banned from driving them drove off dangerously in his car which he had parked on a 2Y line outside the Magistrate's Court. He was also in Court for offences of Drug Driving.
All Alone Road is a prosperous area; he thinks he is above the law. IMO an indeterminate or permanent driving ban is indicated, as he has abused the privilege of driving on multiple occasions. It's quite the account and worth a read.
I wonder why the Telegraph is covering this particular case?
Normal service is resumed in the courts, then.
Serial offender gets a suspended sentence.
For some reason, I think putting him in the stocks would be an appropriate sentence.
Summary from The Magistrate's Blog:
Prosecutor Philip Adams told the Judge that Hassan turned up to Bradford Magistrates' Court on 9th September in his car. He was sentenced to a 12-month community order and banned again for three years for drink driving and a public order offence. No sooner had he left the court building, CCTV cameras caught Hassan getting into his vehicle and driving away. https://magistrates.blogspot.com/2019/10/bradford-man-jailed-for-dangerous.html
So he pretends to be a good Muslim to assault these women for dressing immodestly but he himself drinks alcohol ?
Another reason I am glad I have never drunk the devil’s buttermilk.
(An Alan Partridge quote for the morning, no less)
I did Twelfth Night at School. It was pretty good.
I also did 12N at school. Never liked his romcoms though - always preferred the grittier plays like Macbeth and Henry V.
For the record I also preferred Game of Thrones and Breaking Bad to Friends and Sex and the City.
Breaking Bad is the greatest TV show ever after Chernobyl.
BB isn't all brilliant.
Some of the plot twists were pretty unbelievable.
There was the notorious episode with the fly.
The female characters, as usual in these shows, are basically just a kind of nagging chorus at the back while the men get on with the serious business of drug dealing and murder.
But overall yes it was amazing.
The fly episode is what happens when you’ve totally blown your budget and are an episode short, you need to produce a really cheap hour of TV somehow. Two actors, one camera, one existing location…
"Bottle episodes", I think they are called
There’s also clip shows when you’ve also blown your budget.
Star Trek: The Next Generation had Shades of Grey when they blew their budget introducing the Borg in an earlier episode.
Looking forward, one of the challenges the Conservatives have is coming up with a shared story about the Truss days. At the moment, the gap between those who think the disaster was electing her and those who think the disaster was dumping her is just too big.
Going back to Thatcher, hardly anyone holds a candle for the Community Charge now.
That's a bit like attitudes to Nick Clegg. Was breaking the promise on tuition fees the mistake?, or making the promise in the first place?
Having made it, breaking it was the mistake: They could have finessed things by refusing to agree to vote against their own manifesto commitments in the coalition agreement with the conservatives.
My working assumption is that the Orange-book types who held many of the top slots at the time didn’t particularly agree with the manifesto commitment in the first place & so were untroubled by the possibility of voting against it. They failed to consider the impact it would have on both their voter base & their activists.
(An Alan Partridge quote for the morning, no less)
I did Twelfth Night at School. It was pretty good.
I also did 12N at school. Never liked his romcoms though - always preferred the grittier plays like Macbeth and Henry V.
For the record I also preferred Game of Thrones and Breaking Bad to Friends and Sex and the City.
Breaking Bad is the greatest TV show ever after Chernobyl.
BB isn't all brilliant.
Some of the plot twists were pretty unbelievable.
There was the notorious episode with the fly.
The female characters, as usual in these shows, are basically just a kind of nagging chorus at the back while the men get on with the serious business of drug dealing and murder.
But overall yes it was amazing.
The fly episode is what happens when you’ve totally blown your budget and are an episode short, you need to produce a really cheap hour of TV somehow. Two actors, one camera, one existing location…
"Bottle episodes", I think they are called
There’s also clip shows when you’ve also blown your budget.
Star Trek: The Next Generation had Shades of Grey when they blew their budget introducing the Borg in an earlier episode.
Star Trek is the original source of the bottle episode meme.
(An Alan Partridge quote for the morning, no less)
I did Twelfth Night at School. It was pretty good.
I also did 12N at school. Never liked his romcoms though - always preferred the grittier plays like Macbeth and Henry V.
For the record I also preferred Game of Thrones and Breaking Bad to Friends and Sex and the City.
Breaking Bad is the greatest TV show ever after Chernobyl.
BB isn't all brilliant.
Some of the plot twists were pretty unbelievable.
There was the notorious episode with the fly.
The female characters, as usual in these shows, are basically just a kind of nagging chorus at the back while the men get on with the serious business of drug dealing and murder.
But overall yes it was amazing.
The fly episode is what happens when you’ve totally blown your budget and are an episode short, you need to produce a really cheap hour of TV somehow. Two actors, one camera, one existing location…
"Bottle episodes", I think they are called
There’s also clip shows when you’ve also blown your budget.
Star Trek: The Next Generation had Shades of Grey when they blew their budget introducing the Borg in an earlier episode.
Star Trek is the original source of the bottle episode meme.
And from the previous thread does Harris have any plans to increase any taxes or are her promises of more giveaways to be funded by even more borrowing ?
Well it's the USA so normal country borrowing rules don't apply, as in they can and do borrow more because they are the 900 lb gorilla in the room. Overcook it though and it's the world's problem not just the USA.
It could very much about to be the world’s problem.
The Chinese are already buying Saudi oil priced in yuan, and the Russians are selling discounted oil to China and India, who are washing it back into the international markets.
The dollar is immune from US money printing, until suddenly it isn’t.
On topic, usually I'd say I doubt this is true, and politically motivated, particularly since civil servants do put forth crazy options, but with Truss who knows.
TRUSS, you say? And you are only saying what many are thinking. That it is her time. Time for her to lead, and others to follow.
You are warming on a TRUSS revival, and who I am to say your instincts are wrong?
Of many bonkers memes on pb.com, this is by a country mile the most bonkers.
Knock it off.
It is a strong point you make. Perhaps you are right - and TRUSS could be just the tonic the Tories need, now and forever. And when she reassumes her deserved crown, our country - and our world - will win the future.
And from the previous thread does Harris have any plans to increase any taxes or are her promises of more giveaways to be funded by even more borrowing ?
Well it's the USA so normal country borrowing rules don't apply, as in they can and do borrow more because they are the 900 lb gorilla in the room. Overcook it though and it's the world's problem not just the USA.
(An Alan Partridge quote for the morning, no less)
I did Twelfth Night at School. It was pretty good.
I also did 12N at school. Never liked his romcoms though - always preferred the grittier plays like Macbeth and Henry V.
For the record I also preferred Game of Thrones and Breaking Bad to Friends and Sex and the City.
Breaking Bad is the greatest TV show ever after Chernobyl.
BB isn't all brilliant.
Some of the plot twists were pretty unbelievable.
There was the notorious episode with the fly.
The female characters, as usual in these shows, are basically just a kind of nagging chorus at the back while the men get on with the serious business of drug dealing and murder.
But overall yes it was amazing.
The fly episode is what happens when you’ve totally blown your budget and are an episode short, you need to produce a really cheap hour of TV somehow. Two actors, one camera, one existing location…
"Bottle episodes", I think they are called
There’s also clip shows when you’ve also blown your budget.
Star Trek: The Next Generation had Shades of Grey when they blew their budget introducing the Borg in an earlier episode.
This is the problem with a bonfire of regulations housebuilding scheme. We can't even enforce standards as they are and it's ruining the finances and living conditions of young people desperate to get on the housing ladder.
It's mad that I've had fewer issues in a 150 year old tenement, built to house dockers in what was the seediest part of Edinburgh.
(An Alan Partridge quote for the morning, no less)
I did Twelfth Night at School. It was pretty good.
I also did 12N at school. Never liked his romcoms though - always preferred the grittier plays like Macbeth and Henry V.
For the record I also preferred Game of Thrones and Breaking Bad to Friends and Sex and the City.
Breaking Bad is the greatest TV show ever after Chernobyl.
BB isn't all brilliant.
Some of the plot twists were pretty unbelievable.
There was the notorious episode with the fly.
The female characters, as usual in these shows, are basically just a kind of nagging chorus at the back while the men get on with the serious business of drug dealing and murder.
But overall yes it was amazing.
The fly episode is what happens when you’ve totally blown your budget and are an episode short, you need to produce a really cheap hour of TV somehow. Two actors, one camera, one existing location…
"Bottle episodes", I think they are called
There’s also clip shows when you’ve also blown your budget.
Star Trek: The Next Generation had Shades of Grey when they blew their budget introducing the Borg in an earlier episode.
Stargaze SG1 introduced Senator Kinsey in a similar episode recapping the first season before the big budget final episodes too.
This is the problem with a bonfire of regulations housebuilding scheme. We can't even enforce standards as they are and it's ruining the finances and living conditions of young people desperate to get on the housing ladder.
It's mad that I've had fewer issues in a 150 year old tenement, built to house dockers in what was the seediest part of Edinburgh.
A young woman, who didn’t want to be identified, tells me that within weeks of moving in, the entire staircase collapsed and her husband fell into the understairs cupboard.
"The contractor who came to fix it said there was only one screw in each step. There should have been 14," she says.
"We’ll leave as soon as we can – too many bad memories here."
Im sure all of those taking the piss out of Harris's economic policies will want to weigh in here ?
Vance: Our corrupt leadership said if you put tariffs on China, prices will go up. Instead, Donald Trump did that, manufacturing came back and prices went down for American citizens. They went up for the Chinese but went down for our people. https://x.com/Acyn/status/1828494553030291901
A trade war helps no one. Anti dumping measures is one thing but what Trump is proposing is somewhat reckless.
Well, yes. But Vance is just spouting plain nonsense there.
I’m well aware of that but Trumps policy is punitive tariffs on China and the rest of the world and it is the policy we should look at not stupid comments. Vance is just using witless rhetoric to support the unsupportable. I guess they don’t fact check over there. Trump is proposing 10% on goods from the rest of the world and 60% on goods from China. We could end up with a trade war. For that alone Trump deserves to lose. Harris has not shown she really offers much so far but she cannot be worse than Trump.
(An Alan Partridge quote for the morning, no less)
I did Twelfth Night at School. It was pretty good.
I also did 12N at school. Never liked his romcoms though - always preferred the grittier plays like Macbeth and Henry V.
For the record I also preferred Game of Thrones and Breaking Bad to Friends and Sex and the City.
Breaking Bad is the greatest TV show ever after Chernobyl.
BB isn't all brilliant.
Some of the plot twists were pretty unbelievable.
There was the notorious episode with the fly.
The female characters, as usual in these shows, are basically just a kind of nagging chorus at the back while the men get on with the serious business of drug dealing and murder.
But overall yes it was amazing.
The fly episode is what happens when you’ve totally blown your budget and are an episode short, you need to produce a really cheap hour of TV somehow. Two actors, one camera, one existing location…
"Bottle episodes", I think they are called
There’s also clip shows when you’ve also blown your budget.
Star Trek: The Next Generation had Shades of Grey when they blew their budget introducing the Borg in an earlier episode.
Yeah, some of the Gerry Anderson series did clip show episodes. With linking narration from characters.
This is the problem with a bonfire of regulations housebuilding scheme. We can't even enforce standards as they are and it's ruining the finances and living conditions of young people desperate to get on the housing ladder.
It's mad that I've had fewer issues in a 150 year old tenement, built to house dockers in what was the seediest part of Edinburgh.
A young woman, who didn’t want to be identified, tells me that within weeks of moving in, the entire staircase collapsed and her husband fell into the understairs cupboard.
"The contractor who came to fix it said there was only one screw in each step. There should have been 14," she says.
"We’ll leave as soon as we can – too many bad memories here."
Look at the comments under the article too. Housing developers are going to be this parliament's water companies.
It seems anomalous, even through there is a package of unpaid work etc. He has quite the record - here he is in 2019 (same name, address, age correlates) sentenced to 6 months in prison after he was banned from driving them drove off dangerously in his car which he had parked on a 2Y line outside the Magistrate's Court. He was also in Court for offences of Drug Driving.
All Alone Road is a prosperous area; he thinks he is above the law. IMO an indeterminate or permanent driving ban is indicated, as he has abused the privilege of driving on multiple occasions. It's quite the account and worth a read.
I wonder why the Telegraph is covering this particular case?
Normal service is resumed in the courts, then.
Serial offender gets a suspended sentence.
For some reason, I think putting him in the stocks would be an appropriate sentence.
Summary from The Magistrate's Blog:
Prosecutor Philip Adams told the Judge that Hassan turned up to Bradford Magistrates' Court on 9th September in his car. He was sentenced to a 12-month community order and banned again for three years for drink driving and a public order offence. No sooner had he left the court building, CCTV cameras caught Hassan getting into his vehicle and driving away. https://magistrates.blogspot.com/2019/10/bradford-man-jailed-for-dangerous.html
So he pretends to be a good Muslim to assault these women for dressing immodestly but he himself drinks alcohol ?
Another reason I am glad I have never drunk the devil’s buttermilk.
That's lifting the lid on a huge can of worms .
Does Islamic Law as believed / perceived by the various category of Muslim take priority over national law, and in what circumstances? The Islamic tradition of young men sowing their wild oats, before they come back to be "good Muslims" as they grow up. How criminals in their heads make excuses / justifications to themselves for their behaviour. ... And the rest.
This is the problem with a bonfire of regulations housebuilding scheme. We can't even enforce standards as they are and it's ruining the finances and living conditions of young people desperate to get on the housing ladder.
It's mad that I've had fewer issues in a 150 year old tenement, built to house dockers in what was the seediest part of Edinburgh.
There's a reason I've suggested a bonfire of planning rules while keeping building regulations.
And its not that mad, if a home has survived 150 years then survivor bias means it likely has good bones and if well maintained it will continue to be good.
However contrast that with many slums BTL landlords let out and it's totally different.
My new build home is much, much better than the damp ridden home we were letting before we bought this.
This is the problem with a bonfire of regulations housebuilding scheme. We can't even enforce standards as they are and it's ruining the finances and living conditions of young people desperate to get on the housing ladder.
It's mad that I've had fewer issues in a 150 year old tenement, built to house dockers in what was the seediest part of Edinburgh.
A young woman, who didn’t want to be identified, tells me that within weeks of moving in, the entire staircase collapsed and her husband fell into the understairs cupboard.
"The contractor who came to fix it said there was only one screw in each step. There should have been 14," she says.
"We’ll leave as soon as we can – too many bad memories here."
Look at the comments under the article too. Housing developers are going to be this parliament's water companies.
Yet more reasons to deregulate planning, so the land doesn’t end up in the hands of a few large developers.
Looking forward, one of the challenges the Conservatives have is coming up with a shared story about the Truss days. At the moment, the gap between those who think the disaster was electing her and those who think the disaster was dumping her is just too big.
Going back to Thatcher, hardly anyone holds a candle for the Community Charge now.
That's a bit like attitudes to Nick Clegg. Was breaking the promise on tuition fees the mistake?, or making the promise in the first place?
Having made it, breaking it was the mistake: They could have finessed things by refusing to agree to vote against their own manifesto commitments in the coalition agreement with the conservatives.
My working assumption is that the Orange-book types who held many of the top slots at the time didn’t particularly agree with the manifesto commitment in the first place & so were untroubled by the possibility of voting against it. They failed to consider the impact it would have on both their voter base & their activists.
Fun Fact - the Orange Book was co-edited by the now Sir Paul Marshall, who owns Unherd and various other things.
Im sure all of those taking the piss out of Harris's economic policies will want to weigh in here ?
Vance: Our corrupt leadership said if you put tariffs on China, prices will go up. Instead, Donald Trump did that, manufacturing came back and prices went down for American citizens. They went up for the Chinese but went down for our people. https://x.com/Acyn/status/1828494553030291901
A trade war helps no one. Anti dumping measures is one thing but what Trump is proposing is somewhat reckless.
Well, yes. But Vance is just spouting plain nonsense there.
I’m well aware of that but Trumps policy is punitive tariffs on China and the rest of the world and it is the policy we should look at not stupid comments. Vance is just using witless rhetoric to support the unsupportable. I guess they don’t fact check over there. Trump is proposing 10% on goods from the rest of the world and 60% on goods from China. We could end up with a trade war. For that alone Trump deserves to lose. Harris has not shown she really offers much so far but she cannot be worse than Trump.
I agree entirely. My point was simply that serious conservatives ought to be calling out obvious lies about the economy, whatever their source; they aren't.
This is the problem with a bonfire of regulations housebuilding scheme. We can't even enforce standards as they are and it's ruining the finances and living conditions of young people desperate to get on the housing ladder.
It's mad that I've had fewer issues in a 150 year old tenement, built to house dockers in what was the seediest part of Edinburgh.
A young woman, who didn’t want to be identified, tells me that within weeks of moving in, the entire staircase collapsed and her husband fell into the understairs cupboard.
"The contractor who came to fix it said there was only one screw in each step. There should have been 14," she says.
"We’ll leave as soon as we can – too many bad memories here."
Look at the comments under the article too. Housing developers are going to be this parliament's water companies.
Yet more reasons to deregulate planning, so the land doesn’t end up in the hands of a few large developers.
They have massive scales of economy and will always undercut smaller developers. I don't think this anything to do with planning.
The other baddie is management companies. Even in Scotland, where we have freehold, the factoring fees can be as high as £150 per month on new builds.
Im sure all of those taking the piss out of Harris's economic policies will want to weigh in here ?
Vance: Our corrupt leadership said if you put tariffs on China, prices will go up. Instead, Donald Trump did that, manufacturing came back and prices went down for American citizens. They went up for the Chinese but went down for our people. https://x.com/Acyn/status/1828494553030291901
A trade war helps no one. Anti dumping measures is one thing but what Trump is proposing is somewhat reckless.
Well, yes. But Vance is just spouting plain nonsense there.
I’m well aware of that but Trumps policy is punitive tariffs on China and the rest of the world and it is the policy we should look at not stupid comments. Vance is just using witless rhetoric to support the unsupportable. I guess they don’t fact check over there. Trump is proposing 10% on goods from the rest of the world and 60% on goods from China. We could end up with a trade war. For that alone Trump deserves to lose. Harris has not shown she really offers much so far but she cannot be worse than Trump.
The impact of a Trump win on the global economy seems to be completely missing from global share prices. Particularly the small but realistic chance of catastrophic events like a trade war, America becoming a democracy in name only, or the end of NATO and Western hegemony.
This is the problem with a bonfire of regulations housebuilding scheme. We can't even enforce standards as they are and it's ruining the finances and living conditions of young people desperate to get on the housing ladder.
It's mad that I've had fewer issues in a 150 year old tenement, built to house dockers in what was the seediest part of Edinburgh.
A young woman, who didn’t want to be identified, tells me that within weeks of moving in, the entire staircase collapsed and her husband fell into the understairs cupboard.
"The contractor who came to fix it said there was only one screw in each step. There should have been 14," she says.
"We’ll leave as soon as we can – too many bad memories here."
Look at the comments under the article too. Housing developers are going to be this parliament's water companies.
Yet more reasons to deregulate planning, so the land doesn’t end up in the hands of a few large developers.
They have massive scales of economy and will always undercut smaller developers. I don't think this anything to do with planning.
The other baddie is management companies. Even in Scotland, where we have freehold, the factoring fees can be as high as £150 per month on new builds.
Yet in every nation where planning is not a restriction, houses are built in small amounts by small companies that compete with each other and not by an oligopoly of large developers.
It's entirely to do with planning. The likes of Barratt know they have no competition solely due to the planning system.
This is the problem with a bonfire of regulations housebuilding scheme. We can't even enforce standards as they are and it's ruining the finances and living conditions of young people desperate to get on the housing ladder.
It's mad that I've had fewer issues in a 150 year old tenement, built to house dockers in what was the seediest part of Edinburgh.
A young woman, who didn’t want to be identified, tells me that within weeks of moving in, the entire staircase collapsed and her husband fell into the understairs cupboard.
"The contractor who came to fix it said there was only one screw in each step. There should have been 14," she says.
"We’ll leave as soon as we can – too many bad memories here."
There's a bit of tabloid going on there, amongst the serious stuff eg:
The drainage system (SUDS) was not supposed to flood so contractors put up a safety sign
er ... yes it is, that's why it's called a "balancing pond".
Buying a new house from a developer ... always get a professional snagger to do a report, and try and withold the final 5% (which may be difficult).
This is the problem with a bonfire of regulations housebuilding scheme. We can't even enforce standards as they are and it's ruining the finances and living conditions of young people desperate to get on the housing ladder.
It's mad that I've had fewer issues in a 150 year old tenement, built to house dockers in what was the seediest part of Edinburgh.
This is the problem with a bonfire of regulations housebuilding scheme. We can't even enforce standards as they are and it's ruining the finances and living conditions of young people desperate to get on the housing ladder.
It's mad that I've had fewer issues in a 150 year old tenement, built to house dockers in what was the seediest part of Edinburgh.
1) the regulations have resulted in the creation of telephone directory sized documents to conform to the regulations. 2) these documents are not read by the builders. They are definitely not written in a way that will be read. By anyone. 3) there is no real enforcement of any of this.
This means that the process is both expensive and useless.
The response to this is
- the big firms write the documents. And then ignore them - the smaller outfits generally don’t bother and as a result most domestic building jobs are done on a handshake basis.
A friend was on the committee managing the freehold for his block. When the cladding issue turns up, the engineers found the building was already structurally deficient. The original Big Builder had *rooms* of documentation. Which didn’t explain why the building was built wrong.
This is the problem with a bonfire of regulations housebuilding scheme. We can't even enforce standards as they are and it's ruining the finances and living conditions of young people desperate to get on the housing ladder.
It's mad that I've had fewer issues in a 150 year old tenement, built to house dockers in what was the seediest part of Edinburgh.
This is the problem with a bonfire of regulations housebuilding scheme. We can't even enforce standards as they are and it's ruining the finances and living conditions of young people desperate to get on the housing ladder.
It's mad that I've had fewer issues in a 150 year old tenement, built to house dockers in what was the seediest part of Edinburgh.
1) the regulations have resulted in the creation of telephone directory sized documents to conform to the regulations. 2) these documents are not read by the builders. They are definitely not written in a way that will be read. By anyone. 3) there is no real enforcement of any of this.
This means that the process is both expensive and useless.
The response to this is
- the big firms write the documents. And then ignore them - the smaller outfits generally don’t bother and as a result most domestic building jobs are done on a handshake basis.
A friend was on the committee managing the freehold for his block. When the cladding issue turns up, the engineers found the building was already structurally deficient. The original Big Builder had *rooms* of documentation. Which didn’t explain why the building was built wrong.
A bit like all the Finance box ticking prior to crash.
When paperwork becomes a box ticking exercise it loses its meaning.
This is the problem with a bonfire of regulations housebuilding scheme. We can't even enforce standards as they are and it's ruining the finances and living conditions of young people desperate to get on the housing ladder.
It's mad that I've had fewer issues in a 150 year old tenement, built to house dockers in what was the seediest part of Edinburgh.
This is the problem with a bonfire of regulations housebuilding scheme. We can't even enforce standards as they are and it's ruining the finances and living conditions of young people desperate to get on the housing ladder.
It's mad that I've had fewer issues in a 150 year old tenement, built to house dockers in what was the seediest part of Edinburgh.
1) the regulations have resulted in the creation of telephone directory sized documents to conform to the regulations. 2) these documents are not read by the builders. They are definitely not written in a way that will be read. By anyone. 3) there is no real enforcement of any of this.
This means that the process is both expensive and useless.
The response to this is
- the big firms write the documents. And then ignore them - the smaller outfits generally don’t bother and as a result most domestic building jobs are done on a handshake basis.
A friend was on the committee managing the freehold for his block. When the cladding issue turns up, the engineers found the building was already structurally deficient. The original Big Builder had *rooms* of documentation. Which didn’t explain why the building was built wrong.
There's one further shark in this custard: in England at least a Building Control Officer can be appointed as a private contractor, which has implications for transparency and accountability.
This is the problem with a bonfire of regulations housebuilding scheme. We can't even enforce standards as they are and it's ruining the finances and living conditions of young people desperate to get on the housing ladder.
It's mad that I've had fewer issues in a 150 year old tenement, built to house dockers in what was the seediest part of Edinburgh.
A young woman, who didn’t want to be identified, tells me that within weeks of moving in, the entire staircase collapsed and her husband fell into the understairs cupboard.
"The contractor who came to fix it said there was only one screw in each step. There should have been 14," she says.
"We’ll leave as soon as we can – too many bad memories here."
Look at the comments under the article too. Housing developers are going to be this parliament's water companies.
Yet more reasons to deregulate planning, so the land doesn’t end up in the hands of a few large developers.
They have massive scales of economy and will always undercut smaller developers. I don't think this anything to do with planning.
The other baddie is management companies. Even in Scotland, where we have freehold, the factoring fees can be as high as £150 per month on new builds.
Yet in every nation where planning is not a restriction, houses are built in small amounts by small companies that compete with each other and not by an oligopoly of large developers.
It's entirely to do with planning. The likes of Barratt know they have no competition solely due to the planning system.
Eyes down, boys. We're heading into a 72 hour local planning regulation post-a-thon.
This is the problem with a bonfire of regulations housebuilding scheme. We can't even enforce standards as they are and it's ruining the finances and living conditions of young people desperate to get on the housing ladder.
It's mad that I've had fewer issues in a 150 year old tenement, built to house dockers in what was the seediest part of Edinburgh.
A young woman, who didn’t want to be identified, tells me that within weeks of moving in, the entire staircase collapsed and her husband fell into the understairs cupboard.
"The contractor who came to fix it said there was only one screw in each step. There should have been 14," she says.
"We’ll leave as soon as we can – too many bad memories here."
There's a bit of tabloid going on there, amongst the serious stuff eg:
The drainage system (SUDS) was not supposed to flood so contractors put up a safety sign
er ... yes it is, that's why it's called a "balancing pond".
Buying a new house from a developer ... always get a professional snagger to do a report, and try and withold the final 5% (which may be difficult).
Looking forward, one of the challenges the Conservatives have is coming up with a shared story about the Truss days. At the moment, the gap between those who think the disaster was electing her and those who think the disaster was dumping her is just too big.
Going back to Thatcher, hardly anyone holds a candle for the Community Charge now.
That's a bit like attitudes to Nick Clegg. Was breaking the promise on tuition fees the mistake?, or making the promise in the first place?
Making the promise central to their campaign having already decided to sacrifice it if there was a chance of power, then being part of bringing in a far worse system.
I've never understood why Clegg still seems to get the benefit of the doubt when his post-politics career, earning megabucks running corporate whitewashing for Meta, clearly shows him in his truelight, someone happy to make money promoting suicide to teens.
Who are these folk giving Clegg the benefit of the doubt ?
Includes Rest is Politics, who interviewed Clegg, oddly Campbell likes him.
Sort of on topic, the real savings are probably in the types of treatment and care than extend, say, the life of a 85 year old in poor health by 18-24 months in slightly less poor health but with chronic conditions and in some pain, before they diminish again and die. And that won't be just cancer treatment, and nor will it be cheap.
I'm not sure how you'd quantity that, though, or deprioritise over a childhood or mainstream working adult cancer because you then start to go against the hypocratic oath.
Isn't this what the Quality Adjusted Life Year metric is supposed to address? The QA part accounts for that year in pain with chronic conditions being different from a year where a younger adult is in remission and doesn't have those extra conditions, and the LY part rates "we cured a child's cancer and they got an extra 60 years" as worth sixty times more than "an elderly person got another year". Medicine has to prioritise, because we can't give it infinite resources.
QALY works in theory but in practice it doesn't. I refer back to my own grandfather who, at 91, was offered surgery to remove a brain tumour and it needed his kids who had LPA on medical affairs to step in and reject the treatment on the grounds that he was old, very frail and unlikely to recover from surgery so why put him through any kind of pain when the chances of him recovering were so low and any additional life expectancy would be spend bedridden recovering from brain surgery.
On the other hand we also have odd decisions taken with kids where treatment is rejected, there have been a few famous cases of it too, and they go overseas to have the treatment and come back and live a normal and happy life.
This is the problem with a bonfire of regulations housebuilding scheme. We can't even enforce standards as they are and it's ruining the finances and living conditions of young people desperate to get on the housing ladder.
It's mad that I've had fewer issues in a 150 year old tenement, built to house dockers in what was the seediest part of Edinburgh.
This is the problem with a bonfire of regulations housebuilding scheme. We can't even enforce standards as they are and it's ruining the finances and living conditions of young people desperate to get on the housing ladder.
It's mad that I've had fewer issues in a 150 year old tenement, built to house dockers in what was the seediest part of Edinburgh.
1) the regulations have resulted in the creation of telephone directory sized documents to conform to the regulations. 2) these documents are not read by the builders. They are definitely not written in a way that will be read. By anyone. 3) there is no real enforcement of any of this.
This means that the process is both expensive and useless.
The response to this is
- the big firms write the documents. And then ignore them - the smaller outfits generally don’t bother and as a result most domestic building jobs are done on a handshake basis.
A friend was on the committee managing the freehold for his block. When the cladding issue turns up, the engineers found the building was already structurally deficient. The original Big Builder had *rooms* of documentation. Which didn’t explain why the building was built wrong.
A bit like all the Finance box ticking prior to crash.
When paperwork becomes a box ticking exercise it loses its meaning.
In 2008, we had lots of people screaming that more regulation was the answer.
More photocopies of passports, more click through multiple choice exams for the traders….
What both needed was a simple, clear process.
With simple, clear documentation.
With simple, clear enforcement.
In the case of my friend’s building, the concrete wasn’t up to spec. *Bazelgette* was one of the earlier users of the process of taking samples from each pour and doing lab tests. FFS.
Im sure all of those taking the piss out of Harris's economic policies will want to weigh in here ?
Vance: Our corrupt leadership said if you put tariffs on China, prices will go up. Instead, Donald Trump did that, manufacturing came back and prices went down for American citizens. They went up for the Chinese but went down for our people. https://x.com/Acyn/status/1828494553030291901
A trade war helps no one. Anti dumping measures is one thing but what Trump is proposing is somewhat reckless.
Well, yes. But Vance is just spouting plain nonsense there.
I’m well aware of that but Trumps policy is punitive tariffs on China and the rest of the world and it is the policy we should look at not stupid comments. Vance is just using witless rhetoric to support the unsupportable. I guess they don’t fact check over there. Trump is proposing 10% on goods from the rest of the world and 60% on goods from China. We could end up with a trade war. For that alone Trump deserves to lose. Harris has not shown she really offers much so far but she cannot be worse than Trump.
I agree entirely. My point was simply that serious conservatives ought to be calling out obvious lies about the economy, whatever their source; they aren't.
It will be interesting what happens in GOP world if - when! - Trump loses this election. They have to detox but with the amount of poison they've ingested it will be difficult.
This is the problem with a bonfire of regulations housebuilding scheme. We can't even enforce standards as they are and it's ruining the finances and living conditions of young people desperate to get on the housing ladder.
It's mad that I've had fewer issues in a 150 year old tenement, built to house dockers in what was the seediest part of Edinburgh.
A young woman, who didn’t want to be identified, tells me that within weeks of moving in, the entire staircase collapsed and her husband fell into the understairs cupboard.
"The contractor who came to fix it said there was only one screw in each step. There should have been 14," she says.
"We’ll leave as soon as we can – too many bad memories here."
Look at the comments under the article too. Housing developers are going to be this parliament's water companies.
Yet more reasons to deregulate planning, so the land doesn’t end up in the hands of a few large developers.
They have massive scales of economy and will always undercut smaller developers. I don't think this anything to do with planning.
The other baddie is management companies. Even in Scotland, where we have freehold, the factoring fees can be as high as £150 per month on new builds.
Yet in every nation where planning is not a restriction, houses are built in small amounts by small companies that compete with each other and not by an oligopoly of large developers.
It's entirely to do with planning. The likes of Barratt know they have no competition solely due to the planning system.
Eyes down, boys. We're heading into a 72 hour local planning regulation post-a-thon.
Apparently, the going rate in south Devon to get a no-questions-asked planning approval is £45,000.
Cheap, I guess, if it gets you a £1,000,000++ house out of it.
This story definitely has a ring of plausibility about it. The people Liz is now hanging out with in the US regard state-provided health care as a kind of slavery: the government literally imposing its authority over the bodies of it citizens. So one can see how Liz would regard abolishing NHS services both as a facilitation of her great calling - growth, growth, growth - and as human emancipation. Two birds with one stone and all that.
Truss is a very odd character and appears to have little in the way of basic empathy. In some situations I could see her being actually quite helpful - the person in the room happy to think outside the box and throw up ideas - so long as there’s a leader in place to contain her and manage that. She is the wrong fit for being a leader herself.
In Belbin team-building speak, she would be the "plant".
This is the problem with a bonfire of regulations housebuilding scheme. We can't even enforce standards as they are and it's ruining the finances and living conditions of young people desperate to get on the housing ladder.
It's mad that I've had fewer issues in a 150 year old tenement, built to house dockers in what was the seediest part of Edinburgh.
A young woman, who didn’t want to be identified, tells me that within weeks of moving in, the entire staircase collapsed and her husband fell into the understairs cupboard.
"The contractor who came to fix it said there was only one screw in each step. There should have been 14," she says.
"We’ll leave as soon as we can – too many bad memories here."
Look at the comments under the article too. Housing developers are going to be this parliament's water companies.
Yet more reasons to deregulate planning, so the land doesn’t end up in the hands of a few large developers.
They have massive scales of economy and will always undercut smaller developers. I don't think this anything to do with planning.
The other baddie is management companies. Even in Scotland, where we have freehold, the factoring fees can be as high as £150 per month on new builds.
Yet in every nation where planning is not a restriction, houses are built in small amounts by small companies that compete with each other and not by an oligopoly of large developers.
It's entirely to do with planning. The likes of Barratt know they have no competition solely due to the planning system.
Eyes down, boys. We're heading into a 72 hour local planning regulation post-a-thon.
This is the problem with a bonfire of regulations housebuilding scheme. We can't even enforce standards as they are and it's ruining the finances and living conditions of young people desperate to get on the housing ladder.
It's mad that I've had fewer issues in a 150 year old tenement, built to house dockers in what was the seediest part of Edinburgh.
A young woman, who didn’t want to be identified, tells me that within weeks of moving in, the entire staircase collapsed and her husband fell into the understairs cupboard.
"The contractor who came to fix it said there was only one screw in each step. There should have been 14," she says.
"We’ll leave as soon as we can – too many bad memories here."
Look at the comments under the article too. Housing developers are going to be this parliament's water companies.
Yet more reasons to deregulate planning, so the land doesn’t end up in the hands of a few large developers.
They have massive scales of economy and will always undercut smaller developers. I don't think this anything to do with planning.
The other baddie is management companies. Even in Scotland, where we have freehold, the factoring fees can be as high as £150 per month on new builds.
Yet in every nation where planning is not a restriction, houses are built in small amounts by small companies that compete with each other and not by an oligopoly of large developers.
It's entirely to do with planning. The likes of Barratt know they have no competition solely due to the planning system.
Eyes down, boys. We're heading into a 72 hour local planning regulation post-a-thon.
Does make me wonder - if one of the Oasis lads had said you can grab a woman by the pussy and get away with it beause they are famous, would they still be earning £400m from a grand tour? Or would they be cancelled?
My grandmother used to be a cleaner for Sir Ernest Jardine, a Nottingham industrialist.
He had a huge dog. A Mastiff, if I recall correctly. It was famous for taking it itself off on the Nottingham buses during the day. It would get on, go upstairs and sit on the front seat, watching the world go by. He would get on and off various buses as the mood took him, but would always manage to get the correct bus home in time for tea.
It is in the Washington case (Prosecutor is Jack Smith), from a new Grand Jury, taking the SCOTUS immunity ruling into account. These are also in front of Judge Chutkan.
The charges are new ones, but are the same as the previous four. Any evidence has been removed which the prosecutor thinks could be undermined by the immunity ruling.
This is the problem with a bonfire of regulations housebuilding scheme. We can't even enforce standards as they are and it's ruining the finances and living conditions of young people desperate to get on the housing ladder.
It's mad that I've had fewer issues in a 150 year old tenement, built to house dockers in what was the seediest part of Edinburgh.
A young woman, who didn’t want to be identified, tells me that within weeks of moving in, the entire staircase collapsed and her husband fell into the understairs cupboard.
"The contractor who came to fix it said there was only one screw in each step. There should have been 14," she says.
"We’ll leave as soon as we can – too many bad memories here."
Look at the comments under the article too. Housing developers are going to be this parliament's water companies.
Yet more reasons to deregulate planning, so the land doesn’t end up in the hands of a few large developers.
They have massive scales of economy and will always undercut smaller developers. I don't think this anything to do with planning.
The other baddie is management companies. Even in Scotland, where we have freehold, the factoring fees can be as high as £150 per month on new builds.
Yet in every nation where planning is not a restriction, houses are built in small amounts by small companies that compete with each other and not by an oligopoly of large developers.
It's entirely to do with planning. The likes of Barratt know they have no competition solely due to the planning system.
Eyes down, boys. We're heading into a 72 hour local planning regulation post-a-thon.
Never change 😂
It's not just the sheer tedium of the topic but that the discussion will be remorselessly transacted without a shred of wit, levity, rhetorical flourish or even variation in emotional shade.
This is the problem with a bonfire of regulations housebuilding scheme. We can't even enforce standards as they are and it's ruining the finances and living conditions of young people desperate to get on the housing ladder.
It's mad that I've had fewer issues in a 150 year old tenement, built to house dockers in what was the seediest part of Edinburgh.
A young woman, who didn’t want to be identified, tells me that within weeks of moving in, the entire staircase collapsed and her husband fell into the understairs cupboard.
"The contractor who came to fix it said there was only one screw in each step. There should have been 14," she says.
"We’ll leave as soon as we can – too many bad memories here."
Look at the comments under the article too. Housing developers are going to be this parliament's water companies.
Yet more reasons to deregulate planning, so the land doesn’t end up in the hands of a few large developers.
They have massive scales of economy and will always undercut smaller developers. I don't think this anything to do with planning.
The other baddie is management companies. Even in Scotland, where we have freehold, the factoring fees can be as high as £150 per month on new builds.
Yet in every nation where planning is not a restriction, houses are built in small amounts by small companies that compete with each other and not by an oligopoly of large developers.
It's entirely to do with planning. The likes of Barratt know they have no competition solely due to the planning system.
Eyes down, boys. We're heading into a 72 hour local planning regulation post-a-thon.
Are you bricking it?
If so, hang fire, there's lots mortar come.
It's enough to make me lose the plot. I am flat out of here.
My grandmother used to be a cleaner for Sir Ernest Jardine, a Nottingham industrialist.
He had a huge dog. A Mastiff, if I recall correctly. It was famous for taking it itself off on the Nottingham buses during the day. It would get on, go upstairs and sit on the front seat, watching the world go by. He would get on and off various buses as the mood took him, but would always manage to get the correct bus home in time for tea.
This is tagged as by Christopher Gunson, a London based photog, from a competition in 2017.
The reflection is "1920s bank or civic building", and could be Nottingham Council House but the pediments are wrong.
I don't recognise the "Transit" logo, or the chopped off lettering at the bottom.
This is the problem with a bonfire of regulations housebuilding scheme. We can't even enforce standards as they are and it's ruining the finances and living conditions of young people desperate to get on the housing ladder.
It's mad that I've had fewer issues in a 150 year old tenement, built to house dockers in what was the seediest part of Edinburgh.
A young woman, who didn’t want to be identified, tells me that within weeks of moving in, the entire staircase collapsed and her husband fell into the understairs cupboard.
"The contractor who came to fix it said there was only one screw in each step. There should have been 14," she says.
"We’ll leave as soon as we can – too many bad memories here."
Look at the comments under the article too. Housing developers are going to be this parliament's water companies.
Yet more reasons to deregulate planning, so the land doesn’t end up in the hands of a few large developers.
They have massive scales of economy and will always undercut smaller developers. I don't think this anything to do with planning.
The other baddie is management companies. Even in Scotland, where we have freehold, the factoring fees can be as high as £150 per month on new builds.
Yet in every nation where planning is not a restriction, houses are built in small amounts by small companies that compete with each other and not by an oligopoly of large developers.
It's entirely to do with planning. The likes of Barratt know they have no competition solely due to the planning system.
Eyes down, boys. We're heading into a 72 hour local planning regulation post-a-thon.
Are you bricking it?
If so, hang fire, there's lots mortar come.
It's enough to make me lose the plot. I am flat out of here.
This is the problem with a bonfire of regulations housebuilding scheme. We can't even enforce standards as they are and it's ruining the finances and living conditions of young people desperate to get on the housing ladder.
It's mad that I've had fewer issues in a 150 year old tenement, built to house dockers in what was the seediest part of Edinburgh.
This is the problem with a bonfire of regulations housebuilding scheme. We can't even enforce standards as they are and it's ruining the finances and living conditions of young people desperate to get on the housing ladder.
It's mad that I've had fewer issues in a 150 year old tenement, built to house dockers in what was the seediest part of Edinburgh.
1) the regulations have resulted in the creation of telephone directory sized documents to conform to the regulations. 2) these documents are not read by the builders. They are definitely not written in a way that will be read. By anyone. 3) there is no real enforcement of any of this.
This means that the process is both expensive and useless.
The response to this is
- the big firms write the documents. And then ignore them - the smaller outfits generally don’t bother and as a result most domestic building jobs are done on a handshake basis.
A friend was on the committee managing the freehold for his block. When the cladding issue turns up, the engineers found the building was already structurally deficient. The original Big Builder had *rooms* of documentation. Which didn’t explain why the building was built wrong.
The problem is really one of enforcement. Effectively builders self certify, with local authorities inadequately funded and staffed to enforce after decades of council cuts.
If we aren't going to enforce regulations, why bother?
This is the problem with a bonfire of regulations housebuilding scheme. We can't even enforce standards as they are and it's ruining the finances and living conditions of young people desperate to get on the housing ladder.
It's mad that I've had fewer issues in a 150 year old tenement, built to house dockers in what was the seediest part of Edinburgh.
A young woman, who didn’t want to be identified, tells me that within weeks of moving in, the entire staircase collapsed and her husband fell into the understairs cupboard.
"The contractor who came to fix it said there was only one screw in each step. There should have been 14," she says.
"We’ll leave as soon as we can – too many bad memories here."
Look at the comments under the article too. Housing developers are going to be this parliament's water companies.
Yet more reasons to deregulate planning, so the land doesn’t end up in the hands of a few large developers.
They have massive scales of economy and will always undercut smaller developers. I don't think this anything to do with planning.
The other baddie is management companies. Even in Scotland, where we have freehold, the factoring fees can be as high as £150 per month on new builds.
Yet in every nation where planning is not a restriction, houses are built in small amounts by small companies that compete with each other and not by an oligopoly of large developers.
It's entirely to do with planning. The likes of Barratt know they have no competition solely due to the planning system.
Eyes down, boys. We're heading into a 72 hour local planning regulation post-a-thon.
Are you bricking it?
If so, hang fire, there's lots mortar come.
It's enough to make me lose the plot. I am flat out of here.
I bet you end up at most semi-detached.
Posters should be free, hold any view on the matter.
This is the problem with a bonfire of regulations housebuilding scheme. We can't even enforce standards as they are and it's ruining the finances and living conditions of young people desperate to get on the housing ladder.
It's mad that I've had fewer issues in a 150 year old tenement, built to house dockers in what was the seediest part of Edinburgh.
A young woman, who didn’t want to be identified, tells me that within weeks of moving in, the entire staircase collapsed and her husband fell into the understairs cupboard.
"The contractor who came to fix it said there was only one screw in each step. There should have been 14," she says.
"We’ll leave as soon as we can – too many bad memories here."
Look at the comments under the article too. Housing developers are going to be this parliament's water companies.
Yet more reasons to deregulate planning, so the land doesn’t end up in the hands of a few large developers.
They have massive scales of economy and will always undercut smaller developers. I don't think this anything to do with planning.
The other baddie is management companies. Even in Scotland, where we have freehold, the factoring fees can be as high as £150 per month on new builds.
Yet in every nation where planning is not a restriction, houses are built in small amounts by small companies that compete with each other and not by an oligopoly of large developers.
It's entirely to do with planning. The likes of Barratt know they have no competition solely due to the planning system.
Eyes down, boys. We're heading into a 72 hour local planning regulation post-a-thon.
Are you bricking it?
If so, hang fire, there's lots mortar come.
It's enough to make me lose the plot. I am flat out of here.
I bet you end up at most semi-detached.
Posters should be free, hold any view on the matter.
This is the problem with a bonfire of regulations housebuilding scheme. We can't even enforce standards as they are and it's ruining the finances and living conditions of young people desperate to get on the housing ladder.
It's mad that I've had fewer issues in a 150 year old tenement, built to house dockers in what was the seediest part of Edinburgh.
A young woman, who didn’t want to be identified, tells me that within weeks of moving in, the entire staircase collapsed and her husband fell into the understairs cupboard.
"The contractor who came to fix it said there was only one screw in each step. There should have been 14," she says.
"We’ll leave as soon as we can – too many bad memories here."
Look at the comments under the article too. Housing developers are going to be this parliament's water companies.
Yet more reasons to deregulate planning, so the land doesn’t end up in the hands of a few large developers.
They have massive scales of economy and will always undercut smaller developers. I don't think this anything to do with planning.
The other baddie is management companies. Even in Scotland, where we have freehold, the factoring fees can be as high as £150 per month on new builds.
Yet in every nation where planning is not a restriction, houses are built in small amounts by small companies that compete with each other and not by an oligopoly of large developers.
It's entirely to do with planning. The likes of Barratt know they have no competition solely due to the planning system.
Eyes down, boys. We're heading into a 72 hour local planning regulation post-a-thon.
Are you bricking it?
If so, hang fire, there's lots mortar come.
It's enough to make me lose the plot. I am flat out of here.
I bet you end up at most semi-detached.
Posters should be free, hold any view on the matter.
This is the problem with a bonfire of regulations housebuilding scheme. We can't even enforce standards as they are and it's ruining the finances and living conditions of young people desperate to get on the housing ladder.
It's mad that I've had fewer issues in a 150 year old tenement, built to house dockers in what was the seediest part of Edinburgh.
This is the problem with a bonfire of regulations housebuilding scheme. We can't even enforce standards as they are and it's ruining the finances and living conditions of young people desperate to get on the housing ladder.
It's mad that I've had fewer issues in a 150 year old tenement, built to house dockers in what was the seediest part of Edinburgh.
1) the regulations have resulted in the creation of telephone directory sized documents to conform to the regulations. 2) these documents are not read by the builders. They are definitely not written in a way that will be read. By anyone. 3) there is no real enforcement of any of this.
This means that the process is both expensive and useless.
The response to this is
- the big firms write the documents. And then ignore them - the smaller outfits generally don’t bother and as a result most domestic building jobs are done on a handshake basis.
A friend was on the committee managing the freehold for his block. When the cladding issue turns up, the engineers found the building was already structurally deficient. The original Big Builder had *rooms* of documentation. Which didn’t explain why the building was built wrong.
The problem is really one of enforcement. Effectively builders self certify, with local authorities inadequately funded and staffed to enforce after decades of council cuts.
If we aren't going to enforce regulations, why bother?
The massive, un-enforced regulations means that the larger building companies can afford the overhead of preparing the documents that no one reads, better than the smaller companies.
This is the problem with a bonfire of regulations housebuilding scheme. We can't even enforce standards as they are and it's ruining the finances and living conditions of young people desperate to get on the housing ladder.
It's mad that I've had fewer issues in a 150 year old tenement, built to house dockers in what was the seediest part of Edinburgh.
This is the problem with a bonfire of regulations housebuilding scheme. We can't even enforce standards as they are and it's ruining the finances and living conditions of young people desperate to get on the housing ladder.
It's mad that I've had fewer issues in a 150 year old tenement, built to house dockers in what was the seediest part of Edinburgh.
A young woman, who didn’t want to be identified, tells me that within weeks of moving in, the entire staircase collapsed and her husband fell into the understairs cupboard.
"The contractor who came to fix it said there was only one screw in each step. There should have been 14," she says.
"We’ll leave as soon as we can – too many bad memories here."
Look at the comments under the article too. Housing developers are going to be this parliament's water companies.
Yet more reasons to deregulate planning, so the land doesn’t end up in the hands of a few large developers.
They have massive scales of economy and will always undercut smaller developers. I don't think this anything to do with planning.
The other baddie is management companies. Even in Scotland, where we have freehold, the factoring fees can be as high as £150 per month on new builds.
Yet in every nation where planning is not a restriction, houses are built in small amounts by small companies that compete with each other and not by an oligopoly of large developers.
It's entirely to do with planning. The likes of Barratt know they have no competition solely due to the planning system.
Eyes down, boys. We're heading into a 72 hour local planning regulation post-a-thon.
Are you bricking it?
If so, hang fire, there's lots mortar come.
It's enough to make me lose the plot. I am flat out of here.
I bet you end up at most semi-detached.
Posters should be free, hold any view on the matter.
Oh gosh. That's really bad.
At lease make the effort.
The thing about the housing debate is that everyone's responses are so predictable. We can play buzzword bingo with them.
My grandmother used to be a cleaner for Sir Ernest Jardine, a Nottingham industrialist.
He had a huge dog. A Mastiff, if I recall correctly. It was famous for taking it itself off on the Nottingham buses during the day. It would get on, go upstairs and sit on the front seat, watching the world go by. He would get on and off various buses as the mood took him, but would always manage to get the correct bus home in time for tea.
This is tagged as by Christopher Gunson, a London based photog, from a competition in 2017.
The reflection is "1920s bank or civic building", and could be Nottingham Council House but the pediments are wrong.
I don't recognise the "Transit" logo, or the chopped off lettering at the bottom.
The logo is a Ford Transit van, but I'll stop chasing this one.
This is the problem with a bonfire of regulations housebuilding scheme. We can't even enforce standards as they are and it's ruining the finances and living conditions of young people desperate to get on the housing ladder.
It's mad that I've had fewer issues in a 150 year old tenement, built to house dockers in what was the seediest part of Edinburgh.
A young woman, who didn’t want to be identified, tells me that within weeks of moving in, the entire staircase collapsed and her husband fell into the understairs cupboard.
"The contractor who came to fix it said there was only one screw in each step. There should have been 14," she says.
"We’ll leave as soon as we can – too many bad memories here."
Look at the comments under the article too. Housing developers are going to be this parliament's water companies.
Yet more reasons to deregulate planning, so the land doesn’t end up in the hands of a few large developers.
They have massive scales of economy and will always undercut smaller developers. I don't think this anything to do with planning.
The other baddie is management companies. Even in Scotland, where we have freehold, the factoring fees can be as high as £150 per month on new builds.
Yet in every nation where planning is not a restriction, houses are built in small amounts by small companies that compete with each other and not by an oligopoly of large developers.
It's entirely to do with planning. The likes of Barratt know they have no competition solely due to the planning system.
Eyes down, boys. We're heading into a 72 hour local planning regulation post-a-thon.
Are you bricking it?
If so, hang fire, there's lots mortar come.
It's enough to make me lose the plot. I am flat out of here.
I bet you end up at most semi-detached.
Posters should be free, hold any view on the matter.
Oh gosh. That's really bad.
At lease make the effort.
The thing about the housing debate is that everyone's responses are so predictable. We can play buzzword bingo with them.
It won't be long before someone has a full house.
But then it will collapse, because they have a screw loose.
This is the problem with a bonfire of regulations housebuilding scheme. We can't even enforce standards as they are and it's ruining the finances and living conditions of young people desperate to get on the housing ladder.
It's mad that I've had fewer issues in a 150 year old tenement, built to house dockers in what was the seediest part of Edinburgh.
A young woman, who didn’t want to be identified, tells me that within weeks of moving in, the entire staircase collapsed and her husband fell into the understairs cupboard.
"The contractor who came to fix it said there was only one screw in each step. There should have been 14," she says.
"We’ll leave as soon as we can – too many bad memories here."
Look at the comments under the article too. Housing developers are going to be this parliament's water companies.
Yet more reasons to deregulate planning, so the land doesn’t end up in the hands of a few large developers.
They have massive scales of economy and will always undercut smaller developers. I don't think this anything to do with planning.
The other baddie is management companies. Even in Scotland, where we have freehold, the factoring fees can be as high as £150 per month on new builds.
Yet in every nation where planning is not a restriction, houses are built in small amounts by small companies that compete with each other and not by an oligopoly of large developers.
It's entirely to do with planning. The likes of Barratt know they have no competition solely due to the planning system.
Eyes down, boys. We're heading into a 72 hour local planning regulation post-a-thon.
Are you bricking it?
If so, hang fire, there's lots mortar come.
It's enough to make me lose the plot. I am flat out of here.
I bet you end up at most semi-detached.
Posters should be free, hold any view on the matter.
Oh gosh. That's really bad.
At lease make the effort.
The thing about the housing debate is that everyone's responses are so predictable. We can play buzzword bingo with them.
Sorry to go off topic, but overnight Harris has booked her first interview. Will be with CNN in Georgia, tomorrow, a joint effort with Walz as part of their tour.
Biden also to campaign with her in Pennsylvania next week.
Conservative journalist Megyn Kelly managed to get “emotional support governor” trending in the US.
A loyal member of the senior team who you can use for political counsel and sensitive missions with the certainty that, outside of an Aaron Sorkin production, they are not going to be scheming against you.
How is that different to an “emotional support governor”?
The other thing from the Seldon book that many PBers said at the time, Truss and her supporters were cosplaying Thatcher, it really was a case of Thatcher cut taxes therefore we shall do it.
Anyone who pointed out that Thatcher first stabilised the public finances by putting up taxes such as VAT was shouted down.
Thing about Thatcher was, she believed in hard work and she believed in understanding the subject before she made a decision. Which meant, even if some of her decisions were not perhaps very wise decisions, at least they had been thought through and were not usually completely catastrophic.
She was also willing to listen to reasoned advice as long as it was based on facts and evidence, even if it wasn't what she intended to do to start with.
Liz Truss, by contrast, was completely ignorant of every brief she ever had in government, never bothered to learn a subject before she threw herself bodily into it, and appears to have been extremely lazy and ill prepared for everything she did (remember the Rostov fiasco? Or the cheese nonsense)?
Anyone comparing Truss to Thatcher has not bothered to look hard enough at what Truss was really like.
I go back to the AIDS crisis.
Thatcher wanted it to be a moral campaign, Norman Fowler wanted it to be a practical campaign.
The cabinet outvoted Thatcher and she accepted it and backed the policy both publicly and privately.
I cannot see Liz Truss doing that.
Fiona Fowler deserves the credit for that. Norman came home with the idea of a moral campaign and she told him “not to be so bloody stupid”.
This is the problem with a bonfire of regulations housebuilding scheme. We can't even enforce standards as they are and it's ruining the finances and living conditions of young people desperate to get on the housing ladder.
It's mad that I've had fewer issues in a 150 year old tenement, built to house dockers in what was the seediest part of Edinburgh.
A young woman, who didn’t want to be identified, tells me that within weeks of moving in, the entire staircase collapsed and her husband fell into the understairs cupboard.
"The contractor who came to fix it said there was only one screw in each step. There should have been 14," she says.
"We’ll leave as soon as we can – too many bad memories here."
Look at the comments under the article too. Housing developers are going to be this parliament's water companies.
Yet more reasons to deregulate planning, so the land doesn’t end up in the hands of a few large developers.
They have massive scales of economy and will always undercut smaller developers. I don't think this anything to do with planning.
The other baddie is management companies. Even in Scotland, where we have freehold, the factoring fees can be as high as £150 per month on new builds.
Yet in every nation where planning is not a restriction, houses are built in small amounts by small companies that compete with each other and not by an oligopoly of large developers.
It's entirely to do with planning. The likes of Barratt know they have no competition solely due to the planning system.
Eyes down, boys. We're heading into a 72 hour local planning regulation post-a-thon.
Are you bricking it?
If so, hang fire, there's lots mortar come.
It's enough to make me lose the plot. I am flat out of here.
I bet you end up at most semi-detached.
Posters should be free, hold any view on the matter.
Oh gosh. That's really bad.
At lease make the effort.
The thing about the housing debate is that everyone's responses are so predictable. We can play buzzword bingo with them.
It won't be long before someone has a full house.
That could still be beaten by the bathroom in Buckingham Palace, as it has a royal flush.
Sorry to go off topic, but overnight Harris has booked her first interview. Will be with CNN in Georgia, tomorrow, a joint effort with Walz as part of their tour.
Biden also to campaign with her in Pennsylvania next week.
Conservative journalist Megyn Kelly managed to get “emotional support governor” trending in the US.
A loyal member of the senior team who you can use for political counsel and sensitive missions with the certainty that, outside of an Aaron Sorkin production, they are not going to be scheming against you.
How is that different to an “emotional support governor”?
There is a sort of tradition that the VP is somewhere between useless, ignored or a scheming rival. See Dan Quayle. Biden was somewhere between ignored and despised under Obama.
Hence the weird (to those outside the US) comments about Cheney being given, actual, real work to do under Bush II.
This is the problem with a bonfire of regulations housebuilding scheme. We can't even enforce standards as they are and it's ruining the finances and living conditions of young people desperate to get on the housing ladder.
It's mad that I've had fewer issues in a 150 year old tenement, built to house dockers in what was the seediest part of Edinburgh.
A young woman, who didn’t want to be identified, tells me that within weeks of moving in, the entire staircase collapsed and her husband fell into the understairs cupboard.
"The contractor who came to fix it said there was only one screw in each step. There should have been 14," she says.
"We’ll leave as soon as we can – too many bad memories here."
Look at the comments under the article too. Housing developers are going to be this parliament's water companies.
Yet more reasons to deregulate planning, so the land doesn’t end up in the hands of a few large developers.
They have massive scales of economy and will always undercut smaller developers. I don't think this anything to do with planning.
The other baddie is management companies. Even in Scotland, where we have freehold, the factoring fees can be as high as £150 per month on new builds.
Yet in every nation where planning is not a restriction, houses are built in small amounts by small companies that compete with each other and not by an oligopoly of large developers.
It's entirely to do with planning. The likes of Barratt know they have no competition solely due to the planning system.
Eyes down, boys. We're heading into a 72 hour local planning regulation post-a-thon.
Are you bricking it?
If so, hang fire, there's lots mortar come.
It's enough to make me lose the plot. I am flat out of here.
I bet you end up at most semi-detached.
Posters should be free, hold any view on the matter.
Oh gosh. That's really bad.
At lease make the effort.
The thing about the housing debate is that everyone's responses are so predictable. We can play buzzword bingo with them.
It won't be long before someone has a full house.
But then it will collapse, because they have a screw loose.
Or completely missing.
I was just reading this about the high quality of modern mass building in Cambridgeshire or somewhere flat like that (which might interest @JosiasJessop )
'A young woman, who didn’t want to be identified, tells me that within weeks of moving in, the entire staircase collapsed and her husband fell into the understairs cupboard.
"The contractor who came to fix it said there was only one screw in each step. There should have been 14," she says.'
Comments
Service use isn't of course based purely on population and property - the family with three small children uses education and leisure services, the single elderly man or woman more likely to be a user of social care and so on so it was as flawed a basis for funding as property values.
Short of individual household contracts (if you only need your rubbish collected fortnightly or every three weeks and you bin has the barcode indicating frequency of collection) you pay less than a house needing the bin emptied twice a week or even individual citizen contracts (imagine the bureaucracy), you're left with some rather blunt instruments.
There's no "fair" way of funding local Government because no two areas are the same. If they were, it would be easy but Newham isn't Surrey and Liverpool isn't Cornwall. Applying a uniform funding mechanism is clearly flawed so it may be different areas need different funding mechanisms - property values in some areas, a local sales or income tax in others. The problem is the need to redistribute funds from the richer areas which tend to have fewer needs to the poorer areas which do.
https://www.nice.org.uk
Was breaking the promise on tuition fees the mistake?, or making the promise in the first place?
You are warming on a TRUSS revival, and who I am to say your instincts are wrong?
Eg SEN, Care etc are all required by national regulations and make up most of supposedly-local expenditure. Levy the property tax nationally and give the money as a grant.
Locally raised expenditure should go on local choices not national ones.
I've never understood why Clegg still seems to get the benefit of the doubt when his post-politics career, earning megabucks running corporate whitewashing for Meta, clearly shows him in his truelight, someone happy to make money promoting suicide to teens.
Knock it off.
Full article is here:
https://archive.ph/Eb040#selection-2563.0-2563.19
Local report:
https://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/24539641.women-attacked-man-broad-daylight-bradford/
It seems anomalous, even through there is a package of unpaid work etc. He has quite the record - here he is in 2019 (same name, address, age correlates) sentenced to 6 months in prison after he was banned from driving them drove off dangerously in his car which he had parked on a 2Y line outside the Magistrate's Court. He was also in Court for offences of Drug Driving.
All Alone Road is a prosperous area; he thinks he is above the law. IMO an indeterminate or permanent driving ban is indicated, as he has abused the privilege of driving on multiple occasions. It's quite the account and worth a read.
https://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/17982989.danger-driver-muhammad-hassan-sparked-police-chase-minutes-second-driving-ban/
I wonder why the Telegraph is covering this particular case?
Vance: Our corrupt leadership said if you put tariffs on China, prices will go up. Instead, Donald Trump did that, manufacturing came back and prices went down for American citizens. They went up for the Chinese but went down for our people.
https://x.com/Acyn/status/1828494553030291901
They think that The Lettuce wasn’t real. That she was a prank played on them by The Real Conspiracy.
Serial offender gets a suspended sentence.
For some reason, I think putting him in the stocks would be an appropriate sentence.
The big tax reducing budgets were 1987 and 1988.
Did Farage get mistaken as to which budget was which or was he just saying a year at random ?
Firstly, the politicians have meddled with this, and overridden the system, with regard to certain cancer drugs in particular, as it happens. Often in response to newspaper campaigns.
Secondly, it operates in relation to elective treatments and interventions, and not to acute emergency care. If an old person is brought to A&E after falling and breaking a hip, there isn't a situation where the NHS will tell them that patching them up doesn't earn enough QALYs to be worth their while and turns them away. They will be admitted to hospital and the best done for them, and their broken hip, at great expense.
Not sure I'd want an old person to be put down in that scenario, but it is an example of where the QALY calculation doesn't apply.
Prosecutor Philip Adams told the Judge that Hassan turned up to Bradford Magistrates' Court on 9th September in his car. He was sentenced to a 12-month community order and banned again for three years for drink driving and a public order offence. No sooner had he left the court building, CCTV cameras caught Hassan getting into his vehicle and driving away.
https://magistrates.blogspot.com/2019/10/bradford-man-jailed-for-dangerous.html
But Vance is just spouting plain nonsense there.
Believed by most people in Oxford, back in the day.
Hopefully the PM can tell the Chancellor to get his finger out of his arse and start sending every available weapon in the arsenal East to Ukraine.
Judge Colin Burn said: “Whatever the motivation was for this, it’s still utterly inadequate to justify the violence that you perpetrated against [the victims] when they were sitting in a car effectively cowering from you.
“The three people on the receiving end of your violence were women who were in a vulnerable situation.
“This was an extremely abusive, controlling and violent incident.”
To draw a parallel between this Conservative leadership election and the 2020 Labour one, I don't think any of the candidates needs to curry favour with party activists by claiming that Truss was their best buddy ever and they will carry on her proud and principled movement - they can move on to the 'yes, I supported her, but it's ok because I really thought she was awful' stage right away.
Another reason I am glad I have never drunk the devil’s buttermilk.
Star Trek: The Next Generation had Shades of Grey when they blew their budget introducing the Borg in an earlier episode.
My working assumption is that the Orange-book types who held many of the top slots at the time didn’t particularly agree with the manifesto commitment in the first place & so were untroubled by the possibility of voting against it. They failed to consider the impact it would have on both their voter base & their activists.
As an aside, AOC is a Voyager fan.
https://x.com/Joanhussey1/status/1826986807965139272
The Chinese are already buying Saudi oil priced in yuan, and the Russians are selling discounted oil to China and India, who are washing it back into the international markets.
The dollar is immune from US money printing, until suddenly it isn’t.
Tories need, now and forever. And when she reassumes her deserved crown, our country - and our world - will win the future.
But they still need to pay interest on that debt.
It's mad that I've had fewer issues in a 150 year old tenement, built to house dockers in what was the seediest part of Edinburgh.
BBC News - Owners catalogue snagging on Bellway homes in Cambridgeshire - BBC News
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3ej5v1ney1o
A young woman, who didn’t want to be identified, tells me that within weeks of moving in, the entire staircase collapsed and her husband fell into the understairs cupboard.
"The contractor who came to fix it said there was only one screw in each step. There should have been 14," she says.
"We’ll leave as soon as we can – too many bad memories here."
Does Islamic Law as believed / perceived by the various category of Muslim take priority over national law, and in what circumstances?
The Islamic tradition of young men sowing their wild oats, before they come back to be "good Muslims" as they grow up.
How criminals in their heads make excuses / justifications to themselves for their behaviour.
... And the rest.
BTW "The Devil's Buttermilk":
https://clydesburn.blogspot.com/2020/11/the-devils-buttermilk-origin-of-figure.html
With 100% of the vote in, two Democrats have taken the top two spots in the nonpartisan primary:
Monroe Nichols (D)- 33.1%
Karen Keith (D)- 32.6%
Brent VanNorman (R)- 31.8%
https://x.com/Uncrewed/status/1828619559445623231
The Democrats do seem to have upped their ground game.
Last time that a Democrat was elected there was in 2006.
And its not that mad, if a home has survived 150 years then survivor bias means it likely has good bones and if well maintained it will continue to be good.
However contrast that with many slums BTL landlords let out and it's totally different.
My new build home is much, much better than the damp ridden home we were letting before we bought this.
My point was simply that serious conservatives ought to be calling out obvious lies about the economy, whatever their source; they aren't.
The other baddie is management companies. Even in Scotland, where we have freehold, the factoring fees can be as high as £150 per month on new builds.
It's entirely to do with planning. The likes of Barratt know they have no competition solely due to the planning system.
The drainage system (SUDS) was not supposed to flood so contractors put up a safety sign
er ... yes it is, that's why it's called a "balancing pond".
Buying a new house from a developer ... always get a professional snagger to do a report, and try and withold the final 5% (which may be difficult).
May not be genuine.
https://x.com/mikebeauvais/status/1828466703841534335?s=61
1) the regulations have resulted in the creation of telephone directory sized documents to conform to the regulations.
2) these documents are not read by the builders. They are definitely not written in a way that will be read. By anyone.
3) there is no real enforcement of any of this.
This means that the process is both expensive and useless.
The response to this is
- the big firms write the documents. And then ignore them
- the smaller outfits generally don’t bother and as a result most domestic building jobs are done on a handshake basis.
A friend was on the committee managing the freehold for his block. When the cladding issue turns up, the engineers found the building was already structurally deficient. The original Big Builder had *rooms* of documentation. Which didn’t explain why the building was built wrong.
When paperwork becomes a box ticking exercise it loses its meaning.
It’s put me off new build.
https://youtu.be/pDDl2y2Z_Rg?si=KOOHzeKem1afNXo7
On the other hand we also have odd decisions taken with kids where treatment is rejected, there have been a few famous cases of it too, and they go overseas to have the treatment and come back and live a normal and happy life.
More photocopies of passports, more click through multiple choice exams for the traders….
What both needed was a simple, clear process.
With simple, clear documentation.
With simple, clear enforcement.
In the case of my friend’s building, the concrete wasn’t up to spec. *Bazelgette* was one of the earlier users of the process of taking samples from each pour and doing lab tests. FFS.
Cheap, I guess, if it gets you a £1,000,000++ house out of it.
"Dog for Scale".
Source:https://www.worldphoto.org/sony-world-photography-awards/winners-galleries/2017/open/commended/street-photography/street?fbclid=IwY2xjawE70-RleHRuA2FlbQIxMAABHSNmJZogR0HTG0RS0d3bFtCQkA-RzEjPx397B4UBesaDaIX_KtiMXoJ-Zw_aem_eIfvtINNI9Z6wkwXSQEHbA#&gid=1&pid=8
If so, hang fire, there's lots mortar come.
He had a huge dog. A Mastiff, if I recall correctly. It was famous for taking it itself off on the Nottingham buses during the day. It would get on, go upstairs and sit on the front seat, watching the world go by. He would get on and off various buses as the mood took him, but would always manage to get the correct bus home in time for tea.
It is in the Washington case (Prosecutor is Jack Smith), from a new Grand Jury, taking the SCOTUS immunity ruling into account. These are also in front of Judge Chutkan.
The charges are new ones, but are the same as the previous four. Any evidence has been removed which the prosecutor thinks could be undermined by the immunity ruling.
Commentary from Brian Taylor-Cohen and Glenn Kirschner. 12 minutes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USDBZhCn9Qc
The reflection is "1920s bank or civic building", and could be Nottingham Council House but the pediments are wrong.
I don't recognise the "Transit" logo, or the chopped off lettering at the bottom.
If we aren't going to enforce regulations, why bother?
At lease make the effort.
Trebles all round!
It won't be long before someone has a full house.
Or completely missing.
A loyal member of the senior team who you can use for political counsel and sensitive missions with the certainty that, outside of an Aaron Sorkin production, they are not going to be scheming against you.
How is that different to an “emotional support governor”?
Hence the weird (to those outside the US) comments about Cheney being given, actual, real work to do under Bush II.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3ej5v1ney1o
'A young woman, who didn’t want to be identified, tells me that within weeks of moving in, the entire staircase collapsed and her husband fell into the understairs cupboard.
"The contractor who came to fix it said there was only one screw in each step. There should have been 14," she says.'