Howdy, Stranger!

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

Grifters gonna grift – politicalbetting.com

124»

Comments

  • Well this means Everton get relegated.

    Leicester have won an appeal against a decision that could have led to a points deduction for an alleged breach of Premier League Profit and Sustainability rules.

    An independent panel found the Premier League did not have the jurisdiction to punish the club.

    The Premier League said it was "surprised and disappointed" by the panel's decision.

    Leicester said they have "simply sought to ensure that the rules are applied based on how they are actually written".

    The Foxes were charged by the Premier League for breaching spending rules. They appealed against this charge but an independent commission then ruled the top flight could take action.

    Leicester then appealed against that decision – based on the fact they were in the English Football League (EFL) at the time the charge was issued – and the outcome was announced on Tuesday.


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/ckg54xkqnzlo
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,701

    FPT: kamski - As far as I know, there is no debate about Christians being -- by far -- the most persecuted religion in the world. For examples: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_in_China#Restrictions_and_international_interest
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Doors

    In the Seattle area, there are a number of Russian Baptist churches. As I understand it, they were persecuted by the czars, by Stalin, and now by Putin. But they seem to be mostly left alone, here. (Though I wouldn't advise them to apply for a job with, for example, Google.)

    Last Friday, I encountered several Jehovah Witness women offering pamphlets -- in Russian. The Witnesses are regulars just outside the local library, but this is the first time I have seen the Russian versions of their literature.

    (I have known Witnesses all my life. To say the least, I don't share their theology, but the ones I have met have all been good people, willing to live in peace with others.)

    Hang on: How are we measuring persecution?
  • Well.

    BREAKING: Former Republican Senator from the critical battleground state of Pennsylvania, Pat Toomey, has announced he will not endorse or vote for Donald Trump. This is huge.

    https://x.com/harris_wins/status/1831039155373244849

    Former Republican Senator Pat Toomey says he won’t vote for Trump (or Harris) in November:

    “When you lose an election and you try to overturn the results so that you can stay in power, you lose me. You lose me at that point."


    https://x.com/RpsAgainstTrump/status/1830968824251981976
  • How about we reduce taxes on those working for a living all the time so they don't stop working, work less or move? Why should only those who are saving for a pension avoid that, shouldn't those saving for a deposit or paying a mortgage or any other cost in life be able to do that if that's their choice?
    We have tax free savings regimes for people who want to save for deposits.

    I have sympathy with CR’s point here - we need more people saving more money into private pensions, not less. There is a conversation around exactly where the bounds of generosity are set, perhaps, but pensions saving should not be discouraged generally.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,565
    Barnesian said:

    It is estimated to save £10b - half the black hole. I'm sure it will be in the Reeves' budget.
    It will just kill pension saving and end up costing the clowns money. They should tax benefits, free houses, cars , etc.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,803
    mercator said:

    It's Liz I feel sorry for. I had hoped that she would be remembered for the Truss Principle which states that it takes way less than 50 days to fail as a PM. Clearly Lessons Have Not Been Learned.
    That's quite a take!
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,967

    We have tax free savings regimes for people who want to save for deposits.

    I have sympathy with CR’s point here - we need more people saving more money into private pensions, not less. There is a conversation around exactly where the bounds of generosity are set, perhaps, but pensions saving should not be discouraged generally.
    I agree, but the incentives are truly plentiful anyway. Extra incentives aren't needed for the wealthy. Of course the nutty PA claw back at £100k causes a huge number of additional pension contributions, but if that anomaly was sorted it would disappear.
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 4,901
    edited September 2024

    Not really. If they draw their pension at the higher rate they will pay the higher rate. If they never draw a higher rate their pot will eventually expire or retire.

    If you try double-taxing people they'll simply stop saving into pensions or stop working causing us far bigger problems.
    Consider a pension pot of £800k, where most of the money was subject to 40% tax relief. Take the £200000 lump sum at 0% to pay off your mortgage, then buy an annuity at age 65. This is £600000 * 0.07 = £42000. Add £11000 state pension. Total income £53000.

    Almost no 40% tax paid on exit. Average tax paid on exit about 15%.

    Edit: plus tax free income from a lifetime of ISAs.
  • malcolmg said:

    It will just kill pension saving and end up costing the clowns money. They should tax benefits, free houses, cars , etc.
    Labour want to take from those who work/have worked for what they have got and instead give more money to those on benefits.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,565
    carnforth said:

    Consider a pension pot of £800k, where most of the money was subject to 40% tax relief. Take the £200000 lump sum at 0% to pay off your mortgage, then buy an annuity at age 65. This is £600000 * 0.07 = £42000. Add £11000 state pension. Total income £53000.

    Almost no 40% tax paid on exit. Average tax paid on exit about 15%.

    Edit: plus tax free income from a lifetime of ISAs.
    How do you survive on 53K though
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,967
    rcs1000 said:

    Sorry, but if your marginal rate is at 45% because of the removal of the tax free allowance, then it is absolutely identical to simply lowering the point at which the higher rate is charged.

    The effect is identical. It's just more complicated.
    I agree, but is it more complicated? People also aren't happy with the PA and higher threshold converging, although it is the same thing. Matter of opinion I suppose. Why do you think the Govt didn't do that in the first place?
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,926

    Is there a market where I can bet on a second set of gig dates for Oasis being announced.

    It would be... unusual to leave so much evident money on the table.
    This Oasis thing; I have no interest, my next ticket, not tricky to obtain is, for the Liszt B Flat piano sonata and I would pay good money to avoid hearing them; but there is an oddity.

    Oasis and their agents could obviously charge £Nzillion more than they have for tickets given the instant resale price. Clearly they have kept prices way below what they could get if they went for the wealthiest/most enthusiastic people, with a polite queue personal or digital and everyone who could afford easily getting a ticket.

    Good for them not doing so. But the oddity is that having based the price way below what the market could command they then renounce all that goodwill by acting like Ryanair and upping the price to non-wealthy people 10 hours into a million strong queue. Bad PR.

    Could I suggest that if you really want hard core fans, not rich, to get decently priced tickets the old fashioned way is best: Box office and queue in the rain at one venue in Manchester in November, personal tickets only, 2 max per person.
  • We have tax free savings regimes for people who want to save for deposits.

    I have sympathy with CR’s point here - we need more people saving more money into private pensions, not less. There is a conversation around exactly where the bounds of generosity are set, perhaps, but pensions saving should not be discouraged generally.
    We don't have tax free incomes for people who want to save for deposits.

    There's a world of difference between saying we'll waive taxes on interest on savings, versus saying we'll waive taxes so you can save more.

    Yes pension saving should not be discouraged, but nor should work either. Taxes should be low and consistent.
  • https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/article/2024/sep/03/i-am-evil-i-did-this-lucy-letbys-so-called-confessions-were-written-on-advice-of-counsellors

    Absolute and utter bombshell news. Except to people like me who were always saying that self accusations by the depressed are not to be taken at face value.
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 4,901
    edited September 2024

    We don't have tax free incomes for people who want to save for deposits.
    If you're a basic rate taxpayer, the LISA is an approximation.
  • malcolmg said:

    How do you survive on 53K though
    I nip to the loo when it's my turn to buy a round of 80/-. Blame it on my weak bladder.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,442
    .
    TimS said:

    I have a little tag in the car that pings when I go through a French toll gate. Something similar built into cars in South Africa for tolls too. Works nicely.
    Similarly in S Korea.
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hi-pass
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,803
    algarkirk said:

    This Oasis thing; I have no interest, my next ticket, not tricky to obtain is, for the Liszt B Flat piano sonata and I would pay good money to avoid hearing them; but there is an oddity.

    Oasis and their agents could obviously charge £Nzillion more than they have for tickets given the instant resale price. Clearly they have kept prices way below what they could get if they went for the wealthiest/most enthusiastic people, with a polite queue personal or digital and everyone who could afford easily getting a ticket.

    Good for them not doing so. But the oddity is that having based the price way below what the market could command they then renounce all that goodwill by acting like Ryanair and upping the price to non-wealthy people 10 hours into a million strong queue. Bad PR.

    Could I suggest that if you really want hard core fans, not rich, to get decently priced tickets the old fashioned way is best: Box office and queue in the rain at one venue in Manchester in November, personal tickets only, 2 max per person.
    I'll be seeing them for fifty quid in 2027.
  • carnforth said:

    If you're a basic rate taxpayer, the LISA is an approximation.
    And a disaster according to the torygraph

    https://archive.ph/Z1XLC
  • mercator said:

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/article/2024/sep/03/i-am-evil-i-did-this-lucy-letbys-so-called-confessions-were-written-on-advice-of-counsellors

    Absolute and utter bombshell news. Except to people like me who were always saying that self accusations by the depressed are not to be taken at face value.

    Not it's not. She said herself at the trial that they were just jottings of random thoughts. The jury clearly didn't believe her or didn't think it made any difference if they did.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,442
    edited September 2024
    algarkirk said:

    This Oasis thing; I have no interest, my next ticket, not tricky to obtain is, for the Liszt B Flat piano sonata and I would pay good money to avoid hearing them; but there is an oddity.

    Oasis and their agents could obviously charge £Nzillion more than they have for tickets given the instant resale price. Clearly they have kept prices way below what they could get if they went for the wealthiest/most enthusiastic people, with a polite queue personal or digital and everyone who could afford easily getting a ticket.

    Good for them not doing so. But the oddity is that having based the price way below what the market could command they then renounce all that goodwill by acting like Ryanair and upping the price to non-wealthy people 10 hours into a million strong queue. Bad PR.

    Could I suggest that if you really want hard core fans, not rich, to get decently priced tickets the old fashioned way is best: Box office and queue in the rain at one venue in Manchester in November, personal tickets only, 2 max per person.
    Probably because they're thick ?

    If they'd started the other way round, selling the best seats in the house at (say) £1500, and gradually brought prices down as demand dried up, they'd maximise their take, and avoid the overwhelmed system.

    With you on the Lizst.
  • carnforth said:

    If you're a basic rate taxpayer, the LISA is an approximation.
    An approximation that is strictly capped, has strict rules around it, and only applies at the basic rate and not other rates.

    Quite different to an uncapped amount of savings with tax rebates at your full rate of tax and not basic rate only.

    I don't see any reason why saving for a pension and saving for a deposit should have different tax implications. Both should be equally encouraged.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,442

    Well.

    BREAKING: Former Republican Senator from the critical battleground state of Pennsylvania, Pat Toomey, has announced he will not endorse or vote for Donald Trump. This is huge.

    https://x.com/harris_wins/status/1831039155373244849

    Former Republican Senator Pat Toomey says he won’t vote for Trump (or Harris) in November:

    “When you lose an election and you try to overturn the results so that you can stay in power, you lose me. You lose me at that point."


    https://x.com/RpsAgainstTrump/status/1830968824251981976

    Well.

    BREAKING: Former Republican Senator from the critical battleground state of Pennsylvania, Pat Toomey, has announced he will not endorse or vote for Donald Trump. This is huge.

    https://x.com/harris_wins/status/1831039155373244849

    Former Republican Senator Pat Toomey says he won’t vote for Trump (or Harris) in November:

    “When you lose an election and you try to overturn the results so that you can stay in power, you lose me. You lose me at that point."


    https://x.com/RpsAgainstTrump/status/1830968824251981976

    Bit of a copout.
  • kjh said:

    I agree, but the incentives are truly plentiful anyway. Extra incentives aren't needed for the wealthy. Of course the nutty PA claw back at £100k causes a huge number of additional pension contributions, but if that anomaly was sorted it would disappear.
    Yes. If you fixed the 100k cliff edge you’d fix a lot of problems in the system.
  • Not it's not. She said herself at the trial that they were just jottings of random thoughts. The jury clearly didn't believe her or didn't think it made any difference if they did.
    "Jottings of random thoughts" is different from "my counsellors told me to write them down". Surely that is easy to understand?

    Juries are composed of people of below average intelligence (this is trivially easy to prove, but I will leave it to you to work out).
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,926
    mercator said:

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/article/2024/sep/03/i-am-evil-i-did-this-lucy-letbys-so-called-confessions-were-written-on-advice-of-counsellors

    Absolute and utter bombshell news. Except to people like me who were always saying that self accusations by the depressed are not to be taken at face value.

    Guardian still on this. It's going to run and run. It presents as revelation stuff about the origin of the Letby written material which, assuming the story is accurate, was in the personal knowledge of the defendant and all of which they were fully entitled to explain in their evidence.

    Material which could be self incriminating is put in evidence and is exactly what it is. The prosecution is not going to throw it away, it is highly relevant, and the defence is absolutely entitled to give their account of what it means, why it exists and why it isn't a confession.

    This of course was just one of a multiple set of threads of evidence. The grounds of appeal made no mention of how the judge or prosecution had handled the written material, there was no complaint.

    Nothing to see here.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,783
    edited September 2024
    Nigelb said:

    Probably because they're thick ?

    If they'd started the other way round, selling the best seats in the house at (say) £1500, and gradually brought prices down as demand dried up, they'd maximise their take, and avoid the overwhelmed system.

    With you on the Lizst.
    It's like the difference between a standard auction with price starting from below , and a Dutch auction which starts high. Economists know that the Dutch auction extracts all the consumer surplus - as your comment implies.

    eta - this is not socially optimal. The second highest price (which is not realisable in this scheme) is that.
  • NEW THREAD

  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,716
    edited September 2024
    mercator said:

    "Jottings of random thoughts" is different from "my counsellors told me to write them down". Surely that is easy to understand?

    Juries are composed of people of below average intelligence (this is trivially easy to prove, but I will leave it to you to work out).
    So her counsellor told her: 'I know you're feeling depressed, Lucy, because everyone thinks you're a serial killer. Go home, get a piece of paper and write down that you actually did it. You'll feel so much better after that.'?
  • TimS said:

    Apparently the Tory leadership hopefuls have just been in speaking to the “common sense group” of MPs.

    Was he/she receptive?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,882
    Nigelb said:

    Bit of a copout.
    I think if I'd had to put up with that exceptionally rude fellow interviewee, I'd have finished by saying, 'You know what? You're a bigger bellend than Trump so I've decided to vote for him to annoy you.'

    Worse than some of those twats on Fox News.
  • algarkirk said:

    Guardian still on this. It's going to run and run. It presents as revelation stuff about the origin of the Letby written material which, assuming the story is accurate, was in the personal knowledge of the defendant and all of which they were fully entitled to explain in their evidence.

    Material which could be self incriminating is put in evidence and is exactly what it is. The prosecution is not going to throw it away, it is highly relevant, and the defence is absolutely entitled to give their account of what it means, why it exists and why it isn't a confession.

    This of course was just one of a multiple set of threads of evidence. The grounds of appeal made no mention of how the judge or prosecution had handled the written material, there was no complaint.

    Nothing to see here.
    I don't get the hatred for this woman. As for the "it was all gone over in court" stuff, the legal system works to a closed set of sometimes arbitrary rules which I probably know more about than you do - not a boast, a sober reflection of the fact that I qualified as a solicitor in 1987. Just for instance, her defence team were obliged to conform exactly to her instructions (unless they thought she was effectively insane). We have no idea what those instructions were. Another thing I hope for your sake I know more about than you do, is very severe depression. You can end up taking some pretty odd positions and thinking some pretty odd things which turn out not to be true.

    Either engage with the underlying facts or don't, but just saying therjurysedinnit makes you look like the Milgram experiment. Or like the Life of Brian: OK but apart from {identifiable cases number 1 ... 9999 and that's before we get on to the post office} when has there ever been a miscarriage of justice? NEVER! Oh and Evans and the Birmingham six and ...
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 10,089

    Yes. If you fixed the 100k cliff edge you’d fix a lot of problems in the system.
    I would suggest fixing the cliff edge coming welcome would benefit 100x more people and bring more into full time work than fixing a cliffedge for the 1%
  • carnforth said:

    £5.01 buys you three pints of Greene King IPA in my local Wetherspoons. Alternatively, half a litre of wine from a tap(!) for £5.90. Not ultra-chic though.
    Does 3 pints of Greene King IPA get you pissed or just unpleasantly hungover?
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 4,901
    Dopermean said:

    Does 3 pints of Greene King IPA get you pissed or just unpleasantly hungover?
    Neither, in my case. But it's not a pleasant beer, even when served well.

    Ordinary ales in my branch are £2.74 a pint, regardless of strength. A couple of 7% stouts for £5.48 might be the better bet for the drinker on a budget.
  • tlg86 said:

    Bad news for Everton (and others):

    https://www.premierleague.com/news/4106719

    The Premier League is surprised and disappointed by the independent Appeal Board’s decision to uphold an appeal lodged by Leicester City FC regarding the League’s jurisdiction over the club’s alleged breach of its Profitability and Sustainability Rules (PSRs) when the club was a member of the Premier League.

    Could the Premier League not close this loophole by mandating the accounting period for clubs?

    Though given the manner in which PSR is being applied by PL and circumnavigated by the richer clubs, it seems to be increasingly pointless and unfair on the smaller/less successful clubs.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 20,013
    Leon said:

    If you voted Brexit to bring down immigration and control the borders, as millions did, you are allowed to be severely dismayed that instead the rancid Tories TRIPLED immigration and showed themselves incapable of protecting our most important border of all: the Channel

    These people are angry and I do not blame them
    How simply awful for you. There must be a chance however remote that you'll bump into one of these people.
This discussion has been closed.