Howdy, Stranger!

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

Another Boris Johnson failure, Brexit isn’t done – politicalbetting.com

1235

Comments

  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,397
    edited August 29
    MaxPB said:

    Foxy said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Sean_F said:

    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Election 2029 - Lets Ban Starmer! 😂

    We laugh, but he has seemed to me to p*ss off a sizeable chunk of people in a very short space of time. I find him oddly charmless and rather prickly.

    He can probably afford to p*ss people off, if he delivers meaningful results. But the jury will be out on that one for some time.
    Remember, I've always said this will be a one term government, despite the landslide. ;)
    I said it first! Before the election.

    Got pilloried on here for it.
    Yes, Starmer’s/Labour’s ratings are heading one way.

    The issue is, who of Conservatives, Lib Dem’s, Reform benefits.
    Until the Tories have a leader in place it will be difficult for them to benefit and if it's not Cleverly or Tugendhat then I think they will struggle to win people over from Labour, though Jenrick and Kemi will find it easier to win Reform voters back.
    The problem is how do the Conservatives attract voters from one side without shipping roughly as many voters on the other side. Sunak never solved that, which is why he spent so much of the time looking like a rabbit caught in headlights.

    This has nothing to do with whether Starmer is a good PM or not, or whether any of the Conservative options would be better. It's just that the shape of the party system is much harder for the Conservatives to navigate than it has been in the past.
    It's quite simple. The Conservatives reduce and control immigration, whilst delivering economic competence, low tax and investing in infrastructure, industry and business in the north. Without corruption or bad behaviour.

    This stuff isn't that complicated.
    While that sounds simple, it also needs to be weighed against the current expenditure budget which has skyrocketed under the Tories since 2019. A proper Tory government needs to put a 10 year brake on current spending including stuff like the state pension and other welfare. We will never be in a position as a country to invest in infrastructure if the priority is for current expenditure.
    Scrap the Triple Lock. It's the only way.
    And universal credit, move back to JSA and ESA. It was a better system.
    No it wasn't.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,960
    edited August 29
    Workers to gain right to a four-day week

    Workers are to be given new rights to demand a four-day week in a law planned for this autumn.

    The Telegraph understands the system of “compressed hours”, which lets an employee work their contracted week’s hours in four days rather than five, will be included in the package of new rights for workers.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/08/29/workers-to-be-given-new-rights-to-demand-four-day-week/
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,615
    Truly extraordinary.

    It reminds us all why we dumped the Tories in the bin 8 weeks ago.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 17,392

    Workers to gain right to a four-day week

    Workers are to be given new rights to demand a four-day week in a law planned for this autumn.

    The Telegraph understands the system of “compressed hours”, which lets an employee work their contracted week’s hours in four days rather than five, will be included in the package of new rights for workers.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/08/29/workers-to-be-given-new-rights-to-demand-four-day-week/

    Timetabling at the Uni won't like that...
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,198

    MattW said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sandpit said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Brexit is done on that poll for most Tory voters and that was who Boris focused on as he was elected PM of a Conservative majority government.

    It isn't done for most Labour and LD voters as they want Starmer to start to restore free movement and dilute Brexit.

    It isn't done for most Reform voters as they want an even harder Brexit than Boris had with the RN stopping the boats and a hard border in Northern Ireland

    I assume that Tory voters in that poll is the 20-something percent who voted Tory in 2024, so it's unlikely that a majority of 2019 Tory voters would agree that Brexit was done.
    Those that don't want an even harder Brexit as I said, blocking up the channel tunnel, razor wire on Kent beaches, naval ships in the channel, checkpoints at the Irish border and tariffs on EU imports etc but they are mainly Reform voters now not Tories
    Does anyone really want to block up the Channel Tunnel? Anyone?
    Rees Mogg wanted to build a wall in the English Channel

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/jul/02/rees-mogg-tories-build-wall-english-channel-donald-trump-biden
    Didn't Alan Clark want to put a self-destruct mechanism in the Channel Tunnel, in case of invasion?
    To be fair to the bigoted old hypochondriac, he did live 3 miles from the tunnel entrance.
    I think he was right to do so - I certainly hope there's an easy way to block it up/destroy it if the worst happens. We are constantly told of the menace of Putin to the continent - are we going to wait for him to arrive at St Pancras?
    The plans for the 1960s Tunnel proposal were supposed to include demolition chambers - cavities next to the tunnel that would ordinarily be empty. In time of war, an explosive charge (nuclear?) would be placed in it.

    IIRC someone asked the question if such a cavity or cavities exist for the current Channel tunnel. And didn’t get an answer.
    It will surprise nobody to learn this, but I believe the whole purpose of a European rail network and its importance to the project is the potential to subdue a discontented populace. We might find such ideas quaint, but in the former Soviet bloc it's a very real concept.
    Errr

    The European rail network is almost entirely about high speed passenger only.

    Which is useless for military purposes.

  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,777
    dixiedean said:

    MaxPB said:

    Foxy said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Sean_F said:

    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Election 2029 - Lets Ban Starmer! 😂

    We laugh, but he has seemed to me to p*ss off a sizeable chunk of people in a very short space of time. I find him oddly charmless and rather prickly.

    He can probably afford to p*ss people off, if he delivers meaningful results. But the jury will be out on that one for some time.
    Remember, I've always said this will be a one term government, despite the landslide. ;)
    I said it first! Before the election.

    Got pilloried on here for it.
    Yes, Starmer’s/Labour’s ratings are heading one way.

    The issue is, who of Conservatives, Lib Dem’s, Reform benefits.
    Until the Tories have a leader in place it will be difficult for them to benefit and if it's not Cleverly or Tugendhat then I think they will struggle to win people over from Labour, though Jenrick and Kemi will find it easier to win Reform voters back.
    The problem is how do the Conservatives attract voters from one side without shipping roughly as many voters on the other side. Sunak never solved that, which is why he spent so much of the time looking like a rabbit caught in headlights.

    This has nothing to do with whether Starmer is a good PM or not, or whether any of the Conservative options would be better. It's just that the shape of the party system is much harder for the Conservatives to navigate than it has been in the past.
    It's quite simple. The Conservatives reduce and control immigration, whilst delivering economic competence, low tax and investing in infrastructure, industry and business in the north. Without corruption or bad behaviour.

    This stuff isn't that complicated.
    While that sounds simple, it also needs to be weighed against the current expenditure budget which has skyrocketed under the Tories since 2019. A proper Tory government needs to put a 10 year brake on current spending including stuff like the state pension and other welfare. We will never be in a position as a country to invest in infrastructure if the priority is for current expenditure.
    Scrap the Triple Lock. It's the only way.
    And universal credit, move back to JSA and ESA. It was a better system.
    No it wasn't.
    Under that system we had record labour force participation and almost 80% employment for working age people. Since UC has rolled out more people have become economically inactive by choice and live on benefits. The system has design flaws and needs to be scrapped.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,960
    edited August 29

    Workers to gain right to a four-day week

    Workers are to be given new rights to demand a four-day week in a law planned for this autumn.

    The Telegraph understands the system of “compressed hours”, which lets an employee work their contracted week’s hours in four days rather than five, will be included in the package of new rights for workers.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/08/29/workers-to-be-given-new-rights-to-demand-four-day-week/

    Timetabling at the Uni won't like that...
    It feels like one of those things like hybrid working that will actually end up being absolutely great for middle class office workers, especially bosses, but will widen the gap between them and those that further down the chain that need to be in person for their job e.g. bus drivers are still going to be doing the same shifts and not being doing it as WFH.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,687
    TimS said:

    carnforth said:

    TimS said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    SKS reported to have removed a painting of Margaret Thatcher from 10 Downing Street study.

    Later he realised it was a mirror.

    I don't remember Thatcher hammering pensioners and whacking up taxes on those with assets and entrepreneurs with higher CGT? Starmer has also overseen the biggest jailing of nationalist far right activists in modern history
    Nor did Thatcher impose VAT on private school fees and remove all hereditary peers from the Lords
    Howe increased VAT from 8 to 15% as soon as they got in in 1979.

    If Reeves hiked it from 20 to the Irish rate of 23% all our fiscal holes would be filled.
    Labour and its supporters have decided VAT is "regressive". Never quite understood it myself, given someone on a low income is mostly buying VAT-free or lower-rate things (housing, basic food, bills).
    The one to watch is employers NI.
    I think putting that up is bonkers compared to tweaking corporation tax by an equivalent amount to raise the necessary revenue. Employers NI is a tax on jobs - corp tax is after all is said and done and a tax on the final profit.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,540
    FF43 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    SKS reported to have removed a painting of Margaret Thatcher from 10 Downing Street study.

    Later he realised it was a mirror.

    I saw that earlier. All I'll say is... it's up to him. BUT, given he doesn't own Downing St. and he doesn't own that painting, I hope it's being stored somewhere for safe keeping so when he's booted out on his arse in 2029, the next PM can restore it to it's rightful place....
    Of course it's being stored somewhere for safekeeping.
    I hope so.

    Mrs Thatcher won her elections with 43.9%, 42.4% and 42.2% of the vote and Keith "won" his election with... checks... 33.7% of the vote... He's not fit to lick her boots, honestly!
    Did Sir Maggie ever win over 400 seats like Sir Keir?
    That was purely a one off anomaly with REF splitting the Con vote.

    In any other election Lab would have lost with their 2024 vote share... As they will in 2029. 👌
    Michael Foot won 28% of the vote, way more than Conservative current standing despite his longest suicide note.
    Interesting fact: Foot got a higher share of the voting age public than Starmer did.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,031
    .
    MaxPB said:

    I have to say having a go at Harris for working in McDonalds when she was at university seems particularly stupid. It shows she's got work ethic and doesn't mind doing whatever it takes to pay her own way. Saying it's not transparent of her to leave it off her CV is ridiculous, I haven't put my uni job at Topman on my CV since probably 2008 after I got my first actual job I binned it.

    Presumably an indication that these guys just never had to do jobs like that.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,810
    Andy_JS said:

    FF43 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    SKS reported to have removed a painting of Margaret Thatcher from 10 Downing Street study.

    Later he realised it was a mirror.

    I saw that earlier. All I'll say is... it's up to him. BUT, given he doesn't own Downing St. and he doesn't own that painting, I hope it's being stored somewhere for safe keeping so when he's booted out on his arse in 2029, the next PM can restore it to it's rightful place....
    Of course it's being stored somewhere for safekeeping.
    I hope so.

    Mrs Thatcher won her elections with 43.9%, 42.4% and 42.2% of the vote and Keith "won" his election with... checks... 33.7% of the vote... He's not fit to lick her boots, honestly!
    Did Sir Maggie ever win over 400 seats like Sir Keir?
    That was purely a one off anomaly with REF splitting the Con vote.

    In any other election Lab would have lost with their 2024 vote share... As they will in 2029. 👌
    Michael Foot won 28% of the vote, way more than Conservative current standing despite his longest suicide note.
    Interesting fact: Foot got a higher share of the voting age public than Starmer did.
    Starmer won nearly twice as many seats as Foot did.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,540

    Andy_JS said:

    FF43 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    SKS reported to have removed a painting of Margaret Thatcher from 10 Downing Street study.

    Later he realised it was a mirror.

    I saw that earlier. All I'll say is... it's up to him. BUT, given he doesn't own Downing St. and he doesn't own that painting, I hope it's being stored somewhere for safe keeping so when he's booted out on his arse in 2029, the next PM can restore it to it's rightful place....
    Of course it's being stored somewhere for safekeeping.
    I hope so.

    Mrs Thatcher won her elections with 43.9%, 42.4% and 42.2% of the vote and Keith "won" his election with... checks... 33.7% of the vote... He's not fit to lick her boots, honestly!
    Did Sir Maggie ever win over 400 seats like Sir Keir?
    That was purely a one off anomaly with REF splitting the Con vote.

    In any other election Lab would have lost with their 2024 vote share... As they will in 2029. 👌
    Michael Foot won 28% of the vote, way more than Conservative current standing despite his longest suicide note.
    Interesting fact: Foot got a higher share of the voting age public than Starmer did.
    Starmer won nearly twice as many seats as Foot did.
    Indeed.
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 6,813

    Workers to gain right to a four-day week

    Workers are to be given new rights to demand a four-day week in a law planned for this autumn.

    The Telegraph understands the system of “compressed hours”, which lets an employee work their contracted week’s hours in four days rather than five, will be included in the package of new rights for workers.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/08/29/workers-to-be-given-new-rights-to-demand-four-day-week/

    That all sounds fantastic. I think the bit that is oft missed in this equation, however, is that if you’re on say a 35 hour week, just look at how your work days look if you’re spreading the extra 7 hours out evenly among the other 4 days.

    I’m not generally knocking it, because I support the idea that as long as an employer and worker can come to an arrangement that suits them we shouldn’t be wedded to traditional 9-5 arrangements. I think you should certainly have the right to request it. I don’t think it’s unreasonable for an employer to think about how that works within its business model either.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,397
    MaxPB said:

    dixiedean said:

    MaxPB said:

    Foxy said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Sean_F said:

    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Election 2029 - Lets Ban Starmer! 😂

    We laugh, but he has seemed to me to p*ss off a sizeable chunk of people in a very short space of time. I find him oddly charmless and rather prickly.

    He can probably afford to p*ss people off, if he delivers meaningful results. But the jury will be out on that one for some time.
    Remember, I've always said this will be a one term government, despite the landslide. ;)
    I said it first! Before the election.

    Got pilloried on here for it.
    Yes, Starmer’s/Labour’s ratings are heading one way.

    The issue is, who of Conservatives, Lib Dem’s, Reform benefits.
    Until the Tories have a leader in place it will be difficult for them to benefit and if it's not Cleverly or Tugendhat then I think they will struggle to win people over from Labour, though Jenrick and Kemi will find it easier to win Reform voters back.
    The problem is how do the Conservatives attract voters from one side without shipping roughly as many voters on the other side. Sunak never solved that, which is why he spent so much of the time looking like a rabbit caught in headlights.

    This has nothing to do with whether Starmer is a good PM or not, or whether any of the Conservative options would be better. It's just that the shape of the party system is much harder for the Conservatives to navigate than it has been in the past.
    It's quite simple. The Conservatives reduce and control immigration, whilst delivering economic competence, low tax and investing in infrastructure, industry and business in the north. Without corruption or bad behaviour.

    This stuff isn't that complicated.
    While that sounds simple, it also needs to be weighed against the current expenditure budget which has skyrocketed under the Tories since 2019. A proper Tory government needs to put a 10 year brake on current spending including stuff like the state pension and other welfare. We will never be in a position as a country to invest in infrastructure if the priority is for current expenditure.
    Scrap the Triple Lock. It's the only way.
    And universal credit, move back to JSA and ESA. It was a better system.
    No it wasn't.
    Under that system we had record labour force participation and almost 80% employment for working age people. Since UC has rolled out more people have become economically inactive by choice and live on benefits. The system has design flaws and needs to be scrapped.
    I would argue that has far more to do with. Being able to access pension pots at 55. And the pandemic. Which made people reassess.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,031

    MaxPB said:

    I have to say having a go at Harris for working in McDonalds when she was at university seems particularly stupid. It shows she's got work ethic and doesn't mind doing whatever it takes to pay her own way. Saying it's not transparent of her to leave it off her CV is ridiculous, I haven't put my uni job at Topman on my CV since probably 2008 after I got my first actual job I binned it.

    There's a reason that the Republican campaign is doing stupid and desperate things right now...
    Talking of stupid and desperate.

    Trump pushes his disgusting, misogynist lie that moms in Minnesota and other blue states can legally murder their babies after they're born. Sick shit.
    https://x.com/atrupar/status/1829257751807041853
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,687
    Sarah Smith seems very sure that there will be a Trump-Harris debate in two weeks time.

    Erm...
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,208
    edited August 29
    TimS said:

    FF43 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    SKS reported to have removed a painting of Margaret Thatcher from 10 Downing Street study.

    Later he realised it was a mirror.

    I saw that earlier. All I'll say is... it's up to him. BUT, given he doesn't own Downing St. and he doesn't own that painting, I hope it's being stored somewhere for safe keeping so when he's booted out on his arse in 2029, the next PM can restore it to it's rightful place....
    Of course it's being stored somewhere for safekeeping.
    I hope so.

    Mrs Thatcher won her elections with 43.9%, 42.4% and 42.2% of the vote and Keith "won" his election with... checks... 33.7% of the vote... He's not fit to lick her boots, honestly!
    Did Sir Maggie ever win over 400 seats like Sir Keir?
    That was purely a one off anomaly with REF splitting the Con vote.

    In any other election Lab would have lost with their 2024 vote share... As they will in 2029. 👌
    Michael Foot won 28% of the vote, way more than Conservative current standing despite his longest suicide note.
    And the Lib Dems + Green even without the sundry lefty independents got far more votes than Reform this year.
    It's way too early to call the next election (and FWIW I think Starmer has done OK so far). There are five main dynamics at play I think:

    1. Reform/Tory. Labour benefits as long as previous Tories stick with Reform.
    2. Labour/Conservative. The traditional battleground is less important than it used to be in terms of voters but not seats (see point 1)
    3. Conservative/Lib Dem in South of England. Tories will find it hard to dislodge the new occupants of their seats I suspect and they aren't putting any effort into trying right now. This dynamic will be relatively impervious to any Labour unpopularity.
    4. Labour/SNP in Scotland. Doesn't directly benefit the Conservatives.
    5. Labour/Greens and Gaza. The mirror of the Tory/Reform dynamic. Labour are fortunate that this phenomenon is mostly in their previously strongest seats and has a limited effect. Gaza may disappear as an issue by next election.

    In general these dynamics aren't particularly useful to the Conservatives, except dynamic (1) against Reform. Parties associated with Nigel Farage have a habit of self combusting. The Tories may strike lucky. Otherwise I think it will be hard work. Reform voters don't particularly like the Conservatives either.
  • GIN1138 said:

    SKS reported to have removed a painting of Margaret Thatcher from 10 Downing Street study.

    Later he realised it was a mirror.

    I saw that earlier. All I'll say is... it's up to him. BUT, given he doesn't own Downing St. and he doesn't own that painting, I hope it's being stored somewhere for safe keeping so when he's booted out on his arse in 2029, the next PM can restore it to it's rightful place....
    It's really common for PMs, and indeed holders of many public offices, to update the art in their office. I'm quite sure all his Tory predecessors did so (possibly excluding Truss simply due to lack of time).

    There is a specific office in DCMS for it, and the art either goes to a public museum, or in some cases storage.

    I'd have thought this may well turn up in the National Portrait Gallery soon. It's a credible piece of art, with a very notable subject.

    I do think it's important to challenge the conspiracy theory bullshit that goes around implying this is unusual or involves an incinerator. It's a public asset, and you're now a hell of a lot more likely to be able to see it than when it was in a private office.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,031

    MaxPB said:

    Sean_F said:

    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Election 2029 - Lets Ban Starmer! 😂

    We laugh, but he has seemed to me to p*ss off a sizeable chunk of people in a very short space of time. I find him oddly charmless and rather prickly.

    He can probably afford to p*ss people off, if he delivers meaningful results. But the jury will be out on that one for some time.
    Remember, I've always said this will be a one term government, despite the landslide. ;)
    I said it first! Before the election.

    Got pilloried on here for it.
    Yes, Starmer’s/Labour’s ratings are heading one way.

    The issue is, who of Conservatives, Lib Dem’s, Reform benefits.
    Until the Tories have a leader in place it will be difficult for them to benefit and if it's not Cleverly or Tugendhat then I think they will struggle to win people over from Labour, though Jenrick and Kemi will find it easier to win Reform voters back.
    The problem is how do the Conservatives attract voters from one side without shipping roughly as many voters on the other side. Sunak never solved that, which is why he spent so much of the time looking like a rabbit caught in headlights.

    This has nothing to do with whether Starmer is a good PM or not, or whether any of the Conservative options would be better. It's just that the shape of the party system is much harder for the Conservatives to navigate than it has been in the past.
    It's quite simple. The Conservatives reduce and control immigration, whilst delivering economic competence, low tax and investing in infrastructure, industry and business in the north. Without corruption or bad behaviour.

    This stuff isn't that complicated.
    Complicated enough to be completely beyond the Tories for the last decade.
    What makes you think they’ve learned anything ?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,615
    Nigelb said:

    MaxPB said:

    Sean_F said:

    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Election 2029 - Lets Ban Starmer! 😂

    We laugh, but he has seemed to me to p*ss off a sizeable chunk of people in a very short space of time. I find him oddly charmless and rather prickly.

    He can probably afford to p*ss people off, if he delivers meaningful results. But the jury will be out on that one for some time.
    Remember, I've always said this will be a one term government, despite the landslide. ;)
    I said it first! Before the election.

    Got pilloried on here for it.
    Yes, Starmer’s/Labour’s ratings are heading one way.

    The issue is, who of Conservatives, Lib Dem’s, Reform benefits.
    Until the Tories have a leader in place it will be difficult for them to benefit and if it's not Cleverly or Tugendhat then I think they will struggle to win people over from Labour, though Jenrick and Kemi will find it easier to win Reform voters back.
    The problem is how do the Conservatives attract voters from one side without shipping roughly as many voters on the other side. Sunak never solved that, which is why he spent so much of the time looking like a rabbit caught in headlights.

    This has nothing to do with whether Starmer is a good PM or not, or whether any of the Conservative options would be better. It's just that the shape of the party system is much harder for the Conservatives to navigate than it has been in the past.
    It's quite simple. The Conservatives reduce and control immigration, whilst delivering economic competence, low tax and investing in infrastructure, industry and business in the north. Without corruption or bad behaviour.

    This stuff isn't that complicated.
    Complicated enough to be completely beyond the Tories for the last decade.
    What makes you think they’ve learned anything ?
    And how can they show competence at these things from opposition?
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 6,813

    GIN1138 said:

    SKS reported to have removed a painting of Margaret Thatcher from 10 Downing Street study.

    Later he realised it was a mirror.

    I saw that earlier. All I'll say is... it's up to him. BUT, given he doesn't own Downing St. and he doesn't own that painting, I hope it's being stored somewhere for safe keeping so when he's booted out on his arse in 2029, the next PM can restore it to it's rightful place....
    It's really common for PMs, and indeed holders of many public offices, to update the art in their office. I'm quite sure all his Tory predecessors did so (possibly excluding Truss simply due to lack of time).

    There is a specific office in DCMS for it, and the art either goes to a public museum, or in some cases storage.

    I'd have thought this may well turn up in the National Portrait Gallery soon. It's a credible piece of art, with a very notable subject.

    I do think it's important to challenge the conspiracy theory bullshit that goes around implying this is unusual or involves an incinerator. It's a public asset, and you're now a hell of a lot more likely to be able to see it than when it was in a private office.
    This reminds me of the drama we have every time a new US President moves into the White House and we have to hear about where they’ve put the dratted Churchill bust.

    Let people have whatever artwork makes them happy on their walls. I don’t think Starmer should be obliged to be gazed down upon by the Sainted Margaret, as if he has to pay due veneration to her like the statue of the Virgin at Lourdes.
  • guybrushguybrush Posts: 257
    edited August 29
    FPT, Gareth Dennis shouldn't be mouthing off to journos outside his area of expertise, especially when employed bh a supplier to NR. Quite right he got put in his place. Hendy's reaction maybe a little extreme, but the anger was justified to an extent.
  • VerulamiusVerulamius Posts: 1,543
    TimS said:

    carnforth said:

    TimS said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    SKS reported to have removed a painting of Margaret Thatcher from 10 Downing Street study.

    Later he realised it was a mirror.

    I don't remember Thatcher hammering pensioners and whacking up taxes on those with assets and entrepreneurs with higher CGT? Starmer has also overseen the biggest jailing of nationalist far right activists in modern history
    Nor did Thatcher impose VAT on private school fees and remove all hereditary peers from the Lords
    Howe increased VAT from 8 to 15% as soon as they got in in 1979.

    If Reeves hiked it from 20 to the Irish rate of 23% all our fiscal holes would be filled.
    Labour and its supporters have decided VAT is "regressive". Never quite understood it myself, given someone on a low income is mostly buying VAT-free or lower-rate things (housing, basic food, bills).
    The one to watch is employers NI.
    Extend it to apply to workers as well as employees?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,031
    Foxy said:

    Nigelb said:

    MaxPB said:

    Sean_F said:

    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Election 2029 - Lets Ban Starmer! 😂

    We laugh, but he has seemed to me to p*ss off a sizeable chunk of people in a very short space of time. I find him oddly charmless and rather prickly.

    He can probably afford to p*ss people off, if he delivers meaningful results. But the jury will be out on that one for some time.
    Remember, I've always said this will be a one term government, despite the landslide. ;)
    I said it first! Before the election.

    Got pilloried on here for it.
    Yes, Starmer’s/Labour’s ratings are heading one way.

    The issue is, who of Conservatives, Lib Dem’s, Reform benefits.
    Until the Tories have a leader in place it will be difficult for them to benefit and if it's not Cleverly or Tugendhat then I think they will struggle to win people over from Labour, though Jenrick and Kemi will find it easier to win Reform voters back.
    The problem is how do the Conservatives attract voters from one side without shipping roughly as many voters on the other side. Sunak never solved that, which is why he spent so much of the time looking like a rabbit caught in headlights.

    This has nothing to do with whether Starmer is a good PM or not, or whether any of the Conservative options would be better. It's just that the shape of the party system is much harder for the Conservatives to navigate than it has been in the past.
    It's quite simple. The Conservatives reduce and control immigration, whilst delivering economic competence, low tax and investing in infrastructure, industry and business in the north. Without corruption or bad behaviour.

    This stuff isn't that complicated.
    Complicated enough to be completely beyond the Tories for the last decade.
    What makes you think they’ve learned anything ?
    And how can they show competence at these things from opposition?
    You can make a case from opposition, if you're disciplined and develop a coherent policy agenda.

    If.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,261
    edited August 29

    GIN1138 said:

    SKS reported to have removed a painting of Margaret Thatcher from 10 Downing Street study.

    Later he realised it was a mirror.

    I saw that earlier. All I'll say is... it's up to him. BUT, given he doesn't own Downing St. and he doesn't own that painting, I hope it's being stored somewhere for safe keeping so when he's booted out on his arse in 2029, the next PM can restore it to it's rightful place....
    It's really common for PMs, and indeed holders of many public offices, to update the art in their office. I'm quite sure all his Tory predecessors did so (possibly excluding Truss simply due to lack of time).

    There is a specific office in DCMS for it, and the art either goes to a public museum, or in some cases storage.

    I'd have thought this may well turn up in the National Portrait Gallery soon. It's a credible piece of art, with a very notable subject.

    I do think it's important to challenge the conspiracy theory bullshit that goes around implying this is unusual or involves an incinerator. It's a public asset, and you're now a hell of a lot more likely to be able to see it than when it was in a private office.
    I think if Blair (or maybe Cameron) had taken down Thatchers portrait then fair enough... But for a total pygmy and puritan creep like Keith to do it... Leaves a bad taste in the mouth.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,777
    dixiedean said:

    MaxPB said:

    dixiedean said:

    MaxPB said:

    Foxy said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Sean_F said:

    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Election 2029 - Lets Ban Starmer! 😂

    We laugh, but he has seemed to me to p*ss off a sizeable chunk of people in a very short space of time. I find him oddly charmless and rather prickly.

    He can probably afford to p*ss people off, if he delivers meaningful results. But the jury will be out on that one for some time.
    Remember, I've always said this will be a one term government, despite the landslide. ;)
    I said it first! Before the election.

    Got pilloried on here for it.
    Yes, Starmer’s/Labour’s ratings are heading one way.

    The issue is, who of Conservatives, Lib Dem’s, Reform benefits.
    Until the Tories have a leader in place it will be difficult for them to benefit and if it's not Cleverly or Tugendhat then I think they will struggle to win people over from Labour, though Jenrick and Kemi will find it easier to win Reform voters back.
    The problem is how do the Conservatives attract voters from one side without shipping roughly as many voters on the other side. Sunak never solved that, which is why he spent so much of the time looking like a rabbit caught in headlights.

    This has nothing to do with whether Starmer is a good PM or not, or whether any of the Conservative options would be better. It's just that the shape of the party system is much harder for the Conservatives to navigate than it has been in the past.
    It's quite simple. The Conservatives reduce and control immigration, whilst delivering economic competence, low tax and investing in infrastructure, industry and business in the north. Without corruption or bad behaviour.

    This stuff isn't that complicated.
    While that sounds simple, it also needs to be weighed against the current expenditure budget which has skyrocketed under the Tories since 2019. A proper Tory government needs to put a 10 year brake on current spending including stuff like the state pension and other welfare. We will never be in a position as a country to invest in infrastructure if the priority is for current expenditure.
    Scrap the Triple Lock. It's the only way.
    And universal credit, move back to JSA and ESA. It was a better system.
    No it wasn't.
    Under that system we had record labour force participation and almost 80% employment for working age people. Since UC has rolled out more people have become economically inactive by choice and live on benefits. The system has design flaws and needs to be scrapped.
    I would argue that has far more to do with. Being able to access pension pots at 55. And the pandemic. Which made people reassess.
    No, there's 1.5m more people on sickness benefits. There aren't 1.5m more sick people, it's just easier for them to get more money with UC than it was on the old system so they do it. There are millions of people who are dishonest and will take advantage any system that is easy to abuse. UC is extremely porous and those dishonest people have learned how to game the system.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,362
    edited August 29
    guybrush said:

    FPT, Gareth Dennis shouldn't be mouthing off to journos outside his area of expertise, especially when employed bh a supplier to NR. Quite right he got put in his place. Hendy's reaction maybe a little extreme, but the anger was justified to an extent.

    Not quite - he was repeating the official ORR statement about Euston which hasn't been improved as multiple people have mentioned.

    Worse the idea that you won't give company X work because they employ person Y is simply childish and the letter shows how stupid Lord Hendy is in actually writing the threat down.

    The only reason why there isn't a stupidly expensive employment tribunal coming is that Gareth hadn't been employed by this firm for 2 years so he can't take it to a tribunal.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,397
    MaxPB said:

    dixiedean said:

    MaxPB said:

    dixiedean said:

    MaxPB said:

    Foxy said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Sean_F said:

    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Election 2029 - Lets Ban Starmer! 😂

    We laugh, but he has seemed to me to p*ss off a sizeable chunk of people in a very short space of time. I find him oddly charmless and rather prickly.

    He can probably afford to p*ss people off, if he delivers meaningful results. But the jury will be out on that one for some time.
    Remember, I've always said this will be a one term government, despite the landslide. ;)
    I said it first! Before the election.

    Got pilloried on here for it.
    Yes, Starmer’s/Labour’s ratings are heading one way.

    The issue is, who of Conservatives, Lib Dem’s, Reform benefits.
    Until the Tories have a leader in place it will be difficult for them to benefit and if it's not Cleverly or Tugendhat then I think they will struggle to win people over from Labour, though Jenrick and Kemi will find it easier to win Reform voters back.
    The problem is how do the Conservatives attract voters from one side without shipping roughly as many voters on the other side. Sunak never solved that, which is why he spent so much of the time looking like a rabbit caught in headlights.

    This has nothing to do with whether Starmer is a good PM or not, or whether any of the Conservative options would be better. It's just that the shape of the party system is much harder for the Conservatives to navigate than it has been in the past.
    It's quite simple. The Conservatives reduce and control immigration, whilst delivering economic competence, low tax and investing in infrastructure, industry and business in the north. Without corruption or bad behaviour.

    This stuff isn't that complicated.
    While that sounds simple, it also needs to be weighed against the current expenditure budget which has skyrocketed under the Tories since 2019. A proper Tory government needs to put a 10 year brake on current spending including stuff like the state pension and other welfare. We will never be in a position as a country to invest in infrastructure if the priority is for current expenditure.
    Scrap the Triple Lock. It's the only way.
    And universal credit, move back to JSA and ESA. It was a better system.
    No it wasn't.
    Under that system we had record labour force participation and almost 80% employment for working age people. Since UC has rolled out more people have become economically inactive by choice and live on benefits. The system has design flaws and needs to be scrapped.
    I would argue that has far more to do with. Being able to access pension pots at 55. And the pandemic. Which made people reassess.
    No, there's 1.5m more people on sickness benefits. There aren't 1.5m more sick people, it's just easier for them to get more money with UC than it was on the old system so they do it. There are millions of people who are dishonest and will take advantage any system that is easy to abuse. UC is extremely porous and those dishonest people have learned how to game the system.
    Maybe.
    Or maybe it's the total collapse of any kind of support system?
    If you want folk to work why not just ask them what they can/can't do?
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,208
    stodge said:

    While some quibble about smoking in beer gardens and let's face it, it isn't a hill (or garden) on which I would choose to die, much more serious matters don't get the attention they deserve:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cj9l8njg2rzo

    Presumably smokers are choosing to die prematurely on exactly that hill.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,540

    WTF is going on with Starmer and Labour?

    Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?

    What is this all adding up to?

    It's a mess.

    "No pain, no gain."
  • theProletheProle Posts: 1,206

    MaxPB said:

    Sean_F said:

    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Election 2029 - Lets Ban Starmer! 😂

    We laugh, but he has seemed to me to p*ss off a sizeable chunk of people in a very short space of time. I find him oddly charmless and rather prickly.

    He can probably afford to p*ss people off, if he delivers meaningful results. But the jury will be out on that one for some time.
    Remember, I've always said this will be a one term government, despite the landslide. ;)
    I said it first! Before the election.

    Got pilloried on here for it.
    Yes, Starmer’s/Labour’s ratings are heading one way.

    The issue is, who of Conservatives, Lib Dem’s, Reform benefits.
    Until the Tories have a leader in place it will be difficult for them to benefit and if it's not Cleverly or Tugendhat then I think they will struggle to win people over from Labour, though Jenrick and Kemi will find it easier to win Reform voters back.
    The problem is how do the Conservatives attract voters from one side without shipping roughly as many voters on the other side. Sunak never solved that, which is why he spent so much of the time looking like a rabbit caught in headlights.

    This has nothing to do with whether Starmer is a good PM or not, or whether any of the Conservative options would be better. It's just that the shape of the party system is much harder for the Conservatives to navigate than it has been in the past.
    It's quite simple. The Conservatives reduce and control immigration, whilst delivering economic competence, low tax and investing in infrastructure, industry and business in the north. Without corruption or bad behaviour.

    This stuff isn't that complicated.
    I don't disagree, but my goodness they made heavy weather of it over the last 14 years...
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,031
    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    SKS reported to have removed a painting of Margaret Thatcher from 10 Downing Street study.

    Later he realised it was a mirror.

    I saw that earlier. All I'll say is... it's up to him. BUT, given he doesn't own Downing St. and he doesn't own that painting, I hope it's being stored somewhere for safe keeping so when he's booted out on his arse in 2029, the next PM can restore it to it's rightful place....
    It's really common for PMs, and indeed holders of many public offices, to update the art in their office. I'm quite sure all his Tory predecessors did so (possibly excluding Truss simply due to lack of time).

    There is a specific office in DCMS for it, and the art either goes to a public museum, or in some cases storage.

    I'd have thought this may well turn up in the National Portrait Gallery soon. It's a credible piece of art, with a very notable subject.

    I do think it's important to challenge the conspiracy theory bullshit that goes around implying this is unusual or involves an incinerator. It's a public asset, and you're now a hell of a lot more likely to be able to see it than when it was in a private office.
    I think if Blair (or maybe Cameron) had taken down Thatchers portrait then fair enough... But for a total pygmy and puritan creep like Keith to do it... Leaves a bad taste in the mouth.
    Thatcher's various legacies have dominated our politics for far too long. Way past time to move on.
    Plenty of better places to hang it.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,208
    edited August 29
    GIN1138 said:

    FF43 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    SKS reported to have removed a painting of Margaret Thatcher from 10 Downing Street study.

    Later he realised it was a mirror.

    I saw that earlier. All I'll say is... it's up to him. BUT, given he doesn't own Downing St. and he doesn't own that painting, I hope it's being stored somewhere for safe keeping so when he's booted out on his arse in 2029, the next PM can restore it to it's rightful place....
    Of course it's being stored somewhere for safekeeping.
    I hope so.

    Mrs Thatcher won her elections with 43.9%, 42.4% and 42.2% of the vote and Keith "won" his election with... checks... 33.7% of the vote... He's not fit to lick her boots, honestly!
    Did Sir Maggie ever win over 400 seats like Sir Keir?
    That was purely a one off anomaly with REF splitting the Con vote.

    In any other election Lab would have lost with their 2024 vote share... As they will in 2029. 👌
    Michael Foot won 28% of the vote, way more than Conservative current standing despite his longest suicide note.
    Foot was challenging from four years in Opposition. Con was defending from 14 years in government. ;)
    Indeed. The Conservatives could go even further backwards from here, just as Labour did in 1984. The equivalent election you are referring to, 1979, saw Labour with a 37% vote share, rather more than the Tories' 24% in July
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,540
    The first Tory leadership ballot is next Wednesday. Hadn't realised it would be upon us so quickly.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,777
    dixiedean said:

    MaxPB said:

    dixiedean said:

    MaxPB said:

    dixiedean said:

    MaxPB said:

    Foxy said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Sean_F said:

    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Election 2029 - Lets Ban Starmer! 😂

    We laugh, but he has seemed to me to p*ss off a sizeable chunk of people in a very short space of time. I find him oddly charmless and rather prickly.

    He can probably afford to p*ss people off, if he delivers meaningful results. But the jury will be out on that one for some time.
    Remember, I've always said this will be a one term government, despite the landslide. ;)
    I said it first! Before the election.

    Got pilloried on here for it.
    Yes, Starmer’s/Labour’s ratings are heading one way.

    The issue is, who of Conservatives, Lib Dem’s, Reform benefits.
    Until the Tories have a leader in place it will be difficult for them to benefit and if it's not Cleverly or Tugendhat then I think they will struggle to win people over from Labour, though Jenrick and Kemi will find it easier to win Reform voters back.
    The problem is how do the Conservatives attract voters from one side without shipping roughly as many voters on the other side. Sunak never solved that, which is why he spent so much of the time looking like a rabbit caught in headlights.

    This has nothing to do with whether Starmer is a good PM or not, or whether any of the Conservative options would be better. It's just that the shape of the party system is much harder for the Conservatives to navigate than it has been in the past.
    It's quite simple. The Conservatives reduce and control immigration, whilst delivering economic competence, low tax and investing in infrastructure, industry and business in the north. Without corruption or bad behaviour.

    This stuff isn't that complicated.
    While that sounds simple, it also needs to be weighed against the current expenditure budget which has skyrocketed under the Tories since 2019. A proper Tory government needs to put a 10 year brake on current spending including stuff like the state pension and other welfare. We will never be in a position as a country to invest in infrastructure if the priority is for current expenditure.
    Scrap the Triple Lock. It's the only way.
    And universal credit, move back to JSA and ESA. It was a better system.
    No it wasn't.
    Under that system we had record labour force participation and almost 80% employment for working age people. Since UC has rolled out more people have become economically inactive by choice and live on benefits. The system has design flaws and needs to be scrapped.
    I would argue that has far more to do with. Being able to access pension pots at 55. And the pandemic. Which made people reassess.
    No, there's 1.5m more people on sickness benefits. There aren't 1.5m more sick people, it's just easier for them to get more money with UC than it was on the old system so they do it. There are millions of people who are dishonest and will take advantage any system that is easy to abuse. UC is extremely porous and those dishonest people have learned how to game the system.
    Maybe.
    Or maybe it's the total collapse of any kind of support system?
    If you want folk to work why not just ask them what they can/can't do?
    That's what ESA was about, UC is a one size fits all solution and it doesn't work.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,368
    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Election 2029 - Lets Ban Starmer! 😂

    We laugh, but he has seemed to me to p*ss off a sizeable chunk of people in a very short space of time. I find him oddly charmless and rather prickly.

    He can probably afford to p*ss people off, if he delivers meaningful results. But the jury will be out on that one for some time.
    Remember, I've always said this will be a one term government, despite the landslide. ;)
    I said it first! Before the election.

    Got pilloried on here for it.
    Where CR leads, we all follow! :D
    You are all in good company, Jeremy Kyle on Talk TV and Nigel Farage are furious too.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,687
    Andy_JS said:

    The first Tory leadership ballot is next Wednesday. Hadn't realised it would be upon us so quickly.

    Kemi is just back from hols in time though.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,545
    Andy_JS said:

    WTF is going on with Starmer and Labour?

    Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?

    What is this all adding up to?

    It's a mess.

    "No pain, no gain."
    "Starmerism" is now fleshing out: pain, no gain.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,348
    Andy_JS said:

    The first Tory leadership ballot is next Wednesday. Hadn't realised it would be upon us so quickly.

    This is only the first stage to whittle down to the four contenders who will then compete at party conference. Then there'll be another stage of MP voting to select the final two for the member's ballot.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,348
    FF43 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    FF43 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    SKS reported to have removed a painting of Margaret Thatcher from 10 Downing Street study.

    Later he realised it was a mirror.

    I saw that earlier. All I'll say is... it's up to him. BUT, given he doesn't own Downing St. and he doesn't own that painting, I hope it's being stored somewhere for safe keeping so when he's booted out on his arse in 2029, the next PM can restore it to it's rightful place....
    Of course it's being stored somewhere for safekeeping.
    I hope so.

    Mrs Thatcher won her elections with 43.9%, 42.4% and 42.2% of the vote and Keith "won" his election with... checks... 33.7% of the vote... He's not fit to lick her boots, honestly!
    Did Sir Maggie ever win over 400 seats like Sir Keir?
    That was purely a one off anomaly with REF splitting the Con vote.

    In any other election Lab would have lost with their 2024 vote share... As they will in 2029. 👌
    Michael Foot won 28% of the vote, way more than Conservative current standing despite his longest suicide note.
    Foot was challenging from four years in Opposition. Con was defending from 14 years in government. ;)
    Indeed. The Conservatives could go even further backwards from here, just as Labour did in 1984. The equivalent election you are referring to, 1979, saw Labour with a 37% vote share, rather more than the Tories' 24% in July
    Reeves' decision to axe the WFA is the masterstroke that will save the Tory party at the next election, and consequently preserve the duopoly that both main parties rely on.
  • theProletheProle Posts: 1,206
    Andy_JS said:

    The first Tory leadership ballot is next Wednesday. Hadn't realised it would be upon us so quickly.

    Really? It's felt like an eternity, where there is effectively no opposition. I can't quite understand why they couldn't just herd the parliamentary party into a conference centre and whittle it two to the last two in succession of votes in half a day, then get the member vote done in under a month. If they'd done that a week after the election they would have the new leader in place now.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,261
    Andy_JS said:

    The first Tory leadership ballot is next Wednesday. Hadn't realised it would be upon us so quickly.

    Bring on Kemi! :D
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,583
    edited August 29

    Andy_JS said:

    WTF is going on with Starmer and Labour?

    Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?

    What is this all adding up to?

    It's a mess.

    "No pain, no gain."
    "Starmerism" is now fleshing out: pain, no gain.
    He’s just warming up:

    https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/1829273419285745885

    NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes

    image
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,208
    edited August 29

    FF43 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    FF43 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    SKS reported to have removed a painting of Margaret Thatcher from 10 Downing Street study.

    Later he realised it was a mirror.

    I saw that earlier. All I'll say is... it's up to him. BUT, given he doesn't own Downing St. and he doesn't own that painting, I hope it's being stored somewhere for safe keeping so when he's booted out on his arse in 2029, the next PM can restore it to it's rightful place....
    Of course it's being stored somewhere for safekeeping.
    I hope so.

    Mrs Thatcher won her elections with 43.9%, 42.4% and 42.2% of the vote and Keith "won" his election with... checks... 33.7% of the vote... He's not fit to lick her boots, honestly!
    Did Sir Maggie ever win over 400 seats like Sir Keir?
    That was purely a one off anomaly with REF splitting the Con vote.

    In any other election Lab would have lost with their 2024 vote share... As they will in 2029. 👌
    Michael Foot won 28% of the vote, way more than Conservative current standing despite his longest suicide note.
    Foot was challenging from four years in Opposition. Con was defending from 14 years in government. ;)
    Indeed. The Conservatives could go even further backwards from here, just as Labour did in 1984. The equivalent election you are referring to, 1979, saw Labour with a 37% vote share, rather more than the Tories' 24% in July
    Reeves' decision to axe the WFA is the masterstroke that will save the Tory party at the next election, and consequently preserve the duopoly that both main parties rely on.
    You think so? The fiscal black hole isn't £22 billion. That's a convenient fiction for Labour who want a big number but not TOO big a number. Whoever won the election was going to raise taxes significantly. We all knew that. WFA means testing is a tinkering and not something most people feel very strongly about hence expressed support for the measure in polls.

    People turned away from the Conservatives because they could collapse in the street and not be picked up by an ambulance or be treated. If it's still the case in five years Labour will lose the election for that reason.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,060

    Andy_JS said:

    WTF is going on with Starmer and Labour?

    Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?

    What is this all adding up to?

    It's a mess.

    "No pain, no gain."
    "Starmerism" is now fleshing out: pain, no gain.
    He’s just warming up:

    https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/1829273419285745885

    NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes

    picture: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GWLisJFW8AANZKX?format=jpg&name=large
    Please, please, government, just stop doing things...
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,638
    edited August 29
    MaxPB said:

    dixiedean said:

    MaxPB said:

    dixiedean said:

    MaxPB said:

    Foxy said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Sean_F said:

    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Election 2029 - Lets Ban Starmer! 😂

    We laugh, but he has seemed to me to p*ss off a sizeable chunk of people in a very short space of time. I find him oddly charmless and rather prickly.

    He can probably afford to p*ss people off, if he delivers meaningful results. But the jury will be out on that one for some time.
    Remember, I've always said this will be a one term government, despite the landslide. ;)
    I said it first! Before the election.

    Got pilloried on here for it.
    Yes, Starmer’s/Labour’s ratings are heading one way.

    The issue is, who of Conservatives, Lib Dem’s, Reform benefits.
    Until the Tories have a leader in place it will be difficult for them to benefit and if it's not Cleverly or Tugendhat then I think they will struggle to win people over from Labour, though Jenrick and Kemi will find it easier to win Reform voters back.
    The problem is how do the Conservatives attract voters from one side without shipping roughly as many voters on the other side. Sunak never solved that, which is why he spent so much of the time looking like a rabbit caught in headlights.

    This has nothing to do with whether Starmer is a good PM or not, or whether any of the Conservative options would be better. It's just that the shape of the party system is much harder for the Conservatives to navigate than it has been in the past.
    It's quite simple. The Conservatives reduce and control immigration, whilst delivering economic competence, low tax and investing in infrastructure, industry and business in the north. Without corruption or bad behaviour.

    This stuff isn't that complicated.
    While that sounds simple, it also needs to be weighed against the current expenditure budget which has skyrocketed under the Tories since 2019. A proper Tory government needs to put a 10 year brake on current spending including stuff like the state pension and other welfare. We will never be in a position as a country to invest in infrastructure if the priority is for current expenditure.
    Scrap the Triple Lock. It's the only way.
    And universal credit, move back to JSA and ESA. It was a better system.
    No it wasn't.
    Under that system we had record labour force participation and almost 80% employment for working age people. Since UC has rolled out more people have become economically inactive by choice and live on benefits. The system has design flaws and needs to be scrapped.
    I would argue that has far more to do with. Being able to access pension pots at 55. And the pandemic. Which made people reassess.
    No, there's 1.5m more people on sickness benefits. There aren't 1.5m more sick people, it's just easier for them to get more money with UC than it was on the old system so they do it. There are millions of people who are dishonest and will take advantage any system that is easy to abuse. UC is extremely porous and those dishonest people have learned how to game the system.
    Steady there. It's more likely that those people have always been sick, and it's only now that it is being recognised in the UC assessment system.

    It's not an easy system to play, and the Scottish equivalent of DWP for devolved benefits sees much higher rates of uptake than equivalent benefits in England - that's simply because Social Security Scotland isn't as tough on people.

    Indeed, analysis of DWP benefits routinely finds much lower rates of uptake than you might expect, saving the Treasury billions each year. Consider pension credit.

    Even then, less than 50% of the increase in people on health-related benefits is a new phenomenon. Most of the increase is in line with long-trends in physical and mental health, and we are now converging with that trend rather than diverging.

    (Check out all the OBR analysis of this. It's excellent).
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,960
    edited August 29

    Andy_JS said:

    WTF is going on with Starmer and Labour?

    Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?

    What is this all adding up to?

    It's a mess.

    "No pain, no gain."
    "Starmerism" is now fleshing out: pain, no gain.
    He’s just warming up:

    https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/1829273419285745885

    NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes

    With what resources are they going to do this? Its not like GP surgeries and A&E are currently running at low levels of demand and absolutely no queues. Are they going to hire a load of new people to just do this?
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,368
    ...

    Andy_JS said:

    WTF is going on with Starmer and Labour?

    Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?

    What is this all adding up to?

    It's a mess.

    "No pain, no gain."
    "Starmerism" is now fleshing out: pain, no gain.
    He’s just warming up:

    https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/1829273419285745885

    NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes

    image
    Bastards. We want heart attacks and strokes! What do we want?
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,638

    Andy_JS said:

    WTF is going on with Starmer and Labour?

    Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?

    What is this all adding up to?

    It's a mess.

    "No pain, no gain."
    "Starmerism" is now fleshing out: pain, no gain.
    He’s just warming up:

    https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/1829273419285745885

    NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes

    image
    With health approaching 50% of public spending, this is the kind of thing we need to be doing. As a share, it's nearly doubled since 1997.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,960
    edited August 29
    I think most people overweight know they are overweight, and they know its bad for their health, they don't need somebody coming in and weighing them. The question is what they do about it. Are they going to start giving out ozempic shots like sweeties?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,583

    Andy_JS said:

    WTF is going on with Starmer and Labour?

    Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?

    What is this all adding up to?

    It's a mess.

    "No pain, no gain."
    "Starmerism" is now fleshing out: pain, no gain.
    He’s just warming up:

    https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/1829273419285745885

    NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes

    With what resources are they going to do this? Its not like GP surgeries and A&E are currently running at low levels of demand and absolutely no queues. Are they going to hire a load of people to just do this?
    It's going to save money, you see. People will become fitter and healthier and it will reduce the burden on the NHS.

    They need to start a TV adverstising campaign: "If we all did 20 minutes of exercise 5 times a week, it would reduce the burden on our NHS. Do your bit for our NHS today!"
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,208
    edited August 29
    Thatcher is properly scary in the portrait. I wouldn't want her in my study either.


  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,960

    Andy_JS said:

    WTF is going on with Starmer and Labour?

    Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?

    What is this all adding up to?

    It's a mess.

    "No pain, no gain."
    "Starmerism" is now fleshing out: pain, no gain.
    He’s just warming up:

    https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/1829273419285745885

    NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes

    With what resources are they going to do this? Its not like GP surgeries and A&E are currently running at low levels of demand and absolutely no queues. Are they going to hire a load of people to just do this?
    It's going to save money, you see. People will become fitter and healthier and it will reduce the burden on the NHS.

    They need to start a TV adverstising campaign: "If we all did 20 minutes of exercise 5 times a week, it would reduce the burden on our NHS. Do your bit for our NHS today!"
    We are going to get a load of sin taxes on unhealthy food and drink aren't we.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,638

    Andy_JS said:

    WTF is going on with Starmer and Labour?

    Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?

    What is this all adding up to?

    It's a mess.

    "No pain, no gain."
    "Starmerism" is now fleshing out: pain, no gain.
    He’s just warming up:

    https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/1829273419285745885

    NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes

    With what resources are they going to do this? Its not like GP surgeries and A&E are currently running at low levels of demand and absolutely no queues. Are they going to hire a load of people to just do this?
    It's going to save money, you see. People will become fitter and healthier and it will reduce the burden on the NHS.

    They need to start a TV adverstising campaign: "If we all did 20 minutes of exercise 5 times a week, it would reduce the burden on our NHS. Do your bit for our NHS today!"
    We are going to get a load of sin taxes on unhealthy food and drink aren't we.
    The Conservative's sugar tax was found to be highly successful, so carrying on that proud tradition of evidence-based policy making.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,060

    ...

    Andy_JS said:

    WTF is going on with Starmer and Labour?

    Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?

    What is this all adding up to?

    It's a mess.

    "No pain, no gain."
    "Starmerism" is now fleshing out: pain, no gain.
    He’s just warming up:

    https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/1829273419285745885

    NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes

    image
    Bastards. We want heart attacks and strokes! What do we want?
    The problems are
    • 1) Logistics. How many people will it cost to do this on a useful scale?
    • 2) Delay. The benefit will be felt later but the cost incurred now.
    • 3) Scope. Is this something the government should be doing at all?
    • 4) Priority. Is there something more important that the Govt should be doing?
    The priorities for the UK are (or should be IMHO)
    • 1) Repositioning the NHS to deal with the care of the approx 15 million pensioners who will die over the next 15 years
    • 2) Work out how to tax the rich in a world where the rich can move at a moment's notice
    • 3) Work out how to wean the economy off constant cheap labour imported from overseas
    • 4) Work out how to cope in a multipolar world full of bad countries and bad billionaires
    • 5) How does the nation state cope in a world where people's loyalties are to online abstractions and identity groups.
    They don't know what to do about these things
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,960
    edited August 29
    Eabhal said:

    Andy_JS said:

    WTF is going on with Starmer and Labour?

    Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?

    What is this all adding up to?

    It's a mess.

    "No pain, no gain."
    "Starmerism" is now fleshing out: pain, no gain.
    He’s just warming up:

    https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/1829273419285745885

    NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes

    With what resources are they going to do this? Its not like GP surgeries and A&E are currently running at low levels of demand and absolutely no queues. Are they going to hire a load of people to just do this?
    It's going to save money, you see. People will become fitter and healthier and it will reduce the burden on the NHS.

    They need to start a TV adverstising campaign: "If we all did 20 minutes of exercise 5 times a week, it would reduce the burden on our NHS. Do your bit for our NHS today!"
    We are going to get a load of sin taxes on unhealthy food and drink aren't we.
    The Conservative's sugar tax was found to be highly successful, so carrying on that proud tradition of evidence-based policy making.
    Actually doing some reading, it is unclear. It is difficult to tease out was it the actual tax or was it that food companies agreed to reduce to reduce sugar in child targeted food / drinks e,g,

    “For example, the announcement and implementation of the sugar tax occurred alongside a programme of voluntary sugar reduction in other products commonly consumed by children, including biscuits, breakfast cereals, yoghurts, and confectionery. The authors have importantly highlighted that there are limitations to the interpretation of their study, which only shows an association rather than a causal link.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/jan/26/uk-sugar-tax-prevents-5000-cases-of-obesity-in-year-6-girls-annually

    In my experience, there never seems to be any difference in prices in the shops between sugar free and full sugar soft drinks, so what is the motivating financial factor to choose one over the other? Both have just gone up in price loads. Bottle of 500ml Coke Cola / Coke Zero / Diet Coke is now often ~£2, where as it used to be ~£1. Weirdly energy drinks (which can't be good for you) now often are cheaper than the traditional soft drinks.
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 6,813

    Andy_JS said:

    WTF is going on with Starmer and Labour?

    Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?

    What is this all adding up to?

    It's a mess.

    "No pain, no gain."
    "Starmerism" is now fleshing out: pain, no gain.
    He’s just warming up:

    https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/1829273419285745885

    NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes

    image
    Make it stop, please…
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,583

    Andy_JS said:

    WTF is going on with Starmer and Labour?

    Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?

    What is this all adding up to?

    It's a mess.

    "No pain, no gain."
    "Starmerism" is now fleshing out: pain, no gain.
    He’s just warming up:

    https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/1829273419285745885

    NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes

    With what resources are they going to do this? Its not like GP surgeries and A&E are currently running at low levels of demand and absolutely no queues. Are they going to hire a load of people to just do this?
    It's going to save money, you see. People will become fitter and healthier and it will reduce the burden on the NHS.

    They need to start a TV adverstising campaign: "If we all did 20 minutes of exercise 5 times a week, it would reduce the burden on our NHS. Do your bit for our NHS today!"
    We are going to get a load of sin taxes on unhealthy food and drink aren't we.
    Perhaps the Keir Starmer as Mr Brittas joke was closer to the truth than we realised.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,960
    edited August 29

    Andy_JS said:

    WTF is going on with Starmer and Labour?

    Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?

    What is this all adding up to?

    It's a mess.

    "No pain, no gain."
    "Starmerism" is now fleshing out: pain, no gain.
    He’s just warming up:

    https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/1829273419285745885

    NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes

    With what resources are they going to do this? Its not like GP surgeries and A&E are currently running at low levels of demand and absolutely no queues. Are they going to hire a load of people to just do this?
    It's going to save money, you see. People will become fitter and healthier and it will reduce the burden on the NHS.

    They need to start a TV adverstising campaign: "If we all did 20 minutes of exercise 5 times a week, it would reduce the burden on our NHS. Do your bit for our NHS today!"
    We are going to get a load of sin taxes on unhealthy food and drink aren't we.
    Perhaps the Keir Starmer as Mr Brittas joke was closer to the truth than we realised.
    Certainly for a man who kept saying growth, growth, growth, everything will be focused on growth, appears to keep making choices that might have other benefits, but definitely won't be boosting short term growth.
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 6,813
    I will also just point out that all these clever Labour wheezes that are being rolled out should have been in a manifesto they won power under 7 weeks ago.

  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,638
    edited August 29

    Eabhal said:

    Andy_JS said:

    WTF is going on with Starmer and Labour?

    Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?

    What is this all adding up to?

    It's a mess.

    "No pain, no gain."
    "Starmerism" is now fleshing out: pain, no gain.
    He’s just warming up:

    https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/1829273419285745885

    NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes

    With what resources are they going to do this? Its not like GP surgeries and A&E are currently running at low levels of demand and absolutely no queues. Are they going to hire a load of people to just do this?
    It's going to save money, you see. People will become fitter and healthier and it will reduce the burden on the NHS.

    They need to start a TV adverstising campaign: "If we all did 20 minutes of exercise 5 times a week, it would reduce the burden on our NHS. Do your bit for our NHS today!"
    We are going to get a load of sin taxes on unhealthy food and drink aren't we.
    The Conservative's sugar tax was found to be highly successful, so carrying on that proud tradition of evidence-based policy making.
    Actually doing some reading, it is unclear. It is difficult to tease out was it the actual tax or was it that food companies agreed to reduce to reduce sugar in child targeted food / drinks e,g,

    “For example, the announcement and implementation of the sugar tax occurred alongside a programme of voluntary sugar reduction in other products commonly consumed by children, including biscuits, breakfast cereals, yoghurts, and confectionery. The authors have importantly highlighted that there are limitations to the interpretation of their study, which only shows an association rather than a causal link.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/jan/26/uk-sugar-tax-prevents-5000-cases-of-obesity-in-year-6-girls-annually

    In my experience, there never seems to be any difference in prices in the shops between sugar free and full sugar soft drinks, so what is the motivating financial factor to choose one over the other?
    This was what I was going on: https://www.lshtm.ac.uk/newsevents/news/2024/expert-comment-sugar-tax-soft-drinks-shown-reduce-sugar-intake

    On your second point - that's not really the point; the drink, sugary or not, is now more expensive which puts people off. They were really quite cheap before. I don't know the marketing rationale for equal pricing.

  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,960
    edited August 29
    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Andy_JS said:

    WTF is going on with Starmer and Labour?

    Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?

    What is this all adding up to?

    It's a mess.

    "No pain, no gain."
    "Starmerism" is now fleshing out: pain, no gain.
    He’s just warming up:

    https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/1829273419285745885

    NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes

    With what resources are they going to do this? Its not like GP surgeries and A&E are currently running at low levels of demand and absolutely no queues. Are they going to hire a load of people to just do this?
    It's going to save money, you see. People will become fitter and healthier and it will reduce the burden on the NHS.

    They need to start a TV adverstising campaign: "If we all did 20 minutes of exercise 5 times a week, it would reduce the burden on our NHS. Do your bit for our NHS today!"
    We are going to get a load of sin taxes on unhealthy food and drink aren't we.
    The Conservative's sugar tax was found to be highly successful, so carrying on that proud tradition of evidence-based policy making.
    Actually doing some reading, it is unclear. It is difficult to tease out was it the actual tax or was it that food companies agreed to reduce to reduce sugar in child targeted food / drinks e,g,

    “For example, the announcement and implementation of the sugar tax occurred alongside a programme of voluntary sugar reduction in other products commonly consumed by children, including biscuits, breakfast cereals, yoghurts, and confectionery. The authors have importantly highlighted that there are limitations to the interpretation of their study, which only shows an association rather than a causal link.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/jan/26/uk-sugar-tax-prevents-5000-cases-of-obesity-in-year-6-girls-annually

    In my experience, there never seems to be any difference in prices in the shops between sugar free and full sugar soft drinks, so what is the motivating financial factor to choose one over the other?
    This was what I was going on: https://www.lshtm.ac.uk/newsevents/news/2024/expert-comment-sugar-tax-soft-drinks-shown-reduce-sugar-intake

    On your second point - that's not really the point; the drink, sugary or not, is now more expensive which puts people off. They were really quite cheap before.

    "modelled the estimated impact" - we all know how good modelling is....

    I don't know if the price rise is the sugar tax or the fact that inflation bust the cost through £1 that it was held at for years due to inflation and we know (as CEOs have said this on earning calls) that they have used this period of very high inflation to maximise profits.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,638
    edited August 29

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Andy_JS said:

    WTF is going on with Starmer and Labour?

    Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?

    What is this all adding up to?

    It's a mess.

    "No pain, no gain."
    "Starmerism" is now fleshing out: pain, no gain.
    He’s just warming up:

    https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/1829273419285745885

    NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes

    With what resources are they going to do this? Its not like GP surgeries and A&E are currently running at low levels of demand and absolutely no queues. Are they going to hire a load of people to just do this?
    It's going to save money, you see. People will become fitter and healthier and it will reduce the burden on the NHS.

    They need to start a TV adverstising campaign: "If we all did 20 minutes of exercise 5 times a week, it would reduce the burden on our NHS. Do your bit for our NHS today!"
    We are going to get a load of sin taxes on unhealthy food and drink aren't we.
    The Conservative's sugar tax was found to be highly successful, so carrying on that proud tradition of evidence-based policy making.
    Actually doing some reading, it is unclear. It is difficult to tease out was it the actual tax or was it that food companies agreed to reduce to reduce sugar in child targeted food / drinks e,g,

    “For example, the announcement and implementation of the sugar tax occurred alongside a programme of voluntary sugar reduction in other products commonly consumed by children, including biscuits, breakfast cereals, yoghurts, and confectionery. The authors have importantly highlighted that there are limitations to the interpretation of their study, which only shows an association rather than a causal link.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/jan/26/uk-sugar-tax-prevents-5000-cases-of-obesity-in-year-6-girls-annually

    In my experience, there never seems to be any difference in prices in the shops between sugar free and full sugar soft drinks, so what is the motivating financial factor to choose one over the other?
    This was what I was going on: https://www.lshtm.ac.uk/newsevents/news/2024/expert-comment-sugar-tax-soft-drinks-shown-reduce-sugar-intake

    On your second point - that's not really the point; the drink, sugary or not, is now more expensive which puts people off. They were really quite cheap before.

    "modelled the estimated impact" - we all know how good modelling is....
    Experts, what do they know eh

    All they've done is obtain survey data and had a look at consumption before and after.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,960
    edited August 29
    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Andy_JS said:

    WTF is going on with Starmer and Labour?

    Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?

    What is this all adding up to?

    It's a mess.

    "No pain, no gain."
    "Starmerism" is now fleshing out: pain, no gain.
    He’s just warming up:

    https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/1829273419285745885

    NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes

    With what resources are they going to do this? Its not like GP surgeries and A&E are currently running at low levels of demand and absolutely no queues. Are they going to hire a load of people to just do this?
    It's going to save money, you see. People will become fitter and healthier and it will reduce the burden on the NHS.

    They need to start a TV adverstising campaign: "If we all did 20 minutes of exercise 5 times a week, it would reduce the burden on our NHS. Do your bit for our NHS today!"
    We are going to get a load of sin taxes on unhealthy food and drink aren't we.
    The Conservative's sugar tax was found to be highly successful, so carrying on that proud tradition of evidence-based policy making.
    Actually doing some reading, it is unclear. It is difficult to tease out was it the actual tax or was it that food companies agreed to reduce to reduce sugar in child targeted food / drinks e,g,

    “For example, the announcement and implementation of the sugar tax occurred alongside a programme of voluntary sugar reduction in other products commonly consumed by children, including biscuits, breakfast cereals, yoghurts, and confectionery. The authors have importantly highlighted that there are limitations to the interpretation of their study, which only shows an association rather than a causal link.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/jan/26/uk-sugar-tax-prevents-5000-cases-of-obesity-in-year-6-girls-annually

    In my experience, there never seems to be any difference in prices in the shops between sugar free and full sugar soft drinks, so what is the motivating financial factor to choose one over the other?
    This was what I was going on: https://www.lshtm.ac.uk/newsevents/news/2024/expert-comment-sugar-tax-soft-drinks-shown-reduce-sugar-intake

    On your second point - that's not really the point; the drink, sugary or not, is now more expensive which puts people off. They were really quite cheap before.

    "modelled the estimated impact" - we all know how good modelling is....
    Experts, what do they know eh
    When it comes to mathematical modelling, recent evidence has shown us, often fuck all. And survey data for food consumption is notoriously unreliable.

    And the actual real world studies have said, no idea, but all this reduction in kids getting teeth pulled and fact kids foods / drinks don't have anywhere much sugar in seems relevant.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,638

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Andy_JS said:

    WTF is going on with Starmer and Labour?

    Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?

    What is this all adding up to?

    It's a mess.

    "No pain, no gain."
    "Starmerism" is now fleshing out: pain, no gain.
    He’s just warming up:

    https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/1829273419285745885

    NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes

    With what resources are they going to do this? Its not like GP surgeries and A&E are currently running at low levels of demand and absolutely no queues. Are they going to hire a load of people to just do this?
    It's going to save money, you see. People will become fitter and healthier and it will reduce the burden on the NHS.

    They need to start a TV adverstising campaign: "If we all did 20 minutes of exercise 5 times a week, it would reduce the burden on our NHS. Do your bit for our NHS today!"
    We are going to get a load of sin taxes on unhealthy food and drink aren't we.
    The Conservative's sugar tax was found to be highly successful, so carrying on that proud tradition of evidence-based policy making.
    Actually doing some reading, it is unclear. It is difficult to tease out was it the actual tax or was it that food companies agreed to reduce to reduce sugar in child targeted food / drinks e,g,

    “For example, the announcement and implementation of the sugar tax occurred alongside a programme of voluntary sugar reduction in other products commonly consumed by children, including biscuits, breakfast cereals, yoghurts, and confectionery. The authors have importantly highlighted that there are limitations to the interpretation of their study, which only shows an association rather than a causal link.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/jan/26/uk-sugar-tax-prevents-5000-cases-of-obesity-in-year-6-girls-annually

    In my experience, there never seems to be any difference in prices in the shops between sugar free and full sugar soft drinks, so what is the motivating financial factor to choose one over the other?
    This was what I was going on: https://www.lshtm.ac.uk/newsevents/news/2024/expert-comment-sugar-tax-soft-drinks-shown-reduce-sugar-intake

    On your second point - that's not really the point; the drink, sugary or not, is now more expensive which puts people off. They were really quite cheap before.

    "modelled the estimated impact" - we all know how good modelling is....
    Experts, what do they know eh
    When it comes to mathematical modelling, recent evidence has shown us, often fuck all. And the actual real world studies have said, no idea, but all this reduction in kids getting teeth pulled and fact kids foods / drinks don't have anywhere much sugar in seems relevant.
    Feel free to pick out their errors: https://jech.bmj.com/content/78/9/578
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,960
    edited August 29
    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Andy_JS said:

    WTF is going on with Starmer and Labour?

    Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?

    What is this all adding up to?

    It's a mess.

    "No pain, no gain."
    "Starmerism" is now fleshing out: pain, no gain.
    He’s just warming up:

    https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/1829273419285745885

    NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes

    With what resources are they going to do this? Its not like GP surgeries and A&E are currently running at low levels of demand and absolutely no queues. Are they going to hire a load of people to just do this?
    It's going to save money, you see. People will become fitter and healthier and it will reduce the burden on the NHS.

    They need to start a TV adverstising campaign: "If we all did 20 minutes of exercise 5 times a week, it would reduce the burden on our NHS. Do your bit for our NHS today!"
    We are going to get a load of sin taxes on unhealthy food and drink aren't we.
    The Conservative's sugar tax was found to be highly successful, so carrying on that proud tradition of evidence-based policy making.
    Actually doing some reading, it is unclear. It is difficult to tease out was it the actual tax or was it that food companies agreed to reduce to reduce sugar in child targeted food / drinks e,g,

    “For example, the announcement and implementation of the sugar tax occurred alongside a programme of voluntary sugar reduction in other products commonly consumed by children, including biscuits, breakfast cereals, yoghurts, and confectionery. The authors have importantly highlighted that there are limitations to the interpretation of their study, which only shows an association rather than a causal link.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/jan/26/uk-sugar-tax-prevents-5000-cases-of-obesity-in-year-6-girls-annually

    In my experience, there never seems to be any difference in prices in the shops between sugar free and full sugar soft drinks, so what is the motivating financial factor to choose one over the other?
    This was what I was going on: https://www.lshtm.ac.uk/newsevents/news/2024/expert-comment-sugar-tax-soft-drinks-shown-reduce-sugar-intake

    On your second point - that's not really the point; the drink, sugary or not, is now more expensive which puts people off. They were really quite cheap before.

    "modelled the estimated impact" - we all know how good modelling is....
    Experts, what do they know eh
    When it comes to mathematical modelling, recent evidence has shown us, often fuck all. And the actual real world studies have said, no idea, but all this reduction in kids getting teeth pulled and fact kids foods / drinks don't have anywhere much sugar in seems relevant.
    Feel free to pick out their errors: https://jech.bmj.com/content/78/9/578
    "Participants are sampled throughout the year, such that in a typical month about 40 adults and 40 children participate"

    Absolutely f##k all sample size for starters.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,859

    FF43 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    FF43 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    SKS reported to have removed a painting of Margaret Thatcher from 10 Downing Street study.

    Later he realised it was a mirror.

    I saw that earlier. All I'll say is... it's up to him. BUT, given he doesn't own Downing St. and he doesn't own that painting, I hope it's being stored somewhere for safe keeping so when he's booted out on his arse in 2029, the next PM can restore it to it's rightful place....
    Of course it's being stored somewhere for safekeeping.
    I hope so.

    Mrs Thatcher won her elections with 43.9%, 42.4% and 42.2% of the vote and Keith "won" his election with... checks... 33.7% of the vote... He's not fit to lick her boots, honestly!
    Did Sir Maggie ever win over 400 seats like Sir Keir?
    That was purely a one off anomaly with REF splitting the Con vote.

    In any other election Lab would have lost with their 2024 vote share... As they will in 2029. 👌
    Michael Foot won 28% of the vote, way more than Conservative current standing despite his longest suicide note.
    Foot was challenging from four years in Opposition. Con was defending from 14 years in government. ;)
    Indeed. The Conservatives could go even further backwards from here, just as Labour did in 1984. The equivalent election you are referring to, 1979, saw Labour with a 37% vote share, rather more than the Tories' 24% in July
    Reeves' decision to axe the WFA is the masterstroke that will save the Tory party at the next election, and consequently preserve the duopoly that both main parties rely on.
    Nah. The pensioners mostly vote Tory already, the better off ones know they don't need it, and the cohort of four or five years of upcoming pensioners won't miss what they never had
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,638

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Andy_JS said:

    WTF is going on with Starmer and Labour?

    Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?

    What is this all adding up to?

    It's a mess.

    "No pain, no gain."
    "Starmerism" is now fleshing out: pain, no gain.
    He’s just warming up:

    https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/1829273419285745885

    NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes

    With what resources are they going to do this? Its not like GP surgeries and A&E are currently running at low levels of demand and absolutely no queues. Are they going to hire a load of people to just do this?
    It's going to save money, you see. People will become fitter and healthier and it will reduce the burden on the NHS.

    They need to start a TV adverstising campaign: "If we all did 20 minutes of exercise 5 times a week, it would reduce the burden on our NHS. Do your bit for our NHS today!"
    We are going to get a load of sin taxes on unhealthy food and drink aren't we.
    The Conservative's sugar tax was found to be highly successful, so carrying on that proud tradition of evidence-based policy making.
    Actually doing some reading, it is unclear. It is difficult to tease out was it the actual tax or was it that food companies agreed to reduce to reduce sugar in child targeted food / drinks e,g,

    “For example, the announcement and implementation of the sugar tax occurred alongside a programme of voluntary sugar reduction in other products commonly consumed by children, including biscuits, breakfast cereals, yoghurts, and confectionery. The authors have importantly highlighted that there are limitations to the interpretation of their study, which only shows an association rather than a causal link.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/jan/26/uk-sugar-tax-prevents-5000-cases-of-obesity-in-year-6-girls-annually

    In my experience, there never seems to be any difference in prices in the shops between sugar free and full sugar soft drinks, so what is the motivating financial factor to choose one over the other?
    This was what I was going on: https://www.lshtm.ac.uk/newsevents/news/2024/expert-comment-sugar-tax-soft-drinks-shown-reduce-sugar-intake

    On your second point - that's not really the point; the drink, sugary or not, is now more expensive which puts people off. They were really quite cheap before.

    "modelled the estimated impact" - we all know how good modelling is....
    Experts, what do they know eh
    When it comes to mathematical modelling, recent evidence has shown us, often fuck all. And the actual real world studies have said, no idea, but all this reduction in kids getting teeth pulled and fact kids foods / drinks don't have anywhere much sugar in seems relevant.
    Feel free to pick out their errors: https://jech.bmj.com/content/78/9/578
    "Participants are sampled throughout the year, such that in a typical month about 40 adults and 40 children participate"

    Absolutely f##k all sample size for starters.
    Well, you can't expect them to interview all 16,000 people in a single day.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,960
    edited August 29
    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Andy_JS said:

    WTF is going on with Starmer and Labour?

    Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?

    What is this all adding up to?

    It's a mess.

    "No pain, no gain."
    "Starmerism" is now fleshing out: pain, no gain.
    He’s just warming up:

    https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/1829273419285745885

    NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes

    With what resources are they going to do this? Its not like GP surgeries and A&E are currently running at low levels of demand and absolutely no queues. Are they going to hire a load of people to just do this?
    It's going to save money, you see. People will become fitter and healthier and it will reduce the burden on the NHS.

    They need to start a TV adverstising campaign: "If we all did 20 minutes of exercise 5 times a week, it would reduce the burden on our NHS. Do your bit for our NHS today!"
    We are going to get a load of sin taxes on unhealthy food and drink aren't we.
    The Conservative's sugar tax was found to be highly successful, so carrying on that proud tradition of evidence-based policy making.
    Actually doing some reading, it is unclear. It is difficult to tease out was it the actual tax or was it that food companies agreed to reduce to reduce sugar in child targeted food / drinks e,g,

    “For example, the announcement and implementation of the sugar tax occurred alongside a programme of voluntary sugar reduction in other products commonly consumed by children, including biscuits, breakfast cereals, yoghurts, and confectionery. The authors have importantly highlighted that there are limitations to the interpretation of their study, which only shows an association rather than a causal link.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/jan/26/uk-sugar-tax-prevents-5000-cases-of-obesity-in-year-6-girls-annually

    In my experience, there never seems to be any difference in prices in the shops between sugar free and full sugar soft drinks, so what is the motivating financial factor to choose one over the other?
    This was what I was going on: https://www.lshtm.ac.uk/newsevents/news/2024/expert-comment-sugar-tax-soft-drinks-shown-reduce-sugar-intake

    On your second point - that's not really the point; the drink, sugary or not, is now more expensive which puts people off. They were really quite cheap before.

    "modelled the estimated impact" - we all know how good modelling is....
    Experts, what do they know eh
    When it comes to mathematical modelling, recent evidence has shown us, often fuck all. And the actual real world studies have said, no idea, but all this reduction in kids getting teeth pulled and fact kids foods / drinks don't have anywhere much sugar in seems relevant.
    Feel free to pick out their errors: https://jech.bmj.com/content/78/9/578
    "Participants are sampled throughout the year, such that in a typical month about 40 adults and 40 children participate"

    Absolutely f##k all sample size for starters.
    Well, you can't expect them to interview all 16,000 people in a single day.
    They weren't doing any interviews themselves they were sampling from existing data from which there is only a total of 500 adults, 500 kids, but they were sampling 40. And as I say, food diaries / interviews are notoriously iffy. Plus the goalposts were shifting because of separate voluntary action by food producers.
  • theProletheProle Posts: 1,206
    Eabhal said:

    Andy_JS said:

    WTF is going on with Starmer and Labour?

    Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?

    What is this all adding up to?

    It's a mess.

    "No pain, no gain."
    "Starmerism" is now fleshing out: pain, no gain.
    He’s just warming up:

    https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/1829273419285745885

    NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes

    With what resources are they going to do this? Its not like GP surgeries and A&E are currently running at low levels of demand and absolutely no queues. Are they going to hire a load of people to just do this?
    It's going to save money, you see. People will become fitter and healthier and it will reduce the burden on the NHS.

    They need to start a TV adverstising campaign: "If we all did 20 minutes of exercise 5 times a week, it would reduce the burden on our NHS. Do your bit for our NHS today!"
    We are going to get a load of sin taxes on unhealthy food and drink aren't we.
    The Conservative's sugar tax was found to be highly successful, so carrying on that proud tradition of evidence-based policy making.
    Not really. All the drinks manufacturers* promptly took sugar out of their drinks, making them taste foul, and leaving the consumer with no virtually choice. As per usual punishing people like me (typical consumption - a couple of cans a month) for the benefit of people who eat at McDonald's twice a week.

    Most of the studies around the real world effects are rubbish too, if not as bad as the one from the Scottish Government which tried to claim that the fall in alcohol consumption which occurred around the time minimum pricing was announced was a result of the policy, then glossed over the fact that there was no measurable effect when the policy was actually implemented.

    *honourable exception - real Coke
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,060
    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Andy_JS said:

    WTF is going on with Starmer and Labour?

    Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?

    What is this all adding up to?

    It's a mess.

    "No pain, no gain."
    "Starmerism" is now fleshing out: pain, no gain.
    He’s just warming up:

    https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/1829273419285745885

    NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes

    With what resources are they going to do this? Its not like GP surgeries and A&E are currently running at low levels of demand and absolutely no queues. Are they going to hire a load of people to just do this?
    It's going to save money, you see. People will become fitter and healthier and it will reduce the burden on the NHS.

    They need to start a TV adverstising campaign: "If we all did 20 minutes of exercise 5 times a week, it would reduce the burden on our NHS. Do your bit for our NHS today!"
    We are going to get a load of sin taxes on unhealthy food and drink aren't we.
    The Conservative's sugar tax was found to be highly successful, so carrying on that proud tradition of evidence-based policy making.
    Actually doing some reading, it is unclear. It is difficult to tease out was it the actual tax or was it that food companies agreed to reduce to reduce sugar in child targeted food / drinks e,g,

    “For example, the announcement and implementation of the sugar tax occurred alongside a programme of voluntary sugar reduction in other products commonly consumed by children, including biscuits, breakfast cereals, yoghurts, and confectionery. The authors have importantly highlighted that there are limitations to the interpretation of their study, which only shows an association rather than a causal link.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/jan/26/uk-sugar-tax-prevents-5000-cases-of-obesity-in-year-6-girls-annually

    In my experience, there never seems to be any difference in prices in the shops between sugar free and full sugar soft drinks, so what is the motivating financial factor to choose one over the other?
    This was what I was going on: https://www.lshtm.ac.uk/newsevents/news/2024/expert-comment-sugar-tax-soft-drinks-shown-reduce-sugar-intake

    On your second point - that's not really the point; the drink, sugary or not, is now more expensive which puts people off. They were really quite cheap before.

    "modelled the estimated impact" - we all know how good modelling is....
    Experts, what do they know eh
    When it comes to mathematical modelling, recent evidence has shown us, often fuck all. And the actual real world studies have said, no idea, but all this reduction in kids getting teeth pulled and fact kids foods / drinks don't have anywhere much sugar in seems relevant.
    Feel free to pick out their errors: https://jech.bmj.com/content/78/9/578
    "Trends in free sugar consumption prior to the announcement of SDIL in April 2016 were used to estimate counterfactual scenarios of what would have happened if the SDIL had not been announced or come into force. "

    In short, not only did they compare before and after, they also compared the actual data with a simulated counterfactual. I have difficulty accepting this, as they are comparing facts with their reckons of what would have happened otherwise. It's not wrong, it's that I'm not sure it's meaningful. I dislike comparsions that require a multiverse.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,960
    edited August 29
    The upshot appears to be kids are now drinking more energy drinks than ever, so we have swapped sugary pop for excessive caffeine intake. In poorer places you can buy extra special gut rot stuff for < £1 at the Spar or Premier. Its like fags > vapes > Zyn, lung cancer to gum cancer.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,677
    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    WSJ is reporting that pilot error led to the loss of one of Ukraine's ten F-16 jets.

    That would be unfortunate.

    If it's the one reported yesterday, then the pilot died as well. RIP.

    Apparently a non-combat loss.
    Crap. War sucks, but the solution is more F-16s heading to Ukraine.

    How many Spitfire pilots did we lose in WWII to non-combat incidents?

    RIP.
    Non combat losses are almost always right up there with combat losses.
    It depends on the conflict, they certainly weren't in either of the Iraqs or in the Stan.

    In the SMO, blue-on-blue is far more common than non-combat losses. AFM did an article on UAF losses in the March edition... 45 Fulcrum/Flanker losses, 30 shot down, 15 destroyed on the ground, 23 crew KIA. Of the 30 shoot downs, 9 were blue-on-blue!

    The Ukrainian F-16 cadre were all first tour nuggets (they didn't retrain any Fulcrum/Flanker drivers) who are in a unit with no grey beards to guide them so there's going to be occasionally spectacular fuck ups. Shades of post WW2 GAF and F-104.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,859
    edited August 29

    The upshot appears to be kids are now drinking more energy drinks than ever, so we have swapped sugary pop for excessive caffeine intake. In poorer places you can buy extra special gut rot stuff for < £1 at the Spar or Premier. Its like fags > vapes > Zyn, lung cancer to gum cancer.

    There was a feature on NPR earlier about how US kids are drinking tons of energy drinks - so it's probably cultural rather than driven by taxation

    This post is supported by you, the reader, and by EZFix consultants, working through technology to prepare businesses and consumers for the modern age. Find out more at...
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,540
    "Suicide rates in England and Wales reach highest level since 1999
    Samaritans charity calls on government to invest in suicide prevention as it has with smoking reduction
    Robert Booth"

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/article/2024/aug/29/suicide-rates-in-england-and-wales-reach-highest-level-since-1999
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,368
    FF43 said:

    Thatcher is properly scary in the portrait. I wouldn't want her in my study either.


    The client media and their cheerleaders on PB have gone mad, quite mad.
  • Tim_in_RuislipTim_in_Ruislip Posts: 435
    edited August 29

    FF43 said:

    Thatcher is properly scary in the portrait. I wouldn't want her in my study either.


    The client media and their cheerleaders on PB have gone mad, quite mad.
    It's right wing displacement activity.

    The level of outward projection of anger onto Starmer/Labour is directly proportional to the intensity of the pitched battles being fought behind closed doors.

    They're desperately trying to keep the lid on the tory leadership pressure cooker.

    The party is deciding.
  • Tim_in_RuislipTim_in_Ruislip Posts: 435
    edited August 30

    FF43 said:

    Thatcher is properly scary in the portrait. I wouldn't want her in my study either.


    The client media and their cheerleaders on PB have gone mad, quite mad.
    It's right wing displacement activity.

    The level of outward projection of anger onto Starmer/Labour is directly proportional to the intensity of the pitched battles being fought behind closed doors.

    They're desperately trying to keep the lid on the tory leadership pressure cooker.

    The party is deciding.
    Anthony Seldon, Truss at 10;

    "She (Truss) was not the only one to claim the Thatcher mantle, in a Conservative Party that had lost its common sense of mission, Thatcher idolatry was almost the only shared belief."

    (Chapter 2, 34:35, audiobook)
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,559
    FF43 said:

    Thatcher is properly scary in the portrait. I wouldn't want her in my study either.


    One can only trust - or rather hope - that when Con MPs and their hench-people engage in Greco-Roman free-style wrestling with colleagues (or perhaps just themselves) in Westminster offices, broom closets, storage lockers, etc., etc., that they have the decency (and sobriety) to cover their obligatory portrait of Lady Thatcher. Possibly with a Union (ahem) Jack (ahem)?
  • Tim_in_RuislipTim_in_Ruislip Posts: 435
    edited August 30
    The logic of the purple bit interests me. Is it that their paper readership is now primarily pensioners? Or that they're explicitly targeting this edition to catch the eye of wealthy pensioners (more likely to have a vote in the tory leadership election?)

    I wanna know who it was who was furious and who the Mail contacted to confect outrage and brand the move "petty."

    I might embarrass myself in the newsagents, tomorrow.

    Or, maybe I won't.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,540

    Minority view I know, but I’ve been pleasantly surprised by SKS in government. Early days, of course, but his focus appears to be on reform and improved efficiency rather than courting popularity. Very different to Blair in that respect and in a good way as far as I’m concerned.

    It's good if they're prioritising balancing the books over being popular.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,031

    FF43 said:

    Thatcher is properly scary in the portrait. I wouldn't want her in my study either.


    The client media and their cheerleaders on PB have gone mad, quite mad.
    It's right wing displacement activity.

    The level of outward projection of anger onto Starmer/Labour is directly proportional to the intensity of the pitched battles being fought behind closed doors.

    They're desperately trying to keep the lid on the tory leadership pressure cooker.

    The party is deciding.
    Anthony Seldon, Truss at 10;

    "She (Truss) was not the only one to claim the Thatcher mantle, in a Conservative Party that had lost its common sense of mission, Thatcher idolatry was almost the only shared belief."

    (Chapter 2, 34:35, audiobook)
    It's risible.
    The truth is Thatcher wasn't particularly good for the UK - or indeed the Tory party.
    Without this absurd veneration, succeeding governments - and that includes Blair/Brown - might have done something about the more negative aspects of her legacy, rather than leaving them unaddressed for three decades.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,031
    Anyone remember the movie Screamers ?

    Once it is all AI controlled, we are going to enter into the very, very interesting times.
    https://x.com/kamilkazani/status/1829286484920123511
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,117
    HYUFD said:

    SKS reported to have removed a painting of Margaret Thatcher from 10 Downing Street study.

    Later he realised it was a mirror.

    I don't remember Thatcher hammering pensioners and whacking up taxes on those with assets and entrepreneurs with higher CGT? Starmer has also overseen the biggest jailing of nationalist far right activists in modern history
    Thatcher broke the link between state pensions and earnings in 1980 as one of the first things she did.

    Then it was on a double lock of the higher of inflation or average earnings increase.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,722
    Foxy said:

    I read that the weekend strikes by ASLEF on LNER have been called off, as the dispute has been settled.

    It's amazing how effective constructive talks (as well as sensible pay offers) are in settling industrial disputes. I think all the disputes inherited by Labour have now been settled, though I may be wrong.

    I don't think the GP work to rule is over.
    Will anyone notice any difference? You couldn't get to see your GP before the work to rule.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,847
    IanB2 said:

    The upshot appears to be kids are now drinking more energy drinks than ever, so we have swapped sugary pop for excessive caffeine intake. In poorer places you can buy extra special gut rot stuff for < £1 at the Spar or Premier. Its like fags > vapes > Zyn, lung cancer to gum cancer.

    There was a feature on NPR earlier about how US kids are drinking tons of energy drinks - so it's probably cultural rather than driven by taxation

    This post is supported by you, the reader, and by EZFix consultants, working through technology to prepare businesses and consumers for the modern age. Find out more at...
    Yes, it turns out the main rival to Coca-Cola is not Pepsi but Red Bull. The government must crack down on energy drinks to drive up Coke sales, and coke sales!
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,847
    Public speaking advice for politicians from Jimmy Carr (serious; Carr seems to be inventing a parallel career as self-help guru).
    https://www.youtube.com/shorts/UdZrdHYrji4

    And if you are too busy for a 36-second video, Carr's advice is to speak at 92 beats per minute.
  • TazTaz Posts: 14,361

    Workers to gain right to a four-day week

    Workers are to be given new rights to demand a four-day week in a law planned for this autumn.

    The Telegraph understands the system of “compressed hours”, which lets an employee work their contracted week’s hours in four days rather than five, will be included in the package of new rights for workers.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/08/29/workers-to-be-given-new-rights-to-demand-four-day-week/

    What’s the point ? Unless I’m missing something as it is Paywalled.

    Anyone can demand this now.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,031
    ‘Like throwing myself at a wall’: UK graduates struggle in ‘insane’ job market
    https://www.theguardian.com/money/article/2024/aug/29/uk-graduates-struggle-job-market
  • TazTaz Posts: 14,361
    Nigelb said:

    FF43 said:

    Thatcher is properly scary in the portrait. I wouldn't want her in my study either.


    The client media and their cheerleaders on PB have gone mad, quite mad.
    It's right wing displacement activity.

    The level of outward projection of anger onto Starmer/Labour is directly proportional to the intensity of the pitched battles being fought behind closed doors.

    They're desperately trying to keep the lid on the tory leadership pressure cooker.

    The party is deciding.
    Anthony Seldon, Truss at 10;

    "She (Truss) was not the only one to claim the Thatcher mantle, in a Conservative Party that had lost its common sense of mission, Thatcher idolatry was almost the only shared belief."

    (Chapter 2, 34:35, audiobook)
    It's risible.
    The truth is Thatcher wasn't particularly good for the UK - or indeed the Tory party.
    Without this absurd veneration, succeeding governments - and that includes Blair/Brown - might have done something about the more negative aspects of her legacy, rather than leaving them unaddressed for three decades.
    The de industrialisation of northern and midlands towns not being properly addressed being a major one.

    I think it no coincidence that in just over 70% of the areas that rioted these were in highly deprived areas.

    Same with the riots in Sheffield. Different people, different reason, same levels of deprivation.

    Sure bringing Nissan to Washington was a success, but there’s very little else to show.

    I hope SKS tries to address this. At the moment he seems to be continuity Sunak.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,960
    edited August 30
    Taz said:

    Workers to gain right to a four-day week

    Workers are to be given new rights to demand a four-day week in a law planned for this autumn.

    The Telegraph understands the system of “compressed hours”, which lets an employee work their contracted week’s hours in four days rather than five, will be included in the package of new rights for workers.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/08/29/workers-to-be-given-new-rights-to-demand-four-day-week/

    What’s the point ? Unless I’m missing something as it is Paywalled.

    Anyone can demand this now.
    They will pass legislation that will change the balance to be heavily in favour of the employee making it much harder for an employer to turn down a request for flexible working, including wishing to work their hours over 4 rather than 5 days. At the moment you can ask and the employer doesn't really need much of a reason to justify saying no.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,960

    Public speaking advice for politicians from Jimmy Carr (serious; Carr seems to be inventing a parallel career as self-help guru).
    https://www.youtube.com/shorts/UdZrdHYrji4

    And if you are too busy for a 36-second video, Carr's advice is to speak at 92 beats per minute.

    I find Jimmy Carr not being Jimmy Carr the comedian a lot more interesting than cracking jokes about what he has done to your mum.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,960
    edited August 30
    Nigelb said:

    ‘Like throwing myself at a wall’: UK graduates struggle in ‘insane’ job market
    https://www.theguardian.com/money/article/2024/aug/29/uk-graduates-struggle-job-market

    "Notably, graduates looking for work in the arts, design and humanities said they had found it impossible to find graduate work without connections."

    When businesses really start to embrace AI that impossible will turn to miracle in those fields.

    The reality too many graduates in certain subject areas / job sectors. Government should be much more proactive in nudging.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,401

    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Election 2029 - Lets Ban Starmer! 😂

    We laugh, but he has seemed to me to p*ss off a sizeable chunk of people in a very short space of time. I find him oddly charmless and rather prickly.

    He can probably afford to p*ss people off, if he delivers meaningful results. But the jury will be out on that one for some time.
    Remember, I've always said this will be a one term government, despite the landslide. ;)
    I said it first! Before the election.

    Got pilloried on here for it.
    I still think you're wrong, and Labour (if not Starmer) will see at least two terms.

    But Labour have not performed brilliantly in the first few weeks, and have not hit the ground running. Your scenario is much more likely than it was.

    Having said that; so far they're an order of magnitude better than their predecessors.
    No.

    No, they're not.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,401

    Workers to gain right to a four-day week

    Workers are to be given new rights to demand a four-day week in a law planned for this autumn.

    The Telegraph understands the system of “compressed hours”, which lets an employee work their contracted week’s hours in four days rather than five, will be included in the package of new rights for workers.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/08/29/workers-to-be-given-new-rights-to-demand-four-day-week/

    That can be even more stressful than a five-day week.

    The amount of work doesn't go down.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,960

    Workers to gain right to a four-day week

    Workers are to be given new rights to demand a four-day week in a law planned for this autumn.

    The Telegraph understands the system of “compressed hours”, which lets an employee work their contracted week’s hours in four days rather than five, will be included in the package of new rights for workers.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/08/29/workers-to-be-given-new-rights-to-demand-four-day-week/

    That can be even more stressful than a five-day week.

    The amount of work doesn't go down.
    Spare a thought for us doing seven-day a week roles, 16+ hrs a day....
This discussion has been closed.