Interesting piece by Max, I'd like to see real food cooking taught in all schools, national cooking/cookery campaigns, and more visits to farmers/farms at all levels of education.
One thing: I get leaflets through the door every other week from Dominos and PapaJohns, both of which I hate. Yes, they can post what they like - and no doubt this is part of an aggressive marketing campaign - but things like this combined with JustEat and Deliveroo make it very very easy to eat shit.
How do we make it easier to eat well?
And this is where the nannying definitely comes in, it might be dispiriting for people like us to contemplate advertising and leafleting bans for unhealthy foods and takeaways but the situation is only getting worse.
On healthy eating, it is already easy to do so, people just don't know how. I actually think we don't need to tackle cooking at school age, we need to do it for parents in their 30s and 40s who never learned. Make it part of eligibility for benefits to attend mandatory cooking classes, give people basic cooking equipment when they sign on and, frankly, be more intrusive about their spending. As I said any solution on healthy eating is going to feel like and be nannying, I think we need to get on board with this or there is no end to the tax rises, the £20bn salvo Labour are planning right now will look like child's play when we win in 2029 if action isn't taken.
The youngest person taught to cook at school will be 53 years old.
Before then CSEs had proper cookery lessons afterwards (as a money saving exercise) Cookery was replaced with home economics as GCSEs were introduced and actually cooking was removed from the exam..
On topic, everybody dies from something. If we increase survival rates for diabetes and lung cancer, the survivors may well die of something even more expensive a few years later, and will probably need lots of expensive end of life care in the meantime.
Looking at it from the demand side is probably wrong. We as a society should stop pretending that health care is unlimited and freely available, work out how much we can afford to spend as a share of national income (say the OECD average excluding the US) then work out how best to allocate it to get the most cost-effective years of healthy life remaining. And anything more than that, people (mostly the old) should be required to fund themselves, at least for non-palliative care.
We spend too much. And the State needs to stop doing some things, and be more efficient with others.
We raise £1 trillion in taxes a year. My view is that is plenty.
The funny thing is that my views on National Insurance are well known and that my preference would be to abolish it entirely and increase income and capital gains tax but there will always be winners and losers in regard to tax policy but it’s the constant bleating about everything Labour are trying to do to stabilise the country’s finances which annoys me.
I have never understood why NI hasn’t at least been made progressive. Continue to charge me full rate over £50k (but drop the full rate) or like you say, merge with IC and rationalise rates. Employee’s NI is just silly.
Employees NI is paid weekly/monthly not annually.
Would you want to see 8% of your annual bonus disappearing because they paid it in a single week - at the moment Ni on your bonus is probably taken at 2%...
That’s why the best solution is a merger with IC and an honest decision about real tax rates. Those of us on decent salaries (not even necessarily “good” salaries) mostly accept a higher rate on the higher amounts; and frankly we pay most the tax paid in this country. But there is such a bonkers system of assorted allowances and let-offs that can’t be efficient. See also the self employed and their “voluntary” contributions, which they mostly pay out of fear and not quite understanding what happens if they don’t.
Were I chancellor - the immediate change I would be making from April 6th is
Basic rate income tax up to 24% Employee NI down to 5%
With an explicit statement that Income tax would be rising to 25% over the next few years while Employee NI would be reduced to 4%...
I would also reintroduce the WFA because that would reduce the impact on pensioners so only those receiving more than £8,000 in private pensions were worse off..
So you'd reintroduce WFP for all pensioners up to an income of £19,500?
The problem with that is it does not take into account 70% of pensioners have no housing costs. In comparison to a single parent, renting a flat with two teenage children, that income is equivalent to a salary of £77,000, or more than double the median salary.
Yes - because the worst hit people losing the WFP are those with an income between £13-15,000 but there is no easy way to identify them so the fix is not bother identifying them and accepting the loss.
A pensioner on £13,000 still has an income worth £58,000, compared with the scenario I describe above.
How does someone on £13000 have an income worth £58,000 - I'm either thick or you are making assumptions that should be easy to refute..
My scenario above included two teenage children and a single parent living in rented accomodation, with a single pensioner living in a home they own outright. The standard tool for comparing household incomes is equivlisation; in this case an adult is worth 1 and a teenage child is worth 0.5.
13,000 = 12,915 after tax. Equivalised income = 12,915 *2 = 25,830 Rental costs = 1,500 PCM (I'm just plucking a number here) Gross pay required = 43,830 Net salary = 57,366
Even with no mortgage 13 grand is incredibly tight to live on. To live a confortable basic life you need more like 18 grand.
PB tories hate every single tax increase but yet their lads left public finances in dire straits. Fuck off, you broke it. The money has to come from somewhere and if business owners have to take some money from profits to pay NI then so what. Deal with it.
You won't be so cheery when it puts you on the dole sunshine, it will be workers paying for it if indeed it makes money as employers are likely to just draw a line at break even and dump some workers. Certainly at bottom end , will kill wage rises.
They won't dump (that requires effort). Instead they simply won't replace permanent workers as they resign and increase the use of temporary agency workers as and when needed.
PB tories hate every single tax increase but yet their lads left public finances in dire straits. Fuck off, you broke it. The money has to come from somewhere and if business owners have to take some money from profits to pay NI then so what. Deal with it.
Some money from profits to pay NI. Haha. Hahahaaaahaaaaaa. Hahahahahaaaahaaaaaa.
One of the reasons payroll taxes are so stupid is that they happen profit or no profit. I would rather they increased Corporation tax - it's a stupid tax too, but at least you have to make a notional profit(*) before they steal it.
If you are running a business in a start-up or expansion phase, you generally haven't got a profit - but payroll taxes still have to be paid - and the greater they are, the slower your expansion, and the more you have to borrow whilst you try and make a go of things. This is a short-term bad effect from changing rates - in the longer term, it will just mean reduced pay for employees, as it's well known that in a steady state without rule changes 100% of the incidence of payroll taxes falls on employees.
*one of the real problems for small businesses, particularly those which are expanding, is that it's possible to make a paper profit without making a cash profit, then get clobbered for a corp tax bill without having any actual additional cash in the business with which to pay said bill.
I am sorry but this just is wrong. Yes on a micro level you might not increase employee pay because of increased payroll costs but on a macro level if the market rate for your employees increases you have a choice to pay the market rate or lose employees/choice of employees. This is just supply and demand in a market economy.
On topic, everybody dies from something. If we increase survival rates for diabetes and lung cancer, the survivors may well die of something even more expensive a few years later, and will probably need lots of expensive end of life care in the meantime.
Looking at it from the demand side is probably wrong. We as a society should stop pretending that health care is unlimited and freely available, work out how much we can afford to spend as a share of national income (say the OECD average excluding the US) then work out how best to allocate it to get the most cost-effective years of healthy life remaining. And anything more than that, people (mostly the old) should be required to fund themselves, at least for non-palliative care.
We spend too much. And the State needs to stop doing some things, and be more efficient with others.
We raise £1 trillion in taxes a year. My view is that is plenty.
The Conservatives have just had fourteen years and a manifesto to identify things it should stop doing, or do more efficiently.
What specifics do you think they left on the table?
The funny thing is that my views on National Insurance are well known and that my preference would be to abolish it entirely and increase income and capital gains tax but there will always be winners and losers in regard to tax policy but it’s the constant bleating about everything Labour are trying to do to stabilise the country’s finances which annoys me.
I have never understood why NI hasn’t at least been made progressive. Continue to charge me full rate over £50k (but drop the full rate) or like you say, merge with IC and rationalise rates. Employee’s NI is just silly.
Employees NI is paid weekly/monthly not annually.
Would you want to see 8% of your annual bonus disappearing because they paid it in a single week - at the moment Ni on your bonus is probably taken at 2%...
That’s why the best solution is a merger with IC and an honest decision about real tax rates. Those of us on decent salaries (not even necessarily “good” salaries) mostly accept a higher rate on the higher amounts; and frankly we pay most the tax paid in this country. But there is such a bonkers system of assorted allowances and let-offs that can’t be efficient. See also the self employed and their “voluntary” contributions, which they mostly pay out of fear and not quite understanding what happens if they don’t.
Were I chancellor - the immediate change I would be making from April 6th is
Basic rate income tax up to 24% Employee NI down to 5%
With an explicit statement that Income tax would be rising to 25% over the next few years while Employee NI would be reduced to 4%...
I would also reintroduce the WFA because that would reduce the impact on pensioners so only those receiving more than £8,000 in private pensions were worse off..
So you'd reintroduce WFP for all pensioners up to an income of £19,500?
The problem with that is it does not take into account 70% of pensioners have no housing costs. In comparison to a single parent, renting a flat with two teenage children, that income is equivalent to a salary of £77,000, or more than double the median salary.
Yes - because the worst hit people losing the WFP are those with an income between £13-15,000 but there is no easy way to identify them so the fix is not bother identifying them and accepting the loss.
A pensioner on £13,000 still has an income worth £58,000, compared with the scenario I describe above.
How does someone on £13000 have an income worth £58,000 - I'm either thick or you are making assumptions that should be easy to refute..
My scenario above included two teenage children and a single parent living in rented accomodation, with a single pensioner living in a home they own outright. The standard tool for comparing household incomes is equivlisation; in this case an adult is worth 1 and a teenage child is worth 0.5.
13,000 = 12,915 after tax. Equivalised income = 12,915 *2 = 25,830 Rental costs = 1,500 PCM (I'm just plucking a number here) Gross pay required = 43,830 Net salary = 57,366
Hang on you've also made the assumption the pensioner still has their spouse and that both of them receive separate state pensions.
That isn't the case - you really have plucked figures from no-where..
PB tories hate every single tax increase but yet their lads left public finances in dire straits. Fuck off, you broke it. The money has to come from somewhere and if business owners have to take some money from profits to pay NI then so what. Deal with it.
There are Santa's little helpers, like you and Foxy too, but you don't have quite the same histrionics that they do, even though you both get off on Wokery, Self-Flagellation and Reparations.
And you refuse to acknowledge the dreadful national finances and run down armed forces, criminal justice system, universities and health service that Labour inherited from the Tories.
That unwillingness to understand why the electorate delivered the most crushing defeat for the Tories since the 19th century is why the Tories are far from being electable again. They believe that bugging turn will deliver them back to power without any analysis of how comprehensively failed over recent parliaments.
I think Labour will lose seats next election, but the Tories will be way behind them in numbers of seats.
On Employers NI - it's the politically easiest way to increase taxes by a substantial amount. My naive interpretation of the promise not to increase income tax, NI or VAT had precluded it as an option, but I don't think the government are going to suffer politically for dodging that with the small print over "working people".
It is, obviously, a little bit disheartening to see a government - once again - do what is politically expedient, rather than something more ideal for the economy, but they are politicians, and they will want to be re-elected. There are worse things they could have chosen to do.
Relative to the rest of Europe our employer taxes are lower.
However it creates a whole set of problems elsewhere as it will mean low paid workers who aren't on the minimum wage are unlikely to see a pay increase next year as the first 2% has just been sent to the Government... Add on any increase to the minimum wage and the first 3% for those above the minimum wage is probably going to the Government or those who are on the minimum wage..
To be frank - I'm expecting to be wholly disappointed with this budget - there are a whole set of things that can only be implemented early on (changes to Council tax, changes to VAT registration levels) and I doubt any of the straws have been grasped to kick off the work required).
I think it's pretty clear they hadn't done any thinking of the practicalities of their programme or how they'd deliver on it in opposition.
They just said what they needed to win the election, had a bit of break over the Summer - during which time they made some inept political moves - and then had an oh shit moment in September when they realised how hard it would be when their propaganda met reality.
You've got to bear in mind Starmer is a Tedious Tactical Triangulator and, now Sunak has gone, he has no-one to triangulate against and is exposed.
This is stressing him out. Which is why, sadly, he looks so harrowed in those photos.
The funny thing is that my views on National Insurance are well known and that my preference would be to abolish it entirely and increase income and capital gains tax but there will always be winners and losers in regard to tax policy but it’s the constant bleating about everything Labour are trying to do to stabilise the country’s finances which annoys me.
I have never understood why NI hasn’t at least been made progressive. Continue to charge me full rate over £50k (but drop the full rate) or like you say, merge with IC and rationalise rates. Employee’s NI is just silly.
Employees NI is paid weekly/monthly not annually.
Would you want to see 8% of your annual bonus disappearing because they paid it in a single week - at the moment Ni on your bonus is probably taken at 2%...
That’s why the best solution is a merger with IC and an honest decision about real tax rates. Those of us on decent salaries (not even necessarily “good” salaries) mostly accept a higher rate on the higher amounts; and frankly we pay most the tax paid in this country. But there is such a bonkers system of assorted allowances and let-offs that can’t be efficient. See also the self employed and their “voluntary” contributions, which they mostly pay out of fear and not quite understanding what happens if they don’t.
Were I chancellor - the immediate change I would be making from April 6th is
Basic rate income tax up to 24% Employee NI down to 5%
With an explicit statement that Income tax would be rising to 25% over the next few years while Employee NI would be reduced to 4%...
I would also reintroduce the WFA because that would reduce the impact on pensioners so only those receiving more than £8,000 in private pensions were worse off..
So you'd reintroduce WFP for all pensioners up to an income of £19,500?
The problem with that is it does not take into account 70% of pensioners have no housing costs. In comparison to a single parent, renting a flat with two teenage children, that income is equivalent to a salary of £77,000, or more than double the median salary.
Yes - because the worst hit people losing the WFP are those with an income between £13-15,000 but there is no easy way to identify them so the fix is not bother identifying them and accepting the loss.
A pensioner on £13,000 still has an income worth £58,000, compared with the scenario I describe above.
How does someone on £13000 have an income worth £58,000 - I'm either thick or you are making assumptions that should be easy to refute..
My scenario above included two teenage children and a single parent living in rented accomodation, with a single pensioner living in a home they own outright. The standard tool for comparing household incomes is equalisation; in this case an adult is worth 1 and a teenage child is worth 0.5.
13,000 = 12,915 after tax. Equivalised income = 12,915 *2 = 25,830 Rental costs = 1,500 PCM (I'm just plucking a number here) Gross pay required = 43,830 Net salary = 57,366
So you are not looking at income but costs of living for a person who may have paid their house off compared to a person living in private rented accommodation.
That isn't even comparing Apples with Oranges it's comparing apples with Concorde jets...
Yeah, I'm all for greater balancing between the generations but comparisons this complex and arbitrary just don't work.
Commonwealth leaders have agreed the "time has come" for a conversation about reparations for the slave trade, despite the UK's desire to keep the subject off the agenda at a two-day summit in Samoa.
A document signed by 56 heads of government, including UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, acknowledges calls for "discussions on reparatory justice" for the "abhorrent" transatlantic slave trade.
The statement says it is time for a "meaningful, truthful and respectful conversation".
Sir Keir said there had been no discussions about money at the meeting, and that the UK is "very clear" in its position that it would not pay reparations.
The UK has faced growing calls from Commonwealth leaders to apologise and pay reparations for the country’s historical role in the slave trade. Reparations for the benefit of those who suffered as a result of slavery could take many forms, from financial to symbolic.
The funny thing is that my views on National Insurance are well known and that my preference would be to abolish it entirely and increase income and capital gains tax but there will always be winners and losers in regard to tax policy but it’s the constant bleating about everything Labour are trying to do to stabilise the country’s finances which annoys me.
I have never understood why NI hasn’t at least been made progressive. Continue to charge me full rate over £50k (but drop the full rate) or like you say, merge with IC and rationalise rates. Employee’s NI is just silly.
Employees NI is paid weekly/monthly not annually.
Would you want to see 8% of your annual bonus disappearing because they paid it in a single week - at the moment Ni on your bonus is probably taken at 2%...
That’s why the best solution is a merger with IC and an honest decision about real tax rates. Those of us on decent salaries (not even necessarily “good” salaries) mostly accept a higher rate on the higher amounts; and frankly we pay most the tax paid in this country. But there is such a bonkers system of assorted allowances and let-offs that can’t be efficient. See also the self employed and their “voluntary” contributions, which they mostly pay out of fear and not quite understanding what happens if they don’t.
Were I chancellor - the immediate change I would be making from April 6th is
Basic rate income tax up to 24% Employee NI down to 5%
With an explicit statement that Income tax would be rising to 25% over the next few years while Employee NI would be reduced to 4%...
I would also reintroduce the WFA because that would reduce the impact on pensioners so only those receiving more than £8,000 in private pensions were worse off..
So you'd reintroduce WFP for all pensioners up to an income of £19,500?
The problem with that is it does not take into account 70% of pensioners have no housing costs. In comparison to a single parent, renting a flat with two teenage children, that income is equivalent to a salary of £77,000, or more than double the median salary.
Yes - because the worst hit people losing the WFP are those with an income between £13-15,000 but there is no easy way to identify them so the fix is not bother identifying them and accepting the loss.
A pensioner on £13,000 still has an income worth £58,000, compared with the scenario I describe above.
How does someone on £13000 have an income worth £58,000 - I'm either thick or you are making assumptions that should be easy to refute..
My scenario above included two teenage children and a single parent living in rented accomodation, with a single pensioner living in a home they own outright. The standard tool for comparing household incomes is equivlisation; in this case an adult is worth 1 and a teenage child is worth 0.5.
13,000 = 12,915 after tax. Equivalised income = 12,915 *2 = 25,830 Rental costs = 1,500 PCM (I'm just plucking a number here) Gross pay required = 43,830 Net salary = 57,366
Hang on you've also made the assumption the pensioner still has their spouse and that both of them receive separate state pensions.
That isn't the case - you really have plucked figures from no-where..
I think he's plucked them from somewhere in particular...
PB tories hate every single tax increase but yet their lads left public finances in dire straits. Fuck off, you broke it. The money has to come from somewhere and if business owners have to take some money from profits to pay NI then so what. Deal with it.
There are Santa's little helpers, like you and Foxy too, but you don't have quite the same histrionics that they do, even though you both get off on Wokery, Self-Flagellation and Reparations.
And you refuse to acknowledge the dreadful national finances and run down armed forces, criminal justice system, universities and health service that Labour inherited from the Tories.
That unwillingness to understand why the electorate delivered the most crushing defeat for the Tories since the 19th century is why the Tories are far from being electable again. They believe that bugging turn will deliver them back to power without any analysis of how comprehensively failed over recent parliaments.
I think Labour will lose seats next election, but the Tories will be way behind them in numbers of seats.
Err, no. I've made plenty of criticisms of the previous administration where I think it deserved them. You can even look them up; they're all on here.
What we're seeing here is projection. You feel the Tories let you down with Brexit and a shift in their socio-cultural policy, so now want to keep them out long-term and you're working back from that, and are happy to defend the incumbent administration to further that, even if you personally can't bring yourself to vote Labour.
Commonwealth leaders have agreed the "time has come" for a conversation about reparations for the slave trade, despite the UK's desire to keep the subject off the agenda at a two-day summit in Samoa.
A document signed by 56 heads of government, including UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, acknowledges calls for "discussions on reparatory justice" for the "abhorrent" transatlantic slave trade.
The statement says it is time for a "meaningful, truthful and respectful conversation".
Sir Keir said there had been no discussions about money at the meeting, and that the UK is "very clear" in its position that it would not pay reparations.
The UK has faced growing calls from Commonwealth leaders to apologise and pay reparations for the country’s historical role in the slave trade. Reparations for the benefit of those who suffered as a result of slavery could take many forms, from financial to symbolic.
On Employers NI - it's the politically easiest way to increase taxes by a substantial amount. My naive interpretation of the promise not to increase income tax, NI or VAT had precluded it as an option, but I don't think the government are going to suffer politically for dodging that with the small print over "working people".
It is, obviously, a little bit disheartening to see a government - once again - do what is politically expedient, rather than something more ideal for the economy, but they are politicians, and they will want to be re-elected. There are worse things they could have chosen to do.
Relative to the rest of Europe our employer taxes are lower.
However it creates a whole set of problems elsewhere as it will mean low paid workers who aren't on the minimum wage are unlikely to see a pay increase next year as the first 2% has just been sent to the Government... Add on any increase to the minimum wage and the first 3% for those above the minimum wage is probably going to the Government or those who are on the minimum wage..
To be frank - I'm expecting to be wholly disappointed with this budget - there are a whole set of things that can only be implemented early on (changes to Council tax, changes to VAT registration levels) and I doubt any of the straws have been grasped to kick off the work required).
I think it's pretty clear they hadn't done any thinking of the practicalities of their programme or how they'd deliver on it in opposition.
They just said what they needed to win the election, had a bit of break over the Summer - during which time they made some inept political moves - and then had an oh shit moment in September when they realised how hard it would be when their propaganda met reality.
You've got to bear in mind Starmer is a Tedious Tactical Triangulator and, now Sunak has gone, he has no-one to triangulate against and is exposed.
This is stressing him out. Which is why, sadly, he looks so harrowed in those photos.
At least with Boris you got joie de vivre. Starmer is just depressing.
On Employers NI - it's the politically easiest way to increase taxes by a substantial amount. My naive interpretation of the promise not to increase income tax, NI or VAT had precluded it as an option, but I don't think the government are going to suffer politically for dodging that with the small print over "working people".
It is, obviously, a little bit disheartening to see a government - once again - do what is politically expedient, rather than something more ideal for the economy, but they are politicians, and they will want to be re-elected. There are worse things they could have chosen to do.
Relative to the rest of Europe our employer taxes are lower.
However it creates a whole set of problems elsewhere as it will mean low paid workers who aren't on the minimum wage are unlikely to see a pay increase next year as the first 2% has just been sent to the Government... Add on any increase to the minimum wage and the first 3% for those above the minimum wage is probably going to the Government or those who are on the minimum wage..
To be frank - I'm expecting to be wholly disappointed with this budget - there are a whole set of things that can only be implemented early on (changes to Council tax, changes to VAT registration levels) and I doubt any of the straws have been grasped to kick off the work required).
I think it's pretty clear they hadn't done any thinking of the practicalities of their programme or how they'd deliver on it in opposition.
They just said what they needed to win the election, had a bit of break over the Summer - during which time they made some inept political moves - and then had an oh shit moment in September when they realised how hard it would be when their propaganda met reality.
You've got to bear in mind Starmer is a Tedious Tactical Triangulator and, now Sunak has gone, he has no-one to triangulate against and is exposed.
This is stressing him out. Which is why, sadly, he looks so harrowed in those photos.
I said last week that this budget will determine the next election and it will.
Labour (and this country) can't have 4 years of austerity so it needs to solve the day to day budget issues by increasing revenue. That should be via a bit on employer Ni and bits that hits richer pensioners (which is why I suggested my changes below).
The funny thing is that my views on National Insurance are well known and that my preference would be to abolish it entirely and increase income and capital gains tax but there will always be winners and losers in regard to tax policy but it’s the constant bleating about everything Labour are trying to do to stabilise the country’s finances which annoys me.
I have never understood why NI hasn’t at least been made progressive. Continue to charge me full rate over £50k (but drop the full rate) or like you say, merge with IC and rationalise rates. Employee’s NI is just silly.
Employees NI is paid weekly/monthly not annually.
Would you want to see 8% of your annual bonus disappearing because they paid it in a single week - at the moment Ni on your bonus is probably taken at 2%...
That’s why the best solution is a merger with IC and an honest decision about real tax rates. Those of us on decent salaries (not even necessarily “good” salaries) mostly accept a higher rate on the higher amounts; and frankly we pay most the tax paid in this country. But there is such a bonkers system of assorted allowances and let-offs that can’t be efficient. See also the self employed and their “voluntary” contributions, which they mostly pay out of fear and not quite understanding what happens if they don’t.
Were I chancellor - the immediate change I would be making from April 6th is
Basic rate income tax up to 24% Employee NI down to 5%
With an explicit statement that Income tax would be rising to 25% over the next few years while Employee NI would be reduced to 4%...
I would also reintroduce the WFA because that would reduce the impact on pensioners so only those receiving more than £8,000 in private pensions were worse off..
So you'd reintroduce WFP for all pensioners up to an income of £19,500?
The problem with that is it does not take into account 70% of pensioners have no housing costs. In comparison to a single parent, renting a flat with two teenage children, that income is equivalent to a salary of £77,000, or more than double the median salary.
Yes - because the worst hit people losing the WFP are those with an income between £13-15,000 but there is no easy way to identify them so the fix is not bother identifying them and accepting the loss.
A pensioner on £13,000 still has an income worth £58,000, compared with the scenario I describe above.
How does someone on £13000 have an income worth £58,000 - I'm either thick or you are making assumptions that should be easy to refute..
My scenario above included two teenage children and a single parent living in rented accomodation, with a single pensioner living in a home they own outright. The standard tool for comparing household incomes is equivlisation; in this case an adult is worth 1 and a teenage child is worth 0.5.
13,000 = 12,915 after tax. Equivalised income = 12,915 *2 = 25,830 Rental costs = 1,500 PCM (I'm just plucking a number here) Gross pay required = 43,830 Net salary = 57,366
Hang on you've also made the assumption the pensioner still has their spouse and that both of them receive separate state pensions.
That isn't the case - you really have plucked figures from no-where..
No I haven't. That's a single pensioner in my example.
It serves as a reminder that pensioner benefits are not means tested, and while someone on UC has their full personal circumstances assessed, including their housing costs and savings, you can have a ludicrous situation where pensioners with very few costs and huge assets get something like WFP.
Commonwealth leaders have agreed the "time has come" for a conversation about reparations for the slave trade, despite the UK's desire to keep the subject off the agenda at a two-day summit in Samoa.
A document signed by 56 heads of government, including UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, acknowledges calls for "discussions on reparatory justice" for the "abhorrent" transatlantic slave trade.
The statement says it is time for a "meaningful, truthful and respectful conversation".
Sir Keir said there had been no discussions about money at the meeting, and that the UK is "very clear" in its position that it would not pay reparations.
The UK has faced growing calls from Commonwealth leaders to apologise and pay reparations for the country’s historical role in the slave trade. Reparations for the benefit of those who suffered as a result of slavery could take many forms, from financial to symbolic.
Interesting piece by Max, I'd like to see real food cooking taught in all schools, national cooking/cookery campaigns, and more visits to farmers/farms at all levels of education.
One thing: I get leaflets through the door every other week from Dominos and PapaJohns, both of which I hate. Yes, they can post what they like - and no doubt this is part of an aggressive marketing campaign - but things like this combined with JustEat and Deliveroo make it very very easy to eat shit.
How do we make it easier to eat well?
And this is where the nannying definitely comes in, it might be dispiriting for people like us to contemplate advertising and leafleting bans for unhealthy foods and takeaways but the situation is only getting worse.
On healthy eating, it is already easy to do so, people just don't know how. I actually think we don't need to tackle cooking at school age, we need to do it for parents in their 30s and 40s who never learned. Make it part of eligibility for benefits to attend mandatory cooking classes, give people basic cooking equipment when they sign on and, frankly, be more intrusive about their spending. As I said any solution on healthy eating is going to feel like and be nannying, I think we need to get on board with this or there is no end to the tax rises, the £20bn salvo Labour are planning right now will look like child's play when we win in 2029 if action isn't taken.
I think the problem is not that people cannot cook, it's that they don't want to. It's too much hassle, which is why so many live off takeaways and ready meals.
Basically, humans are like all animals lazy and greedy. If they can ride they will not walk, and if they can eat high energy foods without cooking then they will do so. In order to choose healthy lifestyles we have to actively use intellect and deferred gratification over base instinct. That's why the fat jabs are such an appeal, we can become slim without effort.
Commonwealth leaders have agreed the "time has come" for a conversation about reparations for the slave trade, despite the UK's desire to keep the subject off the agenda at a two-day summit in Samoa.
A document signed by 56 heads of government, including UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, acknowledges calls for "discussions on reparatory justice" for the "abhorrent" transatlantic slave trade.
The statement says it is time for a "meaningful, truthful and respectful conversation".
Sir Keir said there had been no discussions about money at the meeting, and that the UK is "very clear" in its position that it would not pay reparations.
The UK has faced growing calls from Commonwealth leaders to apologise and pay reparations for the country’s historical role in the slave trade. Reparations for the benefit of those who suffered as a result of slavery could take many forms, from financial to symbolic.
Yep he's f***ed up by allowing that sentence into the agenda. Literally the only country where I think reparations makes sense in Haiti but that's because it needs to be returned from it's current failed state...
On topic, everybody dies from something. If we increase survival rates for diabetes and lung cancer, the survivors may well die of something even more expensive a few years later, and will probably need lots of expensive end of life care in the meantime.
Looking at it from the demand side is probably wrong. We as a society should stop pretending that health care is unlimited and freely available, work out how much we can afford to spend as a share of national income (say the OECD average excluding the US) then work out how best to allocate it to get the most cost-effective years of healthy life remaining. And anything more than that, people (mostly the old) should be required to fund themselves, at least for non-palliative care.
We spend too much. And the State needs to stop doing some things, and be more efficient with others.
We raise £1 trillion in taxes a year. My view is that is plenty.
The Conservatives have just had fourteen years and a manifesto to identify things it should stop doing, or do more efficiently.
What specifics do you think they left on the table?
I've said on here before I think the triple lock should end, State pension should move towards a level of means testing, benefits should be time-limited, and NHS should be for some care but not all care. That public DB pensions need to be phased out. And that planning and rights laws need to be reviewed to stop never ending judicial reviews and initiation of infrastructure. I'd pay down some debt. And I'd put more into industrial strategy, education and defence- whilst incentivising business and jobs.
Of course much of this would be hugely unpopular, but if we don't grasp the nettle we'll eventually go bankrupt.
The funny thing is that my views on National Insurance are well known and that my preference would be to abolish it entirely and increase income and capital gains tax but there will always be winners and losers in regard to tax policy but it’s the constant bleating about everything Labour are trying to do to stabilise the country’s finances which annoys me.
I have never understood why NI hasn’t at least been made progressive. Continue to charge me full rate over £50k (but drop the full rate) or like you say, merge with IC and rationalise rates. Employee’s NI is just silly.
Employees NI is paid weekly/monthly not annually.
Would you want to see 8% of your annual bonus disappearing because they paid it in a single week - at the moment Ni on your bonus is probably taken at 2%...
That’s why the best solution is a merger with IC and an honest decision about real tax rates. Those of us on decent salaries (not even necessarily “good” salaries) mostly accept a higher rate on the higher amounts; and frankly we pay most the tax paid in this country. But there is such a bonkers system of assorted allowances and let-offs that can’t be efficient. See also the self employed and their “voluntary” contributions, which they mostly pay out of fear and not quite understanding what happens if they don’t.
Were I chancellor - the immediate change I would be making from April 6th is
Basic rate income tax up to 24% Employee NI down to 5%
With an explicit statement that Income tax would be rising to 25% over the next few years while Employee NI would be reduced to 4%...
I would also reintroduce the WFA because that would reduce the impact on pensioners so only those receiving more than £8,000 in private pensions were worse off..
So you'd reintroduce WFP for all pensioners up to an income of £19,500?
The problem with that is it does not take into account 70% of pensioners have no housing costs. In comparison to a single parent, renting a flat with two teenage children, that income is equivalent to a salary of £77,000, or more than double the median salary.
Yes - because the worst hit people losing the WFP are those with an income between £13-15,000 but there is no easy way to identify them so the fix is not bother identifying them and accepting the loss.
A pensioner on £13,000 still has an income worth £58,000, compared with the scenario I describe above.
How does someone on £13000 have an income worth £58,000 - I'm either thick or you are making assumptions that should be easy to refute..
My scenario above included two teenage children and a single parent living in rented accomodation, with a single pensioner living in a home they own outright. The standard tool for comparing household incomes is equivlisation; in this case an adult is worth 1 and a teenage child is worth 0.5.
13,000 = 12,915 after tax. Equivalised income = 12,915 *2 = 25,830 Rental costs = 1,500 PCM (I'm just plucking a number here) Gross pay required = 43,830 Net salary = 57,366
Hang on you've also made the assumption the pensioner still has their spouse and that both of them receive separate state pensions.
That isn't the case - you really have plucked figures from no-where..
No I haven't. That's a single pensioner in my example.
Equivalised income = 12,915 *2 = 25,830 - where does that 2 come from?
If you are talking because their are 2 people - it's not 2x food costs for 2 people it's likely 1.5x
Council tax is paid once Electric / Gas (say £150 a month) is only paid once - but will be higher because pensioners are at home all day Water paid once
Your entire figure is made up of assumptions that simply aren't valid. For instance there will be pensioners who are receiving £13,000 and are paying rent on a council flat..
Interesting piece by Max, I'd like to see real food cooking taught in all schools, national cooking/cookery campaigns, and more visits to farmers/farms at all levels of education.
One thing: I get leaflets through the door every other week from Dominos and PapaJohns, both of which I hate. Yes, they can post what they like - and no doubt this is part of an aggressive marketing campaign - but things like this combined with JustEat and Deliveroo make it very very easy to eat shit.
How do we make it easier to eat well?
And this is where the nannying definitely comes in, it might be dispiriting for people like us to contemplate advertising and leafleting bans for unhealthy foods and takeaways but the situation is only getting worse.
On healthy eating, it is already easy to do so, people just don't know how. I actually think we don't need to tackle cooking at school age, we need to do it for parents in their 30s and 40s who never learned. Make it part of eligibility for benefits to attend mandatory cooking classes, give people basic cooking equipment when they sign on and, frankly, be more intrusive about their spending. As I said any solution on healthy eating is going to feel like and be nannying, I think we need to get on board with this or there is no end to the tax rises, the £20bn salvo Labour are planning right now will look like child's play when we win in 2029 if action isn't taken.
I think the problem is not that people cannot cook, it's that they don't want to. It's too much hassle, which is why so many live off takeaways and ready meals.
Basically, humans are like all animals lazy and greedy. If they can ride they will not walk, and if they can eat high energy foods without cooking then they will do so. In order to choose healthy lifestyles we have to actively use intellect and deferred gratification over base instinct. That's why the fat jabs are such an appeal, we can become slim without effort.
The fat jabs allow those with a chemical imbalance to become slim with a similar amount of effort as those without that chemical imbalance. They still have to eat less and exercise more, but no longer get the constant messaging from the body telling them to eat more.
On Employers NI - it's the politically easiest way to increase taxes by a substantial amount. My naive interpretation of the promise not to increase income tax, NI or VAT had precluded it as an option, but I don't think the government are going to suffer politically for dodging that with the small print over "working people".
It is, obviously, a little bit disheartening to see a government - once again - do what is politically expedient, rather than something more ideal for the economy, but they are politicians, and they will want to be re-elected. There are worse things they could have chosen to do.
Relative to the rest of Europe our employer taxes are lower.
However it creates a whole set of problems elsewhere as it will mean low paid workers who aren't on the minimum wage are unlikely to see a pay increase next year as the first 2% has just been sent to the Government... Add on any increase to the minimum wage and the first 3% for those above the minimum wage is probably going to the Government or those who are on the minimum wage..
To be frank - I'm expecting to be wholly disappointed with this budget - there are a whole set of things that can only be implemented early on (changes to Council tax, changes to VAT registration levels) and I doubt any of the straws have been grasped to kick off the work required).
I think it's pretty clear they hadn't done any thinking of the practicalities of their programme or how they'd deliver on it in opposition.
They just said what they needed to win the election, had a bit of break over the Summer - during which time they made some inept political moves - and then had an oh shit moment in September when they realised how hard it would be when their propaganda met reality.
You've got to bear in mind Starmer is a Tedious Tactical Triangulator and, now Sunak has gone, he has no-one to triangulate against and is exposed.
This is stressing him out. Which is why, sadly, he looks so harrowed in those photos.
They do appear totally shocked that the Treasury, OBR, and most of the media, are giving finance policy ideas some pushback, and suggesting unintended consequences such as behavioural change, that challenge the assumptions the government are making.
Thanks @MaxPB for a really great thread. I agree on the fundamental point that the best way to help the NHS is to reduce demand for it rather than simply to increase the supply of it.
I think we part company over your diagnosis of the problem with peoples' health being their poor choices - we do make poor choices sometimes, but:
1. It is far from clear that the alternatives you suggest are healthier
2. There's far more potential to improve public health in the choices we don't make - imagine if the milk, bread, fats, vegetables and meat that we all consume every day was more full of vitamins, minerals and enzymes. How much more effective would that be than telling people off for eating chips?
To expand on 1, take saturated fat. Saturated fat (like butter or coconut oil) is not less healthy than unsaturated fat - indeed the opposite is true. You have said yourself that butter is better for you than marge - and you're right. Unsaturated fats are actually less stable due to their chemical structure, and therefore more likely to result in free radicals within the body that cause oxidative stress, which is a major cause of inflammation, diease and aging. We see this played out in Britain - we've actually achieved massive drops in the proportion of saturated fats that poorer Britons consume, a huge public health 'success' but health has declined in that time.
Also, look at Britain's diet during and after the war. There was rationing till 1955 (an astonishing and frankly distopian situation), with families entitled to ludicrously small amounts of butter and cheese within their weekly allowance. Then look at a picture of the victorious England team in 1966 - barely any teeth between them! And it was common even for young women to go over to dentures. Far from a race of superhumans, 10 years without these foods seems to have had some severe impacts. So I don’t think cracking down on 'sin' foods works, especially if they're not actually 'sins', they're actually the more nourishing foods - then it's a public health disaster.
2. What I do think would work is rather than 'eating healthier food', making the food we eat healthier. We could do this in a number of ways. Here are a few:
Dairy - we pasteurise virtually all milk, a heat treatment that inflicts serious damage to a very complex and nourishing product. It destroys all enzymes as well as many of the vitamins, but leaves the sugars (lactose) that those enzymes are catalysts for the digestion of. Little wonder so many of us have become lactose intolerant. Destroying pathogens by applying pressure to the milk (not heat) preserves the enzymes and it is logical to assume that the final milk would be a more nourishing product. We need more research to see if this could be rolled out nationally.
Bread. We still adulterate bread with chalk. There is scant evidence that we can absorb calcium from chalk, and calcium is a key component of arterial plaque. Also, I believe that soaked, sprouted flour and sourdough bread - all processes that eliminate anti-nutrients like phytic acid within baked products, are healthier and we should encourage their adoption more widely.
Produce. Our vegetables often as packed with nutrients as is claimed. All veg is not created equal, and a vegetable or fruit grown in poor soil, is, by its nature, not a nutrient-packed food. There's no miraculous process that can confer it with nutrients that it didn’t have access too. A lot of it is grown with nitrogen fertiliser that just produces bulk. We should have a huge programme to dress fields with minerals (mined in the UK), which as well as vastly improving quality, could also improve yield, improve drainage and reduce soil erosion, and (believe it or not) draw down carbon from the air and contribute to net zero.
I could go on all day, but you get the idea. Imagine if all our food was just better for you, what that would do for the NHS.
PB tories hate every single tax increase but yet their lads left public finances in dire straits. Fuck off, you broke it. The money has to come from somewhere and if business owners have to take some money from profits to pay NI then so what. Deal with it.
There are Santa's little helpers, like you and Foxy too, but you don't have quite the same histrionics that they do, even though you both get off on Wokery, Self-Flagellation and Reparations.
And you refuse to acknowledge the dreadful national finances and run down armed forces, criminal justice system, universities and health service that Labour inherited from the Tories.
That unwillingness to understand why the electorate delivered the most crushing defeat for the Tories since the 19th century is why the Tories are far from being electable again. They believe that bugging turn will deliver them back to power without any analysis of how comprehensively failed over recent parliaments.
I think Labour will lose seats next election, but the Tories will be way behind them in numbers of seats.
Err, no. I've made plenty of criticisms of the previous administration where I think it deserved them. You can even look them up; they're all on here.
What we're seeing here is projection. You feel the Tories let you down with Brexit and a shift in their socio-cultural policy, so now want to keep them out long-term and you're working back from that, and are happy to defend the incumbent administration to further that, even if you personally can't bring yourself to vote Labour.
Yes, but you propose no solutions to the massive deficit and run down public realm. You carp about trivia. It's why the Tories will remain unelectable.
The funny thing is that my views on National Insurance are well known and that my preference would be to abolish it entirely and increase income and capital gains tax but there will always be winners and losers in regard to tax policy but it’s the constant bleating about everything Labour are trying to do to stabilise the country’s finances which annoys me.
I have never understood why NI hasn’t at least been made progressive. Continue to charge me full rate over £50k (but drop the full rate) or like you say, merge with IC and rationalise rates. Employee’s NI is just silly.
Employees NI is paid weekly/monthly not annually.
Would you want to see 8% of your annual bonus disappearing because they paid it in a single week - at the moment Ni on your bonus is probably taken at 2%...
That’s why the best solution is a merger with IC and an honest decision about real tax rates. Those of us on decent salaries (not even necessarily “good” salaries) mostly accept a higher rate on the higher amounts; and frankly we pay most the tax paid in this country. But there is such a bonkers system of assorted allowances and let-offs that can’t be efficient. See also the self employed and their “voluntary” contributions, which they mostly pay out of fear and not quite understanding what happens if they don’t.
Were I chancellor - the immediate change I would be making from April 6th is
Basic rate income tax up to 24% Employee NI down to 5%
With an explicit statement that Income tax would be rising to 25% over the next few years while Employee NI would be reduced to 4%...
I would also reintroduce the WFA because that would reduce the impact on pensioners so only those receiving more than £8,000 in private pensions were worse off..
So you'd reintroduce WFP for all pensioners up to an income of £19,500?
The problem with that is it does not take into account 70% of pensioners have no housing costs. In comparison to a single parent, renting a flat with two teenage children, that income is equivalent to a salary of £77,000, or more than double the median salary.
Yes - because the worst hit people losing the WFP are those with an income between £13-15,000 but there is no easy way to identify them so the fix is not bother identifying them and accepting the loss.
A pensioner on £13,000 still has an income worth £58,000, compared with the scenario I describe above.
How does someone on £13000 have an income worth £58,000 - I'm either thick or you are making assumptions that should be easy to refute..
My scenario above included two teenage children and a single parent living in rented accomodation, with a single pensioner living in a home they own outright. The standard tool for comparing household incomes is equivlisation; in this case an adult is worth 1 and a teenage child is worth 0.5.
13,000 = 12,915 after tax. Equivalised income = 12,915 *2 = 25,830 Rental costs = 1,500 PCM (I'm just plucking a number here) Gross pay required = 43,830 Net salary = 57,366
Even with no mortgage 13 grand is incredibly tight to live on. To live a confortable basic life you need more like 18 grand.
I don't disagree. I'm just pointing how much someone would have to earn to achieve an equivalent income, particularly if they have dependents and housing costs.
Interesting piece by Max, I'd like to see real food cooking taught in all schools, national cooking/cookery campaigns, and more visits to farmers/farms at all levels of education.
One thing: I get leaflets through the door every other week from Dominos and PapaJohns, both of which I hate. Yes, they can post what they like - and no doubt this is part of an aggressive marketing campaign - but things like this combined with JustEat and Deliveroo make it very very easy to eat shit.
How do we make it easier to eat well?
And this is where the nannying definitely comes in, it might be dispiriting for people like us to contemplate advertising and leafleting bans for unhealthy foods and takeaways but the situation is only getting worse.
On healthy eating, it is already easy to do so, people just don't know how. I actually think we don't need to tackle cooking at school age, we need to do it for parents in their 30s and 40s who never learned. Make it part of eligibility for benefits to attend mandatory cooking classes, give people basic cooking equipment when they sign on and, frankly, be more intrusive about their spending. As I said any solution on healthy eating is going to feel like and be nannying, I think we need to get on board with this or there is no end to the tax rises, the £20bn salvo Labour are planning right now will look like child's play when we win in 2029 if action isn't taken.
The youngest person taught to cook at school will be 53 years old.
Before then CSEs had proper cookery lessons afterwards (as a money saving exercise) Cookery was replaced with home economics as GCSEs were introduced and actually cooking was removed from the exam..
Yes and that's why targeting people in their 30s and 40s probably makes sense. Introduce it into the curriculum for sure but it doesn't solve the issue of a generation of adults having almost no cooking skills. I learned how to cook from my mum, my wife never had that because her mum can't cook for shit. She learned from me (and believe me teaching hour wife how to cook is much more stressful than you'd realise and has huge potential for rows and fights) because she felt like it was a basic necessity she never had figured out.
What I have found among my friends is that there's two distinct groups, people who can cook and do it really well and spend time becoming excellent home chefs or there's those who don't at all and basically just exist off frozen or ready meals and takeaways/eating out. I guess that's what has come from not having food education, people who wanted to learn to do it still did and got good, people who didn't weren't forced and never picked up the skills in the first place.
The funny thing is that my views on National Insurance are well known and that my preference would be to abolish it entirely and increase income and capital gains tax but there will always be winners and losers in regard to tax policy but it’s the constant bleating about everything Labour are trying to do to stabilise the country’s finances which annoys me.
Good morning
That is what happens when you are elected to govern
It is noticeable how journalists, who were aggressively against Johnson, Truss and the conservatives, have switched hats and turned their fire on Starmer and Labour, no more so than Burley and Rigby on Sky
Starmer and Reeves have not helped themselves as they struggle to come to terms with their responsibilities and certainly the doom and gloom together with the vacuum created waiting for the Autumn Statement has been very negative
You can argue which taxes should go up, but ultimately the error they made was to rule out increases in income tax, vat and NI which do the heavy lifting in the economy
As far as the NHS is concerned an excellent header by @MaxPB but no matter how partisan one is, you cannot ignore the desperate state of the NHS in Wales and Scotland run by Labour and SNP respectively
I have had extensive engagement with the Wales NHS over the last year involving three consultants, a cardiologist, haematologist and a vascular surgeon and throughout everything including pacemaker operation in February I have only once received a telephone call from the doctor in our medical practice
All investigations involved nurses and practice nurses and others for blood tests, ECGs, ultrasounds, and X rays and the rest with the consultants. It really is the case I did not need the practice doctors throughout and even today as I have lifetime monitoring
I know many are upset when labour come under fire but that is politics, they are the government and it will continue throughout their term of office
Why would it be any different given they are funded by a % of what English NHS gets, how could they be doing better.
Interesting piece by Max, I'd like to see real food cooking taught in all schools, national cooking/cookery campaigns, and more visits to farmers/farms at all levels of education.
One thing: I get leaflets through the door every other week from Dominos and PapaJohns, both of which I hate. Yes, they can post what they like - and no doubt this is part of an aggressive marketing campaign - but things like this combined with JustEat and Deliveroo make it very very easy to eat shit.
How do we make it easier to eat well?
And this is where the nannying definitely comes in, it might be dispiriting for people like us to contemplate advertising and leafleting bans for unhealthy foods and takeaways but the situation is only getting worse.
On healthy eating, it is already easy to do so, people just don't know how. I actually think we don't need to tackle cooking at school age, we need to do it for parents in their 30s and 40s who never learned. Make it part of eligibility for benefits to attend mandatory cooking classes, give people basic cooking equipment when they sign on and, frankly, be more intrusive about their spending. As I said any solution on healthy eating is going to feel like and be nannying, I think we need to get on board with this or there is no end to the tax rises, the £20bn salvo Labour are planning right now will look like child's play when we win in 2029 if action isn't taken.
I think the problem is not that people cannot cook, it's that they don't want to. It's too much hassle, which is why so many live off takeaways and ready meals.
Basically, humans are like all animals lazy and greedy. If they can ride they will not walk, and if they can eat high energy foods without cooking then they will do so. In order to choose healthy lifestyles we have to actively use intellect and deferred gratification over base instinct. That's why the fat jabs are such an appeal, we can become slim without effort.
Hetes the thing though. I always feel like garbage after eating a ready meal yet people still eat them. Similar to how you feel like garbage after eating at mcdonalds.
The funny thing is that my views on National Insurance are well known and that my preference would be to abolish it entirely and increase income and capital gains tax but there will always be winners and losers in regard to tax policy but it’s the constant bleating about everything Labour are trying to do to stabilise the country’s finances which annoys me.
I have never understood why NI hasn’t at least been made progressive. Continue to charge me full rate over £50k (but drop the full rate) or like you say, merge with IC and rationalise rates. Employee’s NI is just silly.
Employees NI is paid weekly/monthly not annually.
Would you want to see 8% of your annual bonus disappearing because they paid it in a single week - at the moment Ni on your bonus is probably taken at 2%...
That’s why the best solution is a merger with IC and an honest decision about real tax rates. Those of us on decent salaries (not even necessarily “good” salaries) mostly accept a higher rate on the higher amounts; and frankly we pay most the tax paid in this country. But there is such a bonkers system of assorted allowances and let-offs that can’t be efficient. See also the self employed and their “voluntary” contributions, which they mostly pay out of fear and not quite understanding what happens if they don’t.
Were I chancellor - the immediate change I would be making from April 6th is
Basic rate income tax up to 24% Employee NI down to 5%
With an explicit statement that Income tax would be rising to 25% over the next few years while Employee NI would be reduced to 4%...
I would also reintroduce the WFA because that would reduce the impact on pensioners so only those receiving more than £8,000 in private pensions were worse off..
So you'd reintroduce WFP for all pensioners up to an income of £19,500?
The problem with that is it does not take into account 70% of pensioners have no housing costs. In comparison to a single parent, renting a flat with two teenage children, that income is equivalent to a salary of £77,000, or more than double the median salary.
Yes - because the worst hit people losing the WFP are those with an income between £13-15,000 but there is no easy way to identify them so the fix is not bother identifying them and accepting the loss.
A pensioner on £13,000 still has an income worth £58,000, compared with the scenario I describe above.
How does someone on £13000 have an income worth £58,000 - I'm either thick or you are making assumptions that should be easy to refute..
My scenario above included two teenage children and a single parent living in rented accomodation, with a single pensioner living in a home they own outright. The standard tool for comparing household incomes is equivlisation; in this case an adult is worth 1 and a teenage child is worth 0.5.
13,000 = 12,915 after tax. Equivalised income = 12,915 *2 = 25,830 Rental costs = 1,500 PCM (I'm just plucking a number here) Gross pay required = 43,830 Net salary = 57,366
Hang on you've also made the assumption the pensioner still has their spouse and that both of them receive separate state pensions.
That isn't the case - you really have plucked figures from no-where..
That is due to his hatred of pensioners, bias does not begin to cover it and he is loaded to boot.
Interesting piece by Max, I'd like to see real food cooking taught in all schools, national cooking/cookery campaigns, and more visits to farmers/farms at all levels of education.
One thing: I get leaflets through the door every other week from Dominos and PapaJohns, both of which I hate. Yes, they can post what they like - and no doubt this is part of an aggressive marketing campaign - but things like this combined with JustEat and Deliveroo make it very very easy to eat shit.
How do we make it easier to eat well?
And this is where the nannying definitely comes in, it might be dispiriting for people like us to contemplate advertising and leafleting bans for unhealthy foods and takeaways but the situation is only getting worse.
On healthy eating, it is already easy to do so, people just don't know how. I actually think we don't need to tackle cooking at school age, we need to do it for parents in their 30s and 40s who never learned. Make it part of eligibility for benefits to attend mandatory cooking classes, give people basic cooking equipment when they sign on and, frankly, be more intrusive about their spending. As I said any solution on healthy eating is going to feel like and be nannying, I think we need to get on board with this or there is no end to the tax rises, the £20bn salvo Labour are planning right now will look like child's play when we win in 2029 if action isn't taken.
Nannying for me is telling people what to do or stopping them doing what they want to do. And patronising them at the same time like they're children.
I don't have a problem regulating harmful adverts or supplements that do us real damage.
I agree with you on cooking. One small example, last night I looked at a chicken curry and thought.. I'd quite like something else with that. There were dried red lentils and a tin of tomatoes in the cupboard. I baulked at it, thinking I'd screw it up and it'd be shit, but a BBC receipe and 30 minutes later I had an amazing lentil curry, that we both polished off.
I agree with cooking classes for those on benefits. In fact, I think in general the government should fund and promote this. (As long as it's not captured by leftwing activists, who'll want to push "sustainability", veganism and non-dairy)
Then people can choose what to cook themselves. Not nannying.
Interesting piece by Max, I'd like to see real food cooking taught in all schools, national cooking/cookery campaigns, and more visits to farmers/farms at all levels of education.
One thing: I get leaflets through the door every other week from Dominos and PapaJohns, both of which I hate. Yes, they can post what they like - and no doubt this is part of an aggressive marketing campaign - but things like this combined with JustEat and Deliveroo make it very very easy to eat shit.
How do we make it easier to eat well?
And this is where the nannying definitely comes in, it might be dispiriting for people like us to contemplate advertising and leafleting bans for unhealthy foods and takeaways but the situation is only getting worse.
On healthy eating, it is already easy to do so, people just don't know how. I actually think we don't need to tackle cooking at school age, we need to do it for parents in their 30s and 40s who never learned. Make it part of eligibility for benefits to attend mandatory cooking classes, give people basic cooking equipment when they sign on and, frankly, be more intrusive about their spending. As I said any solution on healthy eating is going to feel like and be nannying, I think we need to get on board with this or there is no end to the tax rises, the £20bn salvo Labour are planning right now will look like child's play when we win in 2029 if action isn't taken.
I think the problem is not that people cannot cook, it's that they don't want to. It's too much hassle, which is why so many live off takeaways and ready meals.
Basically, humans are like all animals lazy and greedy. If they can ride they will not walk, and if they can eat high energy foods without cooking then they will do so. In order to choose healthy lifestyles we have to actively use intellect and deferred gratification over base instinct. That's why the fat jabs are such an appeal, we can become slim without effort.
The fat jabs allow those with a chemical imbalance to become slim with a similar amount of effort as those without that chemical imbalance. They still have to eat less and exercise more, but no longer get the constant messaging from the body telling them to eat more.
It’s always been said that there’s some wonder drug around the corner that can deal with obesity and addiction, but it does appear that Semaglutide is the closest we’ve yet come to one making it to market.
It’s not for everyone, some people suffer from side-effects and there’s the danger of people with mental health issues such as anorexia getting hold of it, but it’s definitely something that would help a significant percentage of the population were it to be more widely available.
Interesting piece by Max, I'd like to see real food cooking taught in all schools, national cooking/cookery campaigns, and more visits to farmers/farms at all levels of education.
One thing: I get leaflets through the door every other week from Dominos and PapaJohns, both of which I hate. Yes, they can post what they like - and no doubt this is part of an aggressive marketing campaign - but things like this combined with JustEat and Deliveroo make it very very easy to eat shit.
How do we make it easier to eat well?
And this is where the nannying definitely comes in, it might be dispiriting for people like us to contemplate advertising and leafleting bans for unhealthy foods and takeaways but the situation is only getting worse.
On healthy eating, it is already easy to do so, people just don't know how. I actually think we don't need to tackle cooking at school age, we need to do it for parents in their 30s and 40s who never learned. Make it part of eligibility for benefits to attend mandatory cooking classes, give people basic cooking equipment when they sign on and, frankly, be more intrusive about their spending. As I said any solution on healthy eating is going to feel like and be nannying, I think we need to get on board with this or there is no end to the tax rises, the £20bn salvo Labour are planning right now will look like child's play when we win in 2029 if action isn't taken.
I think the problem is not that people cannot cook, it's that they don't want to. It's too much hassle, which is why so many live off takeaways and ready meals.
Basically, humans are like all animals lazy and greedy. If they can ride they will not walk, and if they can eat high energy foods without cooking then they will do so. In order to choose healthy lifestyles we have to actively use intellect and deferred gratification over base instinct. That's why the fat jabs are such an appeal, we can become slim without effort.
Why don't they want to? Well, a lot of them are working long hours in stressful jobs for crap money under less than ideal conditions. Their housing costs are sky high and the transport infrastructure is crap etc etc. It's no coincidence that obesity is disproportionately high in the lower income brackets. Everything is interrelated.
There is a massive tanker to turnaround in this country. It is the work of many, many years. A lot of people are going to be discomfited by it. But it has to be done. Whether it will be is another matter, of course.
Interesting piece by Max, I'd like to see real food cooking taught in all schools, national cooking/cookery campaigns, and more visits to farmers/farms at all levels of education.
One thing: I get leaflets through the door every other week from Dominos and PapaJohns, both of which I hate. Yes, they can post what they like - and no doubt this is part of an aggressive marketing campaign - but things like this combined with JustEat and Deliveroo make it very very easy to eat shit.
How do we make it easier to eat well?
And this is where the nannying definitely comes in, it might be dispiriting for people like us to contemplate advertising and leafleting bans for unhealthy foods and takeaways but the situation is only getting worse.
On healthy eating, it is already easy to do so, people just don't know how. I actually think we don't need to tackle cooking at school age, we need to do it for parents in their 30s and 40s who never learned. Make it part of eligibility for benefits to attend mandatory cooking classes, give people basic cooking equipment when they sign on and, frankly, be more intrusive about their spending. As I said any solution on healthy eating is going to feel like and be nannying, I think we need to get on board with this or there is no end to the tax rises, the £20bn salvo Labour are planning right now will look like child's play when we win in 2029 if action isn't taken.
The youngest person taught to cook at school will be 53 years old.
Before then CSEs had proper cookery lessons afterwards (as a money saving exercise) Cookery was replaced with home economics as GCSEs were introduced and actually cooking was removed from the exam..
Yes and that's why targeting people in their 30s and 40s probably makes sense. Introduce it into the curriculum for sure but it doesn't solve the issue of a generation of adults having almost no cooking skills. I learned how to cook from my mum, my wife never had that because her mum can't cook for shit. She learned from me (and believe me teaching hour wife how to cook is much more stressful than you'd realise and has huge potential for rows and fights) because she felt like it was a basic necessity she never had figured out.
What I have found among my friends is that there's two distinct groups, people who can cook and do it really well and spend time becoming excellent home chefs or there's those who don't at all and basically just exist off frozen or ready meals and takeaways/eating out. I guess that's what has come from not having food education, people who wanted to learn to do it still did and got good, people who didn't weren't forced and never picked up the skills in the first place.
It is nothing to do with education , it is down to them being lazy barstewards. Anyone nowadays can get recipes online and follow them and teach themselves.
He has also invited Kamala Harris to sit down with him.
Does this interview win Trump the Presidency?
Gets Rogan more attention which he thrives on as does Trump. Two egomanics together.
Well yeah OK, but what do we think to this as a campaign tactic just over a week out from polling day?
It's an interesting choice from Team Trump in what I think has been a MUCH better campaign compared to either 2016 or 2020.
I imagine it was planned a long time ago. A clever move. Would you say Rogans followers are most likely to be Trump than Harris supporters?
If it was organised a while ago, everyone involved kept very quiet until a few days back. Monday was when the speculation started.
Rogan’s audience skews male and rural, so theoretically more likely to be Trump votes than Harris voters.
He does get something totally outrageous like 100m views and downloads, by far the most popular podcast out there. This one will likely set records for a single podcast episode, half the country will have watched it before the election.
Interesting. I agree with you about the profile of his audience.
It does feel like the Trump team masterplanned this last few weeks whereas Kamala has been winging it since the kamalagasm
Nonetheless people are writing off the Dems far too easily. An awful lot of Americans fear and despise Donald Trump and would vote for chairman Mao in preference to him
Or even Donald Duck.
I can't see how Trump being on Rogan changes a single vote frankly. Although it may help with GOTV.
That’s an odd perspective. Over 3hrs he talks gently, a bit rambly and (expertly) gives the impression of being a slightly inappropriate uncle. Rather than Hitler. In an historically close election from a polls perspective, it might prove to be quite an important moment.
Maybe Trumps suggestion he’d get rid of income taxes might swing a few votes for the economically illiterate . Rogan failed to ask him how the government would fund things .
His plan AIUI is to increase tarrifs on imports, and reduce Federal income taxes by a similar amount, such that most Americans would pay no Federal income taxes at all.
This would turbocharge inflation with all imports massively increasing in price. Consumers would switch to domestically produced items where possible, so you’d have to increase tariffs even more to raise enough revenue. It would be like imposing sanctions on yourself.
There would indeed be some inflation as the cost of imports rises, but the US is self sufficient in an awful lot of products and still has a wide manufacturing base. Medium term it would see investment in domestic manufacturing, as the sheer size of the domestic market makes this worthwhile for many companies.
I’m not sure he would be worried about the revenue declining over time, as he plans on significant (and deflationary) reductions in Federal spending - he’s also term limited, so any problems are for the next guy to handle.
Trump's plans for Social Security (US state pensions) will bankrupt the fund in 6 years, but that conveniently leaves the mess for someone else to sort out.
It seems that right wingers always want their tax cuts now rather than prudent long term finances. I am old enough to remember when they cared about deficits and debts.
Dunno about "always". The traditional Conservative approach has always been "low taxes and sound money". And, if push came to shove, taxes went up to avoid debauching the Treasury. Howe did it, Clarke did it, Osborne did it. Question how well they did it, but they did it. Heck, even Sunak did it in his early days.
And that's the conservative thing to do- try to avoid leaving too much mess for the next generation. (Incidentally, interesting lack of object permanence shown by some of our friends on the right today- just because someone has taken the tea towels off the unspeakable mess doesn't mean that they generated the mess.)
The fiscal plans Hunt left were unsound money- everyone who knows about such things said so. If some large, unspecified, presumably politically impossible spending cuts happened in the future, government borrowing wouldn't get too bad. It was the domestic equivalent of treating a new credit card as a pay rise.
Thanks Hunt. Thunt.
No, under Hunts plans we'd have had debt coming down as a %GDP by 2027-2028.
Interesting piece by Max, I'd like to see real food cooking taught in all schools, national cooking/cookery campaigns, and more visits to farmers/farms at all levels of education.
One thing: I get leaflets through the door every other week from Dominos and PapaJohns, both of which I hate. Yes, they can post what they like - and no doubt this is part of an aggressive marketing campaign - but things like this combined with JustEat and Deliveroo make it very very easy to eat shit.
How do we make it easier to eat well?
And this is where the nannying definitely comes in, it might be dispiriting for people like us to contemplate advertising and leafleting bans for unhealthy foods and takeaways but the situation is only getting worse.
On healthy eating, it is already easy to do so, people just don't know how. I actually think we don't need to tackle cooking at school age, we need to do it for parents in their 30s and 40s who never learned. Make it part of eligibility for benefits to attend mandatory cooking classes, give people basic cooking equipment when they sign on and, frankly, be more intrusive about their spending. As I said any solution on healthy eating is going to feel like and be nannying, I think we need to get on board with this or there is no end to the tax rises, the £20bn salvo Labour are planning right now will look like child's play when we win in 2029 if action isn't taken.
I think the problem is not that people cannot cook, it's that they don't want to. It's too much hassle, which is why so many live off takeaways and ready meals.
Basically, humans are like all animals lazy and greedy. If they can ride they will not walk, and if they can eat high energy foods without cooking then they will do so. In order to choose healthy lifestyles we have to actively use intellect and deferred gratification over base instinct. That's why the fat jabs are such an appeal, we can become slim without effort.
The fat jabs allow those with a chemical imbalance to become slim with a similar amount of effort as those without that chemical imbalance. They still have to eat less and exercise more, but no longer get the constant messaging from the body telling them to eat more.
Also lets fat greedy barstewards get down for a short period.
Interesting piece by Max, I'd like to see real food cooking taught in all schools, national cooking/cookery campaigns, and more visits to farmers/farms at all levels of education.
One thing: I get leaflets through the door every other week from Dominos and PapaJohns, both of which I hate. Yes, they can post what they like - and no doubt this is part of an aggressive marketing campaign - but things like this combined with JustEat and Deliveroo make it very very easy to eat shit.
How do we make it easier to eat well?
And this is where the nannying definitely comes in, it might be dispiriting for people like us to contemplate advertising and leafleting bans for unhealthy foods and takeaways but the situation is only getting worse.
On healthy eating, it is already easy to do so, people just don't know how. I actually think we don't need to tackle cooking at school age, we need to do it for parents in their 30s and 40s who never learned. Make it part of eligibility for benefits to attend mandatory cooking classes, give people basic cooking equipment when they sign on and, frankly, be more intrusive about their spending. As I said any solution on healthy eating is going to feel like and be nannying, I think we need to get on board with this or there is no end to the tax rises, the £20bn salvo Labour are planning right now will look like child's play when we win in 2029 if action isn't taken.
I think the problem is not that people cannot cook, it's that they don't want to. It's too much hassle, which is why so many live off takeaways and ready meals.
Basically, humans are like all animals lazy and greedy. If they can ride they will not walk, and if they can eat high energy foods without cooking then they will do so. In order to choose healthy lifestyles we have to actively use intellect and deferred gratification over base instinct. That's why the fat jabs are such an appeal, we can become slim without effort.
Why don't they want to? Well, a lot of them are working long hours in stressful jobs for crap money under less than ideal conditions. Their housing costs are sky high and the transport infrastructure is crap etc etc. It's no coincidence that obesity is disproportionately high in the lower income brackets. Everything is interrelated.
There is a massive tanker to turnaround in this country. It is the work of many, many years. A lot of people are going to be discomfited by it. But it has to be done. Whether it will be is another matter, of course.
I don't buy this. I'm the same. I can often rustle up something better, cheaper and healthier in the same time it takes to get a takeaway delivered.
I think plenty simply don't know, can't be arsed or were never introduced to non-processed food or fast food as children so just don't want it.
The funny thing is that my views on National Insurance are well known and that my preference would be to abolish it entirely and increase income and capital gains tax but there will always be winners and losers in regard to tax policy but it’s the constant bleating about everything Labour are trying to do to stabilise the country’s finances which annoys me.
I have never understood why NI hasn’t at least been made progressive. Continue to charge me full rate over £50k (but drop the full rate) or like you say, merge with IC and rationalise rates. Employee’s NI is just silly.
Employees NI is paid weekly/monthly not annually.
Would you want to see 8% of your annual bonus disappearing because they paid it in a single week - at the moment Ni on your bonus is probably taken at 2%...
That’s why the best solution is a merger with IC and an honest decision about real tax rates. Those of us on decent salaries (not even necessarily “good” salaries) mostly accept a higher rate on the higher amounts; and frankly we pay most the tax paid in this country. But there is such a bonkers system of assorted allowances and let-offs that can’t be efficient. See also the self employed and their “voluntary” contributions, which they mostly pay out of fear and not quite understanding what happens if they don’t.
Were I chancellor - the immediate change I would be making from April 6th is
Basic rate income tax up to 24% Employee NI down to 5%
With an explicit statement that Income tax would be rising to 25% over the next few years while Employee NI would be reduced to 4%...
I would also reintroduce the WFA because that would reduce the impact on pensioners so only those receiving more than £8,000 in private pensions were worse off..
So you'd reintroduce WFP for all pensioners up to an income of £19,500?
The problem with that is it does not take into account 70% of pensioners have no housing costs. In comparison to a single parent, renting a flat with two teenage children, that income is equivalent to a salary of £77,000, or more than double the median salary.
Yes - because the worst hit people losing the WFP are those with an income between £13-15,000 but there is no easy way to identify them so the fix is not bother identifying them and accepting the loss.
A pensioner on £13,000 still has an income worth £58,000, compared with the scenario I describe above.
How does someone on £13000 have an income worth £58,000 - I'm either thick or you are making assumptions that should be easy to refute..
My scenario above included two teenage children and a single parent living in rented accomodation, with a single pensioner living in a home they own outright. The standard tool for comparing household incomes is equivlisation; in this case an adult is worth 1 and a teenage child is worth 0.5.
13,000 = 12,915 after tax. Equivalised income = 12,915 *2 = 25,830 Rental costs = 1,500 PCM (I'm just plucking a number here) Gross pay required = 43,830 Net salary = 57,366
Hang on you've also made the assumption the pensioner still has their spouse and that both of them receive separate state pensions.
That isn't the case - you really have plucked figures from no-where..
No I haven't. That's a single pensioner in my example.
Equivalised income = 12,915 *2 = 25,830 - where does that 2 come from?
If you are talking because their are 2 people - it's not 2x food costs for 2 people it's likely 1.5x
Council tax is paid once Electric / Gas (say £150 a month) is only paid once - but will be higher because pensioners are at home all day Water paid once
Your entire figure is made up of assumptions that simply aren't valid. For instance there will be pensioners who are receiving £13,000 and are paying rent on a council flat..
Each teenage child is worth 0.5 adults. So you multiply by 2x. It's not perfect measure, but it's the standard way OECD countries assess it and make comparisons.
I'm just trying to demonstrate that the universal nature of pensioner benefits is deeply inefficient. 70% of pensioners own their homes outright.
On Trump the ny times has a tie on 48%. Now if they are out one way its a Trump landslide. But even if they are out the other way and Kamala wins the popular vote by say 2 points it will still be very tight and likely come down to a couple of states.
Interesting piece by Max, I'd like to see real food cooking taught in all schools, national cooking/cookery campaigns, and more visits to farmers/farms at all levels of education.
One thing: I get leaflets through the door every other week from Dominos and PapaJohns, both of which I hate. Yes, they can post what they like - and no doubt this is part of an aggressive marketing campaign - but things like this combined with JustEat and Deliveroo make it very very easy to eat shit.
How do we make it easier to eat well?
And this is where the nannying definitely comes in, it might be dispiriting for people like us to contemplate advertising and leafleting bans for unhealthy foods and takeaways but the situation is only getting worse.
On healthy eating, it is already easy to do so, people just don't know how. I actually think we don't need to tackle cooking at school age, we need to do it for parents in their 30s and 40s who never learned. Make it part of eligibility for benefits to attend mandatory cooking classes, give people basic cooking equipment when they sign on and, frankly, be more intrusive about their spending. As I said any solution on healthy eating is going to feel like and be nannying, I think we need to get on board with this or there is no end to the tax rises, the £20bn salvo Labour are planning right now will look like child's play when we win in 2029 if action isn't taken.
The youngest person taught to cook at school will be 53 years old.
Before then CSEs had proper cookery lessons afterwards (as a money saving exercise) Cookery was replaced with home economics as GCSEs were introduced and actually cooking was removed from the exam..
Yes and that's why targeting people in their 30s and 40s probably makes sense. Introduce it into the curriculum for sure but it doesn't solve the issue of a generation of adults having almost no cooking skills. I learned how to cook from my mum, my wife never had that because her mum can't cook for shit. She learned from me (and believe me teaching hour wife how to cook is much more stressful than you'd realise and has huge potential for rows and fights) because she felt like it was a basic necessity she never had figured out.
What I have found among my friends is that there's two distinct groups, people who can cook and do it really well and spend time becoming excellent home chefs or there's those who don't at all and basically just exist off frozen or ready meals and takeaways/eating out. I guess that's what has come from not having food education, people who wanted to learn to do it still did and got good, people who didn't weren't forced and never picked up the skills in the first place.
Mrs Eek went to a mixed Grammar school so learnt to cook to a limited extent. I went to a single sex school and my mum really doesn't cook (they live on Marks ready meals and eating out - heck even the sheltered accommodation they moved to has a cafe in reception).
But as I've got older I've realised I'm lazy and will grab ready meals but given the choice I nowadays grab stir fries - relatively cheap, quick to cook and just about the only way I get enough vegetables in a day.
The funny thing is that my views on National Insurance are well known and that my preference would be to abolish it entirely and increase income and capital gains tax but there will always be winners and losers in regard to tax policy but it’s the constant bleating about everything Labour are trying to do to stabilise the country’s finances which annoys me.
I have never understood why NI hasn’t at least been made progressive. Continue to charge me full rate over £50k (but drop the full rate) or like you say, merge with IC and rationalise rates. Employee’s NI is just silly.
Employees NI is paid weekly/monthly not annually.
Would you want to see 8% of your annual bonus disappearing because they paid it in a single week - at the moment Ni on your bonus is probably taken at 2%...
That’s why the best solution is a merger with IC and an honest decision about real tax rates. Those of us on decent salaries (not even necessarily “good” salaries) mostly accept a higher rate on the higher amounts; and frankly we pay most the tax paid in this country. But there is such a bonkers system of assorted allowances and let-offs that can’t be efficient. See also the self employed and their “voluntary” contributions, which they mostly pay out of fear and not quite understanding what happens if they don’t.
Were I chancellor - the immediate change I would be making from April 6th is
Basic rate income tax up to 24% Employee NI down to 5%
With an explicit statement that Income tax would be rising to 25% over the next few years while Employee NI would be reduced to 4%...
I would also reintroduce the WFA because that would reduce the impact on pensioners so only those receiving more than £8,000 in private pensions were worse off..
So you'd reintroduce WFP for all pensioners up to an income of £19,500?
The problem with that is it does not take into account 70% of pensioners have no housing costs. In comparison to a single parent, renting a flat with two teenage children, that income is equivalent to a salary of £77,000, or more than double the median salary.
Yes - because the worst hit people losing the WFP are those with an income between £13-15,000 but there is no easy way to identify them so the fix is not bother identifying them and accepting the loss.
A pensioner on £13,000 still has an income worth £58,000, compared with the scenario I describe above.
How does someone on £13000 have an income worth £58,000 - I'm either thick or you are making assumptions that should be easy to refute..
My scenario above included two teenage children and a single parent living in rented accomodation, with a single pensioner living in a home they own outright. The standard tool for comparing household incomes is equivlisation; in this case an adult is worth 1 and a teenage child is worth 0.5.
13,000 = 12,915 after tax. Equivalised income = 12,915 *2 = 25,830 Rental costs = 1,500 PCM (I'm just plucking a number here) Gross pay required = 43,830 Net salary = 57,366
Hang on you've also made the assumption the pensioner still has their spouse and that both of them receive separate state pensions.
That isn't the case - you really have plucked figures from no-where..
No I haven't. That's a single pensioner in my example.
Equivalised income = 12,915 *2 = 25,830 - where does that 2 come from?
If you are talking because their are 2 people - it's not 2x food costs for 2 people it's likely 1.5x
Council tax is paid once Electric / Gas (say £150 a month) is only paid once - but will be higher because pensioners are at home all day Water paid once
Your entire figure is made up of assumptions that simply aren't valid. For instance there will be pensioners who are receiving £13,000 and are paying rent on a council flat..
Interesting piece by Max, I'd like to see real food cooking taught in all schools, national cooking/cookery campaigns, and more visits to farmers/farms at all levels of education.
One thing: I get leaflets through the door every other week from Dominos and PapaJohns, both of which I hate. Yes, they can post what they like - and no doubt this is part of an aggressive marketing campaign - but things like this combined with JustEat and Deliveroo make it very very easy to eat shit.
How do we make it easier to eat well?
And this is where the nannying definitely comes in, it might be dispiriting for people like us to contemplate advertising and leafleting bans for unhealthy foods and takeaways but the situation is only getting worse.
On healthy eating, it is already easy to do so, people just don't know how. I actually think we don't need to tackle cooking at school age, we need to do it for parents in their 30s and 40s who never learned. Make it part of eligibility for benefits to attend mandatory cooking classes, give people basic cooking equipment when they sign on and, frankly, be more intrusive about their spending. As I said any solution on healthy eating is going to feel like and be nannying, I think we need to get on board with this or there is no end to the tax rises, the £20bn salvo Labour are planning right now will look like child's play when we win in 2029 if action isn't taken.
I think the problem is not that people cannot cook, it's that they don't want to. It's too much hassle, which is why so many live off takeaways and ready meals.
Basically, humans are like all animals lazy and greedy. If they can ride they will not walk, and if they can eat high energy foods without cooking then they will do so. In order to choose healthy lifestyles we have to actively use intellect and deferred gratification over base instinct. That's why the fat jabs are such an appeal, we can become slim without effort.
The fat jabs allow those with a chemical imbalance to become slim with a similar amount of effort as those without that chemical imbalance. They still have to eat less and exercise more, but no longer get the constant messaging from the body telling them to eat more.
It’s always been said that there’s some wonder drug around the corner that can deal with obesity and addiction, but it does appear that Semaglutide is the closest we’ve yet come to one making it to market.
It’s not for everyone, some people suffer from side-effects and there’s the danger of people with mental health issues such as anorexia getting hold of it, but it’s definitely something that would help a significant percentage of the population were it to be more widely available.
15m Americans have tried them so it is pretty widely available in some places. No surprise that US obesity is starting to fall after decades of rising.
Commonwealth leaders have agreed the "time has come" for a conversation about reparations for the slave trade, despite the UK's desire to keep the subject off the agenda at a two-day summit in Samoa.
A document signed by 56 heads of government, including UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, acknowledges calls for "discussions on reparatory justice" for the "abhorrent" transatlantic slave trade.
The statement says it is time for a "meaningful, truthful and respectful conversation".
Sir Keir said there had been no discussions about money at the meeting, and that the UK is "very clear" in its position that it would not pay reparations.
The UK has faced growing calls from Commonwealth leaders to apologise and pay reparations for the country’s historical role in the slave trade. Reparations for the benefit of those who suffered as a result of slavery could take many forms, from financial to symbolic.
I am reminded of that meme, "boy, that's escalated quickly".
It is a fact universally acknowledged that the plutocratic mansions owned by the National Trust were built with the proceeds of slavery. So an obvious solution is to hand them over to the descendants of slaves, like Zimbabwean farms. Personally I'd view this prospect with absolute equanimity as I avoid such places like the plague and the benefits of slavery barely trickled as far as my ancestors in the hills of Merioneth.
PB tories hate every single tax increase but yet their lads left public finances in dire straits. Fuck off, you broke it. The money has to come from somewhere and if business owners have to take some money from profits to pay NI then so what. Deal with it.
There are Santa's little helpers, like you and Foxy too, but you don't have quite the same histrionics that they do, even though you both get off on Wokery, Self-Flagellation and Reparations.
And you refuse to acknowledge the dreadful national finances and run down armed forces, criminal justice system, universities and health service that Labour inherited from the Tories.
That unwillingness to understand why the electorate delivered the most crushing defeat for the Tories since the 19th century is why the Tories are far from being electable again. They believe that bugging turn will deliver them back to power without any analysis of how comprehensively failed over recent parliaments.
I think Labour will lose seats next election, but the Tories will be way behind them in numbers of seats.
Err, no. I've made plenty of criticisms of the previous administration where I think it deserved them. You can even look them up; they're all on here.
What we're seeing here is projection. You feel the Tories let you down with Brexit and a shift in their socio-cultural policy, so now want to keep them out long-term and you're working back from that, and are happy to defend the incumbent administration to further that, even if you personally can't bring yourself to vote Labour.
Yes, but you propose no solutions to the massive deficit and run down public realm. You carp about trivia. It's why the Tories will remain unelectable.
I provide plenty of solutions, but you choose to ignore them. Preferring to play playground names and name calling.
It's why you remain one of the most boring and tedious posters on here, except about healthcare reform where you have something genuinely interesting to say.
Interesting piece by Max, I'd like to see real food cooking taught in all schools, national cooking/cookery campaigns, and more visits to farmers/farms at all levels of education.
One thing: I get leaflets through the door every other week from Dominos and PapaJohns, both of which I hate. Yes, they can post what they like - and no doubt this is part of an aggressive marketing campaign - but things like this combined with JustEat and Deliveroo make it very very easy to eat shit.
How do we make it easier to eat well?
And this is where the nannying definitely comes in, it might be dispiriting for people like us to contemplate advertising and leafleting bans for unhealthy foods and takeaways but the situation is only getting worse.
On healthy eating, it is already easy to do so, people just don't know how. I actually think we don't need to tackle cooking at school age, we need to do it for parents in their 30s and 40s who never learned. Make it part of eligibility for benefits to attend mandatory cooking classes, give people basic cooking equipment when they sign on and, frankly, be more intrusive about their spending. As I said any solution on healthy eating is going to feel like and be nannying, I think we need to get on board with this or there is no end to the tax rises, the £20bn salvo Labour are planning right now will look like child's play when we win in 2029 if action isn't taken.
The youngest person taught to cook at school will be 53 years old.
Before then CSEs had proper cookery lessons afterwards (as a money saving exercise) Cookery was replaced with home economics as GCSEs were introduced and actually cooking was removed from the exam..
Yes and that's why targeting people in their 30s and 40s probably makes sense. Introduce it into the curriculum for sure but it doesn't solve the issue of a generation of adults having almost no cooking skills. I learned how to cook from my mum, my wife never had that because her mum can't cook for shit. She learned from me (and believe me teaching hour wife how to cook is much more stressful than you'd realise and has huge potential for rows and fights) because she felt like it was a basic necessity she never had figured out.
What I have found among my friends is that there's two distinct groups, people who can cook and do it really well and spend time becoming excellent home chefs or there's those who don't at all and basically just exist off frozen or ready meals and takeaways/eating out. I guess that's what has come from not having food education, people who wanted to learn to do it still did and got good, people who didn't weren't forced and never picked up the skills in the first place.
Mrs Eek went to a mixed Grammar school so learnt to cook to a limited extent. I didn't and my mum really doesn't cook (they live on Marks ready meals and eating out - heck even the sheltered accommodation they moved to has a cafe in reception).
I'm lazy and will grab ready meals but given the choice I nowadays grab stir fries - relatively cheap, quick to cook and just about the only way I get enough vegetables in a day.
Theres a happy medium too where you cook simple but healthy meals.
Interesting piece by Max, I'd like to see real food cooking taught in all schools, national cooking/cookery campaigns, and more visits to farmers/farms at all levels of education.
One thing: I get leaflets through the door every other week from Dominos and PapaJohns, both of which I hate. Yes, they can post what they like - and no doubt this is part of an aggressive marketing campaign - but things like this combined with JustEat and Deliveroo make it very very easy to eat shit.
How do we make it easier to eat well?
And this is where the nannying definitely comes in, it might be dispiriting for people like us to contemplate advertising and leafleting bans for unhealthy foods and takeaways but the situation is only getting worse.
On healthy eating, it is already easy to do so, people just don't know how. I actually think we don't need to tackle cooking at school age, we need to do it for parents in their 30s and 40s who never learned. Make it part of eligibility for benefits to attend mandatory cooking classes, give people basic cooking equipment when they sign on and, frankly, be more intrusive about their spending. As I said any solution on healthy eating is going to feel like and be nannying, I think we need to get on board with this or there is no end to the tax rises, the £20bn salvo Labour are planning right now will look like child's play when we win in 2029 if action isn't taken.
I think the problem is not that people cannot cook, it's that they don't want to. It's too much hassle, which is why so many live off takeaways and ready meals.
Basically, humans are like all animals lazy and greedy. If they can ride they will not walk, and if they can eat high energy foods without cooking then they will do so. In order to choose healthy lifestyles we have to actively use intellect and deferred gratification over base instinct. That's why the fat jabs are such an appeal, we can become slim without effort.
No, I think you'd be shocked as to how lacking people are with culinary skills these days, people in their 30s and 40s who never learned. One of our friends managed to both overboil and burn her pasta when she had us over for dinner. It was inedible so we got a deliveroo instead. The thing without someone to teach her there is no resource for people like that to learn, they need to be spoonfed the basics of how to boil rice/pasta etc... until they've got that figured out, or how to replace sauce from a jar with sauce that's made fresh. She's even said to us that when her and her husband come to visit us she thinks being able to turn ingredients into amazing food is like magic but doesn't know where to start.
She's also not alone, there's millions of adults who just never learned to cook, even the basics, and now don't know where or how to start so subsist on microwave and frozen food.
Interesting piece by Max, I'd like to see real food cooking taught in all schools, national cooking/cookery campaigns, and more visits to farmers/farms at all levels of education.
One thing: I get leaflets through the door every other week from Dominos and PapaJohns, both of which I hate. Yes, they can post what they like - and no doubt this is part of an aggressive marketing campaign - but things like this combined with JustEat and Deliveroo make it very very easy to eat shit.
Hey, I've got some good news for you: she left office over 33 years ago.
Thatcher & Co killed Home Economics some 40 years ago. Centralised control of the school curriculum has meant that it has stayed dead. Thatcher is guilty.
I was in a cookery class at school which allowed the radio on in the CDT block, when I heard the news that Mrs Thatcher had resigned. Surprised to learn she abolished my cookery classes whilst no longer in power.
Interesting piece by Max, I'd like to see real food cooking taught in all schools, national cooking/cookery campaigns, and more visits to farmers/farms at all levels of education.
One thing: I get leaflets through the door every other week from Dominos and PapaJohns, both of which I hate. Yes, they can post what they like - and no doubt this is part of an aggressive marketing campaign - but things like this combined with JustEat and Deliveroo make it very very easy to eat shit.
How do we make it easier to eat well?
And this is where the nannying definitely comes in, it might be dispiriting for people like us to contemplate advertising and leafleting bans for unhealthy foods and takeaways but the situation is only getting worse.
On healthy eating, it is already easy to do so, people just don't know how. I actually think we don't need to tackle cooking at school age, we need to do it for parents in their 30s and 40s who never learned. Make it part of eligibility for benefits to attend mandatory cooking classes, give people basic cooking equipment when they sign on and, frankly, be more intrusive about their spending. As I said any solution on healthy eating is going to feel like and be nannying, I think we need to get on board with this or there is no end to the tax rises, the £20bn salvo Labour are planning right now will look like child's play when we win in 2029 if action isn't taken.
I think the problem is not that people cannot cook, it's that they don't want to. It's too much hassle, which is why so many live off takeaways and ready meals.
Basically, humans are like all animals lazy and greedy. If they can ride they will not walk, and if they can eat high energy foods without cooking then they will do so. In order to choose healthy lifestyles we have to actively use intellect and deferred gratification over base instinct. That's why the fat jabs are such an appeal, we can become slim without effort.
The fat jabs allow those with a chemical imbalance to become slim with a similar amount of effort as those without that chemical imbalance. They still have to eat less and exercise more, but no longer get the constant messaging from the body telling them to eat more.
It’s always been said that there’s some wonder drug around the corner that can deal with obesity and addiction, but it does appear that Semaglutide is the closest we’ve yet come to one making it to market.
It’s not for everyone, some people suffer from side-effects and there’s the danger of people with mental health issues such as anorexia getting hold of it, but it’s definitely something that would help a significant percentage of the population were it to be more widely available.
But what if the constant messaging from the body telling them to eat more was because they ate the wrong things? For example, the body craving sugar because sugar is its signal that fruit is at its maximum ripeness, so the body is actually craving complex vitamin-rich fruit/veg? And they're responding by reaching for a chocolate bar, the chocolate bar isn't working because we've separated the sugar from the nutrients it signals, so the body carries on craving, etc. etc. Shutting off the signal might be partially good because it stops you eating the chocolate bar, but it doesn't help the underlying issue.
The funny thing is that my views on National Insurance are well known and that my preference would be to abolish it entirely and increase income and capital gains tax but there will always be winners and losers in regard to tax policy but it’s the constant bleating about everything Labour are trying to do to stabilise the country’s finances which annoys me.
I have never understood why NI hasn’t at least been made progressive. Continue to charge me full rate over £50k (but drop the full rate) or like you say, merge with IC and rationalise rates. Employee’s NI is just silly.
Employees NI is paid weekly/monthly not annually.
Would you want to see 8% of your annual bonus disappearing because they paid it in a single week - at the moment Ni on your bonus is probably taken at 2%...
That’s why the best solution is a merger with IC and an honest decision about real tax rates. Those of us on decent salaries (not even necessarily “good” salaries) mostly accept a higher rate on the higher amounts; and frankly we pay most the tax paid in this country. But there is such a bonkers system of assorted allowances and let-offs that can’t be efficient. See also the self employed and their “voluntary” contributions, which they mostly pay out of fear and not quite understanding what happens if they don’t.
Were I chancellor - the immediate change I would be making from April 6th is
Basic rate income tax up to 24% Employee NI down to 5%
With an explicit statement that Income tax would be rising to 25% over the next few years while Employee NI would be reduced to 4%...
I would also reintroduce the WFA because that would reduce the impact on pensioners so only those receiving more than £8,000 in private pensions were worse off..
So you'd reintroduce WFP for all pensioners up to an income of £19,500?
The problem with that is it does not take into account 70% of pensioners have no housing costs. In comparison to a single parent, renting a flat with two teenage children, that income is equivalent to a salary of £77,000, or more than double the median salary.
Yes - because the worst hit people losing the WFP are those with an income between £13-15,000 but there is no easy way to identify them so the fix is not bother identifying them and accepting the loss.
A pensioner on £13,000 still has an income worth £58,000, compared with the scenario I describe above.
How does someone on £13000 have an income worth £58,000 - I'm either thick or you are making assumptions that should be easy to refute..
My scenario above included two teenage children and a single parent living in rented accomodation, with a single pensioner living in a home they own outright. The standard tool for comparing household incomes is equivlisation; in this case an adult is worth 1 and a teenage child is worth 0.5.
13,000 = 12,915 after tax. Equivalised income = 12,915 *2 = 25,830 Rental costs = 1,500 PCM (I'm just plucking a number here) Gross pay required = 43,830 Net salary = 57,366
Hang on you've also made the assumption the pensioner still has their spouse and that both of them receive separate state pensions.
That isn't the case - you really have plucked figures from no-where..
No I haven't. That's a single pensioner in my example.
Equivalised income = 12,915 *2 = 25,830 - where does that 2 come from?
If you are talking because their are 2 people - it's not 2x food costs for 2 people it's likely 1.5x
Council tax is paid once Electric / Gas (say £150 a month) is only paid once - but will be higher because pensioners are at home all day Water paid once
Your entire figure is made up of assumptions that simply aren't valid. For instance there will be pensioners who are receiving £13,000 and are paying rent on a council flat..
Each teenage child is worth 0.5 adults. So you multiply by 2x. It's not perfect measure, but it's the standard way OECD countries assess it and make comparisons.
I'm just trying to demonstrate that the universal nature of pensioner benefits is deeply inefficient. 70% of pensioners own their homes outright.
You would have been better off simply saying "Most pensioners no longer have to pay rent or a mortgage" and leaving it at that.
PB tories hate every single tax increase but yet their lads left public finances in dire straits. Fuck off, you broke it. The money has to come from somewhere and if business owners have to take some money from profits to pay NI then so what. Deal with it.
There are Santa's little helpers, like you and Foxy too, but you don't have quite the same histrionics that they do, even though you both get off on Wokery, Self-Flagellation and Reparations.
And you refuse to acknowledge the dreadful national finances and run down armed forces, criminal justice system, universities and health service that Labour inherited from the Tories.
That unwillingness to understand why the electorate delivered the most crushing defeat for the Tories since the 19th century is why the Tories are far from being electable again. They believe that bugging turn will deliver them back to power without any analysis of how comprehensively failed over recent parliaments.
I think Labour will lose seats next election, but the Tories will be way behind them in numbers of seats.
Err, no. I've made plenty of criticisms of the previous administration where I think it deserved them. You can even look them up; they're all on here.
What we're seeing here is projection. You feel the Tories let you down with Brexit and a shift in their socio-cultural policy, so now want to keep them out long-term and you're working back from that, and are happy to defend the incumbent administration to further that, even if you personally can't bring yourself to vote Labour.
Yes, but you propose no solutions to the massive deficit and run down public realm. You carp about trivia. It's why the Tories will remain unelectable.
I provide plenty of solutions, but you choose to ignore them. Preferring to play playground names and name calling.
It's why you remain one of the most boring and tedious posters on here, except about healthcare reform where you have something genuinely interesting to say.
The thing is in order to fit in in the nhs you have to have lefty views. Its a bubble. Then you cone out of the bubble and have no decent arguments.
I was in a cookery class at school which allowed the radio on in the CDT block, when I heard the news that Mrs Thatcher had resigned. Surprised to learn she abolished my cookery classes whilst no longer in power.
Commonwealth leaders have agreed the "time has come" for a conversation about reparations for the slave trade, despite the UK's desire to keep the subject off the agenda at a two-day summit in Samoa.
A document signed by 56 heads of government, including UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, acknowledges calls for "discussions on reparatory justice" for the "abhorrent" transatlantic slave trade.
The statement says it is time for a "meaningful, truthful and respectful conversation".
Sir Keir said there had been no discussions about money at the meeting, and that the UK is "very clear" in its position that it would not pay reparations.
The UK has faced growing calls from Commonwealth leaders to apologise and pay reparations for the country’s historical role in the slave trade. Reparations for the benefit of those who suffered as a result of slavery could take many forms, from financial to symbolic.
Keir Starmer has denied misleading the public over tax rises during the election campaign, amid reports the government is planning to increase employers’ national insurance contributions.
Asked if he had misled voters by not warning them about the billions in tax rises expected in the government’s first budget on Wednesday, the prime minister said: “No, we were very clear about the tax rises that we would necessarily have to make whatever the circumstances … I listed them I don’t know how many times in the campaign.
I genuinely don't know why they are going with this line, nobody believes it. I thought the whole point of the £22bn £40bn, £100bn, black hole narrative was to setup the I am sorry, we are going to have to adjust what we said in the GE.
The funny thing is that my views on National Insurance are well known and that my preference would be to abolish it entirely and increase income and capital gains tax but there will always be winners and losers in regard to tax policy but it’s the constant bleating about everything Labour are trying to do to stabilise the country’s finances which annoys me.
I have never understood why NI hasn’t at least been made progressive. Continue to charge me full rate over £50k (but drop the full rate) or like you say, merge with IC and rationalise rates. Employee’s NI is just silly.
Employees NI is paid weekly/monthly not annually.
Would you want to see 8% of your annual bonus disappearing because they paid it in a single week - at the moment Ni on your bonus is probably taken at 2%...
That’s why the best solution is a merger with IC and an honest decision about real tax rates. Those of us on decent salaries (not even necessarily “good” salaries) mostly accept a higher rate on the higher amounts; and frankly we pay most the tax paid in this country. But there is such a bonkers system of assorted allowances and let-offs that can’t be efficient. See also the self employed and their “voluntary” contributions, which they mostly pay out of fear and not quite understanding what happens if they don’t.
Were I chancellor - the immediate change I would be making from April 6th is
Basic rate income tax up to 24% Employee NI down to 5%
With an explicit statement that Income tax would be rising to 25% over the next few years while Employee NI would be reduced to 4%...
I would also reintroduce the WFA because that would reduce the impact on pensioners so only those receiving more than £8,000 in private pensions were worse off..
So you'd reintroduce WFP for all pensioners up to an income of £19,500?
The problem with that is it does not take into account 70% of pensioners have no housing costs. In comparison to a single parent, renting a flat with two teenage children, that income is equivalent to a salary of £77,000, or more than double the median salary.
Yes - because the worst hit people losing the WFP are those with an income between £13-15,000 but there is no easy way to identify them so the fix is not bother identifying them and accepting the loss.
A pensioner on £13,000 still has an income worth £58,000, compared with the scenario I describe above.
How does someone on £13000 have an income worth £58,000 - I'm either thick or you are making assumptions that should be easy to refute..
My scenario above included two teenage children and a single parent living in rented accomodation, with a single pensioner living in a home they own outright. The standard tool for comparing household incomes is equivlisation; in this case an adult is worth 1 and a teenage child is worth 0.5.
13,000 = 12,915 after tax. Equivalised income = 12,915 *2 = 25,830 Rental costs = 1,500 PCM (I'm just plucking a number here) Gross pay required = 43,830 Net salary = 57,366
Hang on you've also made the assumption the pensioner still has their spouse and that both of them receive separate state pensions.
That isn't the case - you really have plucked figures from no-where..
No I haven't. That's a single pensioner in my example.
Equivalised income = 12,915 *2 = 25,830 - where does that 2 come from?
If you are talking because their are 2 people - it's not 2x food costs for 2 people it's likely 1.5x
Council tax is paid once Electric / Gas (say £150 a month) is only paid once - but will be higher because pensioners are at home all day Water paid once
Your entire figure is made up of assumptions that simply aren't valid. For instance there will be pensioners who are receiving £13,000 and are paying rent on a council flat..
Each teenage child is worth 0.5 adults. So you multiply by 2x. It's not perfect measure, but it's the standard way OECD countries assess it and make comparisons.
I'm just trying to demonstrate that the universal nature of pensioner benefits is deeply inefficient. 70% of pensioners own their homes outright.
But you haven't shown that at all - all you have shown is that when you compare apples with Concordes via dubious assumptions you can send a debate seriously offtopic.
Your maths simply doesn't stack up, your assumptions are missing (and fundamentally wrong) and beyond that you miss so many points as to why we have a State pension that it's not worth arguing with you.
Interesting piece by Max, I'd like to see real food cooking taught in all schools, national cooking/cookery campaigns, and more visits to farmers/farms at all levels of education.
One thing: I get leaflets through the door every other week from Dominos and PapaJohns, both of which I hate. Yes, they can post what they like - and no doubt this is part of an aggressive marketing campaign - but things like this combined with JustEat and Deliveroo make it very very easy to eat shit.
How do we make it easier to eat well?
And this is where the nannying definitely comes in, it might be dispiriting for people like us to contemplate advertising and leafleting bans for unhealthy foods and takeaways but the situation is only getting worse.
On healthy eating, it is already easy to do so, people just don't know how. I actually think we don't need to tackle cooking at school age, we need to do it for parents in their 30s and 40s who never learned. Make it part of eligibility for benefits to attend mandatory cooking classes, give people basic cooking equipment when they sign on and, frankly, be more intrusive about their spending. As I said any solution on healthy eating is going to feel like and be nannying, I think we need to get on board with this or there is no end to the tax rises, the £20bn salvo Labour are planning right now will look like child's play when we win in 2029 if action isn't taken.
I think the problem is not that people cannot cook, it's that they don't want to. It's too much hassle, which is why so many live off takeaways and ready meals.
Basically, humans are like all animals lazy and greedy. If they can ride they will not walk, and if they can eat high energy foods without cooking then they will do so. In order to choose healthy lifestyles we have to actively use intellect and deferred gratification over base instinct. That's why the fat jabs are such an appeal, we can become slim without effort.
No, I think you'd be shocked as to how lacking people are with culinary skills these days, people in their 30s and 40s who never learned. One of our friends managed to both overboil and burn her pasta when she had us over for dinner. It was inedible so we got a deliveroo instead. The thing without someone to teach her there is no resource for people like that to learn, they need to be spoonfed the basics of how to boil rice/pasta etc... until they've got that figured out, or how to replace sauce from a jar with sauce that's made fresh. She's even said to us that when her and her husband come to visit us she thinks being able to turn ingredients into amazing food is like magic but doesn't know where to start.
She's also not alone, there's millions of adults who just never learned to cook, even the basics, and now don't know where or how to start so subsist on microwave and frozen food.
On topic, everybody dies from something. If we increase survival rates for diabetes and lung cancer, the survivors may well die of something even more expensive a few years later, and will probably need lots of expensive end of life care in the meantime.
Looking at it from the demand side is probably wrong. We as a society should stop pretending that health care is unlimited and freely available, work out how much we can afford to spend as a share of national income (say the OECD average excluding the US) then work out how best to allocate it to get the most cost-effective years of healthy life remaining. And anything more than that, people (mostly the old) should be required to fund themselves, at least for non-palliative care.
We spend too much. And the State needs to stop doing some things, and be more efficient with others.
We raise £1 trillion in taxes a year. My view is that is plenty.
The Conservatives have just had fourteen years and a manifesto to identify things it should stop doing, or do more efficiently.
What specifics do you think they left on the table?
I've said on here before I think the triple lock should end, State pension should move towards a level of means testing, benefits should be time-limited, and NHS should be for some care but not all care. That public DB pensions need to be phased out. And that planning and rights laws need to be reviewed to stop never ending judicial reviews and initiation of infrastructure. I'd pay down some debt. And I'd put more into industrial strategy, education and defence- whilst incentivising business and jobs.
Of course much of this would be hugely unpopular, but if we don't grasp the nettle we'll eventually go bankrupt.
None if that is Tory policy though, so why vote for a quadruple lock that you believe will bankrupt the country?
Interesting piece by Max, I'd like to see real food cooking taught in all schools, national cooking/cookery campaigns, and more visits to farmers/farms at all levels of education.
One thing: I get leaflets through the door every other week from Dominos and PapaJohns, both of which I hate. Yes, they can post what they like - and no doubt this is part of an aggressive marketing campaign - but things like this combined with JustEat and Deliveroo make it very very easy to eat shit.
How do we make it easier to eat well?
And this is where the nannying definitely comes in, it might be dispiriting for people like us to contemplate advertising and leafleting bans for unhealthy foods and takeaways but the situation is only getting worse.
On healthy eating, it is already easy to do so, people just don't know how. I actually think we don't need to tackle cooking at school age, we need to do it for parents in their 30s and 40s who never learned. Make it part of eligibility for benefits to attend mandatory cooking classes, give people basic cooking equipment when they sign on and, frankly, be more intrusive about their spending. As I said any solution on healthy eating is going to feel like and be nannying, I think we need to get on board with this or there is no end to the tax rises, the £20bn salvo Labour are planning right now will look like child's play when we win in 2029 if action isn't taken.
I think the problem is not that people cannot cook, it's that they don't want to. It's too much hassle, which is why so many live off takeaways and ready meals.
Basically, humans are like all animals lazy and greedy. If they can ride they will not walk, and if they can eat high energy foods without cooking then they will do so. In order to choose healthy lifestyles we have to actively use intellect and deferred gratification over base instinct. That's why the fat jabs are such an appeal, we can become slim without effort.
Why don't they want to? Well, a lot of them are working long hours in stressful jobs for crap money under less than ideal conditions. Their housing costs are sky high and the transport infrastructure is crap etc etc. It's no coincidence that obesity is disproportionately high in the lower income brackets. Everything is interrelated.
There is a massive tanker to turnaround in this country. It is the work of many, many years. A lot of people are going to be discomfited by it. But it has to be done. Whether it will be is another matter, of course.
I don't buy this. I'm the same. I can often rustle up something better, cheaper and healthier in the same time it takes to get a takeaway delivered.
I think plenty simply don't know, can't be arsed or were never introduced to non-processed food or fast food as children so just don't want it.
Getting a takeaway delivered - find phone order on app and wait 50 minutes (say) for delivery while watching TV
Cook a meal means spending a lot of those 50 minutes in the kitchen actually cooking
The number of people who have crossed the Channel in small boats so far this year has exceeded the total number that arrived in the whole of 2023, according to figures published by the Home Office.
Interesting piece by Max, I'd like to see real food cooking taught in all schools, national cooking/cookery campaigns, and more visits to farmers/farms at all levels of education.
One thing: I get leaflets through the door every other week from Dominos and PapaJohns, both of which I hate. Yes, they can post what they like - and no doubt this is part of an aggressive marketing campaign - but things like this combined with JustEat and Deliveroo make it very very easy to eat shit.
How do we make it easier to eat well?
And this is where the nannying definitely comes in, it might be dispiriting for people like us to contemplate advertising and leafleting bans for unhealthy foods and takeaways but the situation is only getting worse.
On healthy eating, it is already easy to do so, people just don't know how. I actually think we don't need to tackle cooking at school age, we need to do it for parents in their 30s and 40s who never learned. Make it part of eligibility for benefits to attend mandatory cooking classes, give people basic cooking equipment when they sign on and, frankly, be more intrusive about their spending. As I said any solution on healthy eating is going to feel like and be nannying, I think we need to get on board with this or there is no end to the tax rises, the £20bn salvo Labour are planning right now will look like child's play when we win in 2029 if action isn't taken.
I think the problem is not that people cannot cook, it's that they don't want to. It's too much hassle, which is why so many live off takeaways and ready meals.
Basically, humans are like all animals lazy and greedy. If they can ride they will not walk, and if they can eat high energy foods without cooking then they will do so. In order to choose healthy lifestyles we have to actively use intellect and deferred gratification over base instinct. That's why the fat jabs are such an appeal, we can become slim without effort.
The fat jabs allow those with a chemical imbalance to become slim with a similar amount of effort as those without that chemical imbalance. They still have to eat less and exercise more, but no longer get the constant messaging from the body telling them to eat more.
It’s always been said that there’s some wonder drug around the corner that can deal with obesity and addiction, but it does appear that Semaglutide is the closest we’ve yet come to one making it to market.
It’s not for everyone, some people suffer from side-effects and there’s the danger of people with mental health issues such as anorexia getting hold of it, but it’s definitely something that would help a significant percentage of the population were it to be more widely available.
But what if the constant messaging from the body telling them to eat more was because they ate the wrong things? For example, the body craving sugar because sugar is its signal that fruit is at its maximum ripeness, so the body is actually craving complex vitamin-rich fruit/veg? And they're responding by reaching for a chocolate bar, the chocolate bar isn't working because we've separated the sugar from the nutrients it signals, so the body carries on craving, etc. etc. Shutting off the signal might be partially good because it stops you eating the chocolate bar, but it doesn't help the underlying issue.
The drugs can help the problem, but yes the quality of diet is also important.
Interesting piece by Max, I'd like to see real food cooking taught in all schools, national cooking/cookery campaigns, and more visits to farmers/farms at all levels of education.
One thing: I get leaflets through the door every other week from Dominos and PapaJohns, both of which I hate. Yes, they can post what they like - and no doubt this is part of an aggressive marketing campaign - but things like this combined with JustEat and Deliveroo make it very very easy to eat shit.
How do we make it easier to eat well?
And this is where the nannying definitely comes in, it might be dispiriting for people like us to contemplate advertising and leafleting bans for unhealthy foods and takeaways but the situation is only getting worse.
On healthy eating, it is already easy to do so, people just don't know how. I actually think we don't need to tackle cooking at school age, we need to do it for parents in their 30s and 40s who never learned. Make it part of eligibility for benefits to attend mandatory cooking classes, give people basic cooking equipment when they sign on and, frankly, be more intrusive about their spending. As I said any solution on healthy eating is going to feel like and be nannying, I think we need to get on board with this or there is no end to the tax rises, the £20bn salvo Labour are planning right now will look like child's play when we win in 2029 if action isn't taken.
I think the problem is not that people cannot cook, it's that they don't want to. It's too much hassle, which is why so many live off takeaways and ready meals.
Basically, humans are like all animals lazy and greedy. If they can ride they will not walk, and if they can eat high energy foods without cooking then they will do so. In order to choose healthy lifestyles we have to actively use intellect and deferred gratification over base instinct. That's why the fat jabs are such an appeal, we can become slim without effort.
Why don't they want to? Well, a lot of them are working long hours in stressful jobs for crap money under less than ideal conditions. Their housing costs are sky high and the transport infrastructure is crap etc etc. It's no coincidence that obesity is disproportionately high in the lower income brackets. Everything is interrelated.
There is a massive tanker to turnaround in this country. It is the work of many, many years. A lot of people are going to be discomfited by it. But it has to be done. Whether it will be is another matter, of course.
I don't buy that, I was working 60-70 hours a week at the start of my finance career and I still made the time to meal prep and cook. I had a very good income so it would have been easy to just order in or get an M&S ready meal on the way home.
It's a values, not time pressure that makes people choose unhealthy food. They don't value their health enough to make sure they aren't putting crap food into their bodies. A significant bit of that attitude is "well if I get sick the NHS will have to fix me" IMO which is something the government hasn't tackled for 30+ years.
Keir Starmer has denied misleading the public over tax rises during the election campaign, amid reports the government is planning to increase employers’ national insurance contributions.
Asked if he had misled voters by not warning them about the billions in tax rises expected in the government’s first budget on Wednesday, the prime minister said: “No, we were very clear about the tax rises that we would necessarily have to make whatever the circumstances … I listed them I don’t know how many times in the campaign.
I genuinely don't know why they are going with this line, nobody believes it. I though the whole point of the £22bn £40bn, £100bn, black hole narrative was to enable them to say sorry, we are going to have to adjust what we said in the GE.
It's a dull conversation.
Starmer and Labour used ambiguity but also signalled taxes would go up. The public, at the time, understood the signals and thought taxes would go up, and more than Labour were indicating. Now taxes are about to go up and more than Labour were indicating.
None of this is surprising or unusual. It is how politics has always worked.
On topic, everybody dies from something. If we increase survival rates for diabetes and lung cancer, the survivors may well die of something even more expensive a few years later, and will probably need lots of expensive end of life care in the meantime.
Looking at it from the demand side is probably wrong. We as a society should stop pretending that health care is unlimited and freely available, work out how much we can afford to spend as a share of national income (say the OECD average excluding the US) then work out how best to allocate it to get the most cost-effective years of healthy life remaining. And anything more than that, people (mostly the old) should be required to fund themselves, at least for non-palliative care.
We spend too much. And the State needs to stop doing some things, and be more efficient with others.
We raise £1 trillion in taxes a year. My view is that is plenty.
The Conservatives have just had fourteen years and a manifesto to identify things it should stop doing, or do more efficiently.
What specifics do you think they left on the table?
I've said on here before I think the triple lock should end, State pension should move towards a level of means testing, benefits should be time-limited, and NHS should be for some care but not all care. That public DB pensions need to be phased out. And that planning and rights laws need to be reviewed to stop never ending judicial reviews and initiation of infrastructure. I'd pay down some debt. And I'd put more into industrial strategy, education and defence- whilst incentivising business and jobs.
Of course much of this would be hugely unpopular, but if we don't grasp the nettle we'll eventually go bankrupt.
None if that is Tory policy though, so why vote for a quadruple lock that you believe will bankrupt the country?
Intetesting poll here foxy showing only 31% of people now trust their doctor. Shocking.
Interesting piece by Max, I'd like to see real food cooking taught in all schools, national cooking/cookery campaigns, and more visits to farmers/farms at all levels of education.
One thing: I get leaflets through the door every other week from Dominos and PapaJohns, both of which I hate. Yes, they can post what they like - and no doubt this is part of an aggressive marketing campaign - but things like this combined with JustEat and Deliveroo make it very very easy to eat shit.
How do we make it easier to eat well?
And this is where the nannying definitely comes in, it might be dispiriting for people like us to contemplate advertising and leafleting bans for unhealthy foods and takeaways but the situation is only getting worse.
On healthy eating, it is already easy to do so, people just don't know how. I actually think we don't need to tackle cooking at school age, we need to do it for parents in their 30s and 40s who never learned. Make it part of eligibility for benefits to attend mandatory cooking classes, give people basic cooking equipment when they sign on and, frankly, be more intrusive about their spending. As I said any solution on healthy eating is going to feel like and be nannying, I think we need to get on board with this or there is no end to the tax rises, the £20bn salvo Labour are planning right now will look like child's play when we win in 2029 if action isn't taken.
I think the problem is not that people cannot cook, it's that they don't want to. It's too much hassle, which is why so many live off takeaways and ready meals.
Basically, humans are like all animals lazy and greedy. If they can ride they will not walk, and if they can eat high energy foods without cooking then they will do so. In order to choose healthy lifestyles we have to actively use intellect and deferred gratification over base instinct. That's why the fat jabs are such an appeal, we can become slim without effort.
Why don't they want to? Well, a lot of them are working long hours in stressful jobs for crap money under less than ideal conditions. Their housing costs are sky high and the transport infrastructure is crap etc etc. It's no coincidence that obesity is disproportionately high in the lower income brackets. Everything is interrelated.
There is a massive tanker to turnaround in this country. It is the work of many, many years. A lot of people are going to be discomfited by it. But it has to be done. Whether it will be is another matter, of course.
I don't buy this. I'm the same. I can often rustle up something better, cheaper and healthier in the same time it takes to get a takeaway delivered.
I think plenty simply don't know, can't be arsed or were never introduced to non-processed food or fast food as children so just don't want it.
Getting a takeaway delivered - find phone order on app and wait 50 minutes (say) for delivery while watching TV
Cook a meal means spending a lot of those 50 minutes in the kitchen actually cooking
I personally can never get my head around the popularity of UberEats etc. You pay 20-30% more than the menu price in the chain restaurant, then another £5+ on delivery, to have something made in a dark kitchen (or the same kitchen pretending to be 27 different virtual restaurants). Its super expensive and by the time its been bounced around on the back of a bike for 20 mins, a mess.
Keir Starmer has denied misleading the public over tax rises during the election campaign, amid reports the government is planning to increase employers’ national insurance contributions.
Asked if he had misled voters by not warning them about the billions in tax rises expected in the government’s first budget on Wednesday, the prime minister said: “No, we were very clear about the tax rises that we would necessarily have to make whatever the circumstances … I listed them I don’t know how many times in the campaign.
I genuinely don't know why they are going with this line, nobody believes it. I though the whole point of the £22bn £40bn, £100bn, black hole narrative was to enable them to say sorry, we are going to have to adjust what we said in the GE.
It's a dull conversation.
Starmer and Labour used ambiguity but also signalled taxes would go up. The public, at the time, understood the signals and thought taxes would go up, and more than Labour were indicating. Now taxes are about to go up and more than Labour were indicating.
None of this is surprising or unusual. It is how politics has always worked.
He's losing it with his 'I don't know how many times' - even Sunak didn't get that tetchy with interviewers and he was pretty shit at responding to tough questions.
The funny thing is that my views on National Insurance are well known and that my preference would be to abolish it entirely and increase income and capital gains tax but there will always be winners and losers in regard to tax policy but it’s the constant bleating about everything Labour are trying to do to stabilise the country’s finances which annoys me.
I have never understood why NI hasn’t at least been made progressive. Continue to charge me full rate over £50k (but drop the full rate) or like you say, merge with IC and rationalise rates. Employee’s NI is just silly.
Employees NI is paid weekly/monthly not annually.
Would you want to see 8% of your annual bonus disappearing because they paid it in a single week - at the moment Ni on your bonus is probably taken at 2%...
That’s why the best solution is a merger with IC and an honest decision about real tax rates. Those of us on decent salaries (not even necessarily “good” salaries) mostly accept a higher rate on the higher amounts; and frankly we pay most the tax paid in this country. But there is such a bonkers system of assorted allowances and let-offs that can’t be efficient. See also the self employed and their “voluntary” contributions, which they mostly pay out of fear and not quite understanding what happens if they don’t.
Were I chancellor - the immediate change I would be making from April 6th is
Basic rate income tax up to 24% Employee NI down to 5%
With an explicit statement that Income tax would be rising to 25% over the next few years while Employee NI would be reduced to 4%...
I would also reintroduce the WFA because that would reduce the impact on pensioners so only those receiving more than £8,000 in private pensions were worse off..
So you'd reintroduce WFP for all pensioners up to an income of £19,500?
The problem with that is it does not take into account 70% of pensioners have no housing costs. In comparison to a single parent, renting a flat with two teenage children, that income is equivalent to a salary of £77,000, or more than double the median salary.
Yes - because the worst hit people losing the WFP are those with an income between £13-15,000 but there is no easy way to identify them so the fix is not bother identifying them and accepting the loss.
A pensioner on £13,000 still has an income worth £58,000, compared with the scenario I describe above.
How does someone on £13000 have an income worth £58,000 - I'm either thick or you are making assumptions that should be easy to refute..
My scenario above included two teenage children and a single parent living in rented accomodation, with a single pensioner living in a home they own outright. The standard tool for comparing household incomes is equivlisation; in this case an adult is worth 1 and a teenage child is worth 0.5.
13,000 = 12,915 after tax. Equivalised income = 12,915 *2 = 25,830 Rental costs = 1,500 PCM (I'm just plucking a number here) Gross pay required = 43,830 Net salary = 57,366
Hang on you've also made the assumption the pensioner still has their spouse and that both of them receive separate state pensions.
That isn't the case - you really have plucked figures from no-where..
No I haven't. That's a single pensioner in my example.
Equivalised income = 12,915 *2 = 25,830 - where does that 2 come from?
If you are talking because their are 2 people - it's not 2x food costs for 2 people it's likely 1.5x
Council tax is paid once Electric / Gas (say £150 a month) is only paid once - but will be higher because pensioners are at home all day Water paid once
Your entire figure is made up of assumptions that simply aren't valid. For instance there will be pensioners who are receiving £13,000 and are paying rent on a council flat..
Each teenage child is worth 0.5 adults. So you multiply by 2x. It's not perfect measure, but it's the standard way OECD countries assess it and make comparisons.
I'm just trying to demonstrate that the universal nature of pensioner benefits is deeply inefficient. 70% of pensioners own their homes outright.
But you haven't shown that at all - all you have shown is that when you compare apples with Concordes via dubious assumptions you can send a debate seriously offtopic.
Your maths simply doesn't stack up, your assumptions are missing (and fundamentally wrong) and beyond that you miss so many points as to why we have a State pension that it's not worth arguing with you.
Well if government insists on wasting huge amounts of money on frivolous projects, my vote goes to more Concordes!
On topic, everybody dies from something. If we increase survival rates for diabetes and lung cancer, the survivors may well die of something even more expensive a few years later, and will probably need lots of expensive end of life care in the meantime.
Looking at it from the demand side is probably wrong. We as a society should stop pretending that health care is unlimited and freely available, work out how much we can afford to spend as a share of national income (say the OECD average excluding the US) then work out how best to allocate it to get the most cost-effective years of healthy life remaining. And anything more than that, people (mostly the old) should be required to fund themselves, at least for non-palliative care.
We spend too much. And the State needs to stop doing some things, and be more efficient with others.
We raise £1 trillion in taxes a year. My view is that is plenty.
The Conservatives have just had fourteen years and a manifesto to identify things it should stop doing, or do more efficiently.
What specifics do you think they left on the table?
I've said on here before I think the triple lock should end, State pension should move towards a level of means testing, benefits should be time-limited, and NHS should be for some care but not all care. That public DB pensions need to be phased out. And that planning and rights laws need to be reviewed to stop never ending judicial reviews and initiation of infrastructure. I'd pay down some debt. And I'd put more into industrial strategy, education and defence- whilst incentivising business and jobs.
Of course much of this would be hugely unpopular, but if we don't grasp the nettle we'll eventually go bankrupt.
None if that is Tory policy though, so why vote for a quadruple lock that you believe will bankrupt the country?
Intetesting poll here foxy showing only 31% of people now trust their doctor. Shocking.
Interesting piece by Max, I'd like to see real food cooking taught in all schools, national cooking/cookery campaigns, and more visits to farmers/farms at all levels of education.
One thing: I get leaflets through the door every other week from Dominos and PapaJohns, both of which I hate. Yes, they can post what they like - and no doubt this is part of an aggressive marketing campaign - but things like this combined with JustEat and Deliveroo make it very very easy to eat shit.
How do we make it easier to eat well?
And this is where the nannying definitely comes in, it might be dispiriting for people like us to contemplate advertising and leafleting bans for unhealthy foods and takeaways but the situation is only getting worse.
On healthy eating, it is already easy to do so, people just don't know how. I actually think we don't need to tackle cooking at school age, we need to do it for parents in their 30s and 40s who never learned. Make it part of eligibility for benefits to attend mandatory cooking classes, give people basic cooking equipment when they sign on and, frankly, be more intrusive about their spending. As I said any solution on healthy eating is going to feel like and be nannying, I think we need to get on board with this or there is no end to the tax rises, the £20bn salvo Labour are planning right now will look like child's play when we win in 2029 if action isn't taken.
I think the problem is not that people cannot cook, it's that they don't want to. It's too much hassle, which is why so many live off takeaways and ready meals.
Basically, humans are like all animals lazy and greedy. If they can ride they will not walk, and if they can eat high energy foods without cooking then they will do so. In order to choose healthy lifestyles we have to actively use intellect and deferred gratification over base instinct. That's why the fat jabs are such an appeal, we can become slim without effort.
Why don't they want to? Well, a lot of them are working long hours in stressful jobs for crap money under less than ideal conditions. Their housing costs are sky high and the transport infrastructure is crap etc etc. It's no coincidence that obesity is disproportionately high in the lower income brackets. Everything is interrelated.
There is a massive tanker to turnaround in this country. It is the work of many, many years. A lot of people are going to be discomfited by it. But it has to be done. Whether it will be is another matter, of course.
I don't buy that, I was working 60-70 hours a week at the start of my finance career and I still made the time to meal prep and cook. I had a very good income so it would have been easy to just order in or get an M&S ready meal on the way home.
It's a values, not time pressure that makes people choose unhealthy food. They don't value their health enough to make sure they aren't putting crap food into their bodies. A significant bit of that attitude is "well if I get sick the NHS will have to fix me" IMO which is something the government hasn't tackled for 30+ years.
I agree. Also many women think its against the rules of feminism to learn to cook. But sadly someone has to do it.
The number of people who have crossed the Channel in small boats so far this year has exceeded the total number that arrived in the whole of 2023, according to figures published by the Home Office.
But people were so certain that Starmer would "smash the people smuggling gangs" and that would solve it and arrivals would be lower than last year or 2022.
A well-written piece which makes some good points. I personally don't have a distaste for "nanny state" type initiatives designed to improve people's behaviour and this area - health - is indeed crying out for it.
Interesting piece by Max, I'd like to see real food cooking taught in all schools, national cooking/cookery campaigns, and more visits to farmers/farms at all levels of education.
One thing: I get leaflets through the door every other week from Dominos and PapaJohns, both of which I hate. Yes, they can post what they like - and no doubt this is part of an aggressive marketing campaign - but things like this combined with JustEat and Deliveroo make it very very easy to eat shit.
How do we make it easier to eat well?
And this is where the nannying definitely comes in, it might be dispiriting for people like us to contemplate advertising and leafleting bans for unhealthy foods and takeaways but the situation is only getting worse.
On healthy eating, it is already easy to do so, people just don't know how. I actually think we don't need to tackle cooking at school age, we need to do it for parents in their 30s and 40s who never learned. Make it part of eligibility for benefits to attend mandatory cooking classes, give people basic cooking equipment when they sign on and, frankly, be more intrusive about their spending. As I said any solution on healthy eating is going to feel like and be nannying, I think we need to get on board with this or there is no end to the tax rises, the £20bn salvo Labour are planning right now will look like child's play when we win in 2029 if action isn't taken.
I think the problem is not that people cannot cook, it's that they don't want to. It's too much hassle, which is why so many live off takeaways and ready meals.
Basically, humans are like all animals lazy and greedy. If they can ride they will not walk, and if they can eat high energy foods without cooking then they will do so. In order to choose healthy lifestyles we have to actively use intellect and deferred gratification over base instinct. That's why the fat jabs are such an appeal, we can become slim without effort.
Why don't they want to? Well, a lot of them are working long hours in stressful jobs for crap money under less than ideal conditions. Their housing costs are sky high and the transport infrastructure is crap etc etc. It's no coincidence that obesity is disproportionately high in the lower income brackets. Everything is interrelated.
There is a massive tanker to turnaround in this country. It is the work of many, many years. A lot of people are going to be discomfited by it. But it has to be done. Whether it will be is another matter, of course.
Yes, our addiction to junk food and takeaways is part of modern life, particularly the atomisation of family life. Households are smaller and individuals are not always around at the same time to eat. Add in the easy availability of ready meals and takeaway to the smartphone and long hours culture and it's not surprising that few families eat the same food sat together at a table on more than special occasions.
Interesting piece by Max, I'd like to see real food cooking taught in all schools, national cooking/cookery campaigns, and more visits to farmers/farms at all levels of education.
One thing: I get leaflets through the door every other week from Dominos and PapaJohns, both of which I hate. Yes, they can post what they like - and no doubt this is part of an aggressive marketing campaign - but things like this combined with JustEat and Deliveroo make it very very easy to eat shit.
How do we make it easier to eat well?
And this is where the nannying definitely comes in, it might be dispiriting for people like us to contemplate advertising and leafleting bans for unhealthy foods and takeaways but the situation is only getting worse.
On healthy eating, it is already easy to do so, people just don't know how. I actually think we don't need to tackle cooking at school age, we need to do it for parents in their 30s and 40s who never learned. Make it part of eligibility for benefits to attend mandatory cooking classes, give people basic cooking equipment when they sign on and, frankly, be more intrusive about their spending. As I said any solution on healthy eating is going to feel like and be nannying, I think we need to get on board with this or there is no end to the tax rises, the £20bn salvo Labour are planning right now will look like child's play when we win in 2029 if action isn't taken.
I think the problem is not that people cannot cook, it's that they don't want to. It's too much hassle, which is why so many live off takeaways and ready meals.
Basically, humans are like all animals lazy and greedy. If they can ride they will not walk, and if they can eat high energy foods without cooking then they will do so. In order to choose healthy lifestyles we have to actively use intellect and deferred gratification over base instinct. That's why the fat jabs are such an appeal, we can become slim without effort.
Why don't they want to? Well, a lot of them are working long hours in stressful jobs for crap money under less than ideal conditions. Their housing costs are sky high and the transport infrastructure is crap etc etc. It's no coincidence that obesity is disproportionately high in the lower income brackets. Everything is interrelated.
There is a massive tanker to turnaround in this country. It is the work of many, many years. A lot of people are going to be discomfited by it. But it has to be done. Whether it will be is another matter, of course.
I don't buy that, I was working 60-70 hours a week at the start of my finance career and I still made the time to meal prep and cook. I had a very good income so it would have been easy to just order in or get an M&S ready meal on the way home.
It's a values, not time pressure that makes people choose unhealthy food. They don't value their health enough to make sure they aren't putting crap food into their bodies. A significant bit of that attitude is "well if I get sick the NHS will have to fix me" IMO which is something the government hasn't tackled for 30+ years.
I agree. Also many women think its against the rules of feminism to learn to cook. But sadly someone has to do it.
What a laughably sexist post. They don’t do it for the same reasons as men, not enough time or energy, or they can’t be bothered.
A well-written piece which makes some good points. I personally don't have a distaste for "nanny state" type initiatives designed to improve people's behaviour and this area - health - is indeed crying out for it.
Yes. It would be ideal.if people took personal responsibility but thats not modern britain im afraid.
A well-written piece which makes some good points. I personally don't have a distaste for "nanny state" type initiatives designed to improve people's behaviour and this area - health - is indeed crying out for it.
Remember the approving remarks when it was Mr Johnson who proposed such things.
The funny thing is that my views on National Insurance are well known and that my preference would be to abolish it entirely and increase income and capital gains tax but there will always be winners and losers in regard to tax policy but it’s the constant bleating about everything Labour are trying to do to stabilise the country’s finances which annoys me.
The mood of the thread is out of keeping with a thoughtful and measured article at the top of it.
In the thread there's a loud argument over whether it is better to tax a lot to pay for a large health budget, or to tax somewhat less to create a large deficit in health spending. Both imperfect outcomes. The article suggests reconciling the two positions by reducing the amount of health spending required to reach a given level of outcomes, by increasing the health of the nation by other means.
This may well be harder than a person would hope, but it merits serious attention. The argument over taxation is rather less consequential.
That's a medium to long term fix, though. And, TBF, also what Streeting is at least aiming to do.
On topic, everybody dies from something. If we increase survival rates for diabetes and lung cancer, the survivors may well die of something even more expensive a few years later, and will probably need lots of expensive end of life care in the meantime.
Looking at it from the demand side is probably wrong. We as a society should stop pretending that health care is unlimited and freely available, work out how much we can afford to spend as a share of national income (say the OECD average excluding the US) then work out how best to allocate it to get the most cost-effective years of healthy life remaining. And anything more than that, people (mostly the old) should be required to fund themselves, at least for non-palliative care.
We spend too much. And the State needs to stop doing some things, and be more efficient with others.
We raise £1 trillion in taxes a year. My view is that is plenty.
The Conservatives have just had fourteen years and a manifesto to identify things it should stop doing, or do more efficiently.
What specifics do you think they left on the table?
I've said on here before I think the triple lock should end, State pension should move towards a level of means testing, benefits should be time-limited, and NHS should be for some care but not all care. That public DB pensions need to be phased out. And that planning and rights laws need to be reviewed to stop never ending judicial reviews and initiation of infrastructure. I'd pay down some debt. And I'd put more into industrial strategy, education and defence- whilst incentivising business and jobs.
Of course much of this would be hugely unpopular, but if we don't grasp the nettle we'll eventually go bankrupt.
None if that is Tory policy though, so why vote for a quadruple lock that you believe will bankrupt the country?
Intetesting poll here foxy showing only 31% of people now trust their doctor. Shocking.
Commonwealth leaders have agreed the "time has come" for a conversation about reparations for the slave trade, despite the UK's desire to keep the subject off the agenda at a two-day summit in Samoa.
A document signed by 56 heads of government, including UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, acknowledges calls for "discussions on reparatory justice" for the "abhorrent" transatlantic slave trade.
The statement says it is time for a "meaningful, truthful and respectful conversation".
Sir Keir said there had been no discussions about money at the meeting, and that the UK is "very clear" in its position that it would not pay reparations.
The UK has faced growing calls from Commonwealth leaders to apologise and pay reparations for the country’s historical role in the slave trade. Reparations for the benefit of those who suffered as a result of slavery could take many forms, from financial to symbolic.
Interesting piece by Max, I'd like to see real food cooking taught in all schools, national cooking/cookery campaigns, and more visits to farmers/farms at all levels of education.
One thing: I get leaflets through the door every other week from Dominos and PapaJohns, both of which I hate. Yes, they can post what they like - and no doubt this is part of an aggressive marketing campaign - but things like this combined with JustEat and Deliveroo make it very very easy to eat shit.
How do we make it easier to eat well?
And this is where the nannying definitely comes in, it might be dispiriting for people like us to contemplate advertising and leafleting bans for unhealthy foods and takeaways but the situation is only getting worse.
On healthy eating, it is already easy to do so, people just don't know how. I actually think we don't need to tackle cooking at school age, we need to do it for parents in their 30s and 40s who never learned. Make it part of eligibility for benefits to attend mandatory cooking classes, give people basic cooking equipment when they sign on and, frankly, be more intrusive about their spending. As I said any solution on healthy eating is going to feel like and be nannying, I think we need to get on board with this or there is no end to the tax rises, the £20bn salvo Labour are planning right now will look like child's play when we win in 2029 if action isn't taken.
I think the problem is not that people cannot cook, it's that they don't want to. It's too much hassle, which is why so many live off takeaways and ready meals.
Basically, humans are like all animals lazy and greedy. If they can ride they will not walk, and if they can eat high energy foods without cooking then they will do so. In order to choose healthy lifestyles we have to actively use intellect and deferred gratification over base instinct. That's why the fat jabs are such an appeal, we can become slim without effort.
Why don't they want to? Well, a lot of them are working long hours in stressful jobs for crap money under less than ideal conditions. Their housing costs are sky high and the transport infrastructure is crap etc etc. It's no coincidence that obesity is disproportionately high in the lower income brackets. Everything is interrelated.
There is a massive tanker to turnaround in this country. It is the work of many, many years. A lot of people are going to be discomfited by it. But it has to be done. Whether it will be is another matter, of course.
I don't buy that, I was working 60-70 hours a week at the start of my finance career and I still made the time to meal prep and cook. I had a very good income so it would have been easy to just order in or get an M&S ready meal on the way home.
It's a values, not time pressure that makes people choose unhealthy food. They don't value their health enough to make sure they aren't putting crap food into their bodies. A significant bit of that attitude is "well if I get sick the NHS will have to fix me" IMO which is something the government hasn't tackled for 30+ years.
Yes - blaming people for making bad decisions because they are morally weak and do not have the right values is much easier than confronting the multiple challenges many of these people face that may lead them to make such choices in the first place.
Interesting piece by Max, I'd like to see real food cooking taught in all schools, national cooking/cookery campaigns, and more visits to farmers/farms at all levels of education.
One thing: I get leaflets through the door every other week from Dominos and PapaJohns, both of which I hate. Yes, they can post what they like - and no doubt this is part of an aggressive marketing campaign - but things like this combined with JustEat and Deliveroo make it very very easy to eat shit.
How do we make it easier to eat well?
And this is where the nannying definitely comes in, it might be dispiriting for people like us to contemplate advertising and leafleting bans for unhealthy foods and takeaways but the situation is only getting worse.
On healthy eating, it is already easy to do so, people just don't know how. I actually think we don't need to tackle cooking at school age, we need to do it for parents in their 30s and 40s who never learned. Make it part of eligibility for benefits to attend mandatory cooking classes, give people basic cooking equipment when they sign on and, frankly, be more intrusive about their spending. As I said any solution on healthy eating is going to feel like and be nannying, I think we need to get on board with this or there is no end to the tax rises, the £20bn salvo Labour are planning right now will look like child's play when we win in 2029 if action isn't taken.
I think the problem is not that people cannot cook, it's that they don't want to. It's too much hassle, which is why so many live off takeaways and ready meals.
Basically, humans are like all animals lazy and greedy. If they can ride they will not walk, and if they can eat high energy foods without cooking then they will do so. In order to choose healthy lifestyles we have to actively use intellect and deferred gratification over base instinct. That's why the fat jabs are such an appeal, we can become slim without effort.
Why don't they want to? Well, a lot of them are working long hours in stressful jobs for crap money under less than ideal conditions. Their housing costs are sky high and the transport infrastructure is crap etc etc. It's no coincidence that obesity is disproportionately high in the lower income brackets. Everything is interrelated.
There is a massive tanker to turnaround in this country. It is the work of many, many years. A lot of people are going to be discomfited by it. But it has to be done. Whether it will be is another matter, of course.
I don't buy that, I was working 60-70 hours a week at the start of my finance career and I still made the time to meal prep and cook. I had a very good income so it would have been easy to just order in or get an M&S ready meal on the way home.
It's a values, not time pressure that makes people choose unhealthy food. They don't value their health enough to make sure they aren't putting crap food into their bodies. A significant bit of that attitude is "well if I get sick the NHS will have to fix me" IMO which is something the government hasn't tackled for 30+ years.
I agree. Also many women think its against the rules of feminism to learn to cook. But sadly someone has to do it.
What a laughably sexist post. They don’t do it for the same reasons as men, not enough time or energy, or they can’t be bothered.
I was making the point that someone has to cook and many women have thought its betraying the sisterhood to learn how to cook when in reality its a skill both sexes should learn.
Interesting piece by Max, I'd like to see real food cooking taught in all schools, national cooking/cookery campaigns, and more visits to farmers/farms at all levels of education.
One thing: I get leaflets through the door every other week from Dominos and PapaJohns, both of which I hate. Yes, they can post what they like - and no doubt this is part of an aggressive marketing campaign - but things like this combined with JustEat and Deliveroo make it very very easy to eat shit.
How do we make it easier to eat well?
And this is where the nannying definitely comes in, it might be dispiriting for people like us to contemplate advertising and leafleting bans for unhealthy foods and takeaways but the situation is only getting worse.
On healthy eating, it is already easy to do so, people just don't know how. I actually think we don't need to tackle cooking at school age, we need to do it for parents in their 30s and 40s who never learned. Make it part of eligibility for benefits to attend mandatory cooking classes, give people basic cooking equipment when they sign on and, frankly, be more intrusive about their spending. As I said any solution on healthy eating is going to feel like and be nannying, I think we need to get on board with this or there is no end to the tax rises, the £20bn salvo Labour are planning right now will look like child's play when we win in 2029 if action isn't taken.
I think the problem is not that people cannot cook, it's that they don't want to. It's too much hassle, which is why so many live off takeaways and ready meals.
Basically, humans are like all animals lazy and greedy. If they can ride they will not walk, and if they can eat high energy foods without cooking then they will do so. In order to choose healthy lifestyles we have to actively use intellect and deferred gratification over base instinct. That's why the fat jabs are such an appeal, we can become slim without effort.
Why don't they want to? Well, a lot of them are working long hours in stressful jobs for crap money under less than ideal conditions. Their housing costs are sky high and the transport infrastructure is crap etc etc. It's no coincidence that obesity is disproportionately high in the lower income brackets. Everything is interrelated.
There is a massive tanker to turnaround in this country. It is the work of many, many years. A lot of people are going to be discomfited by it. But it has to be done. Whether it will be is another matter, of course.
I don't buy that, I was working 60-70 hours a week at the start of my finance career and I still made the time to meal prep and cook. I had a very good income so it would have been easy to just order in or get an M&S ready meal on the way home.
It's a values, not time pressure that makes people choose unhealthy food. They don't value their health enough to make sure they aren't putting crap food into their bodies. A significant bit of that attitude is "well if I get sick the NHS will have to fix me" IMO which is something the government hasn't tackled for 30+ years.
I agree. Also many women think its against the rules of feminism to learn to cook. But sadly someone has to do it.
What a laughably sexist post. They don’t do it for the same reasons as men, not enough time or energy, or they can’t be bothered.
I was making the point that someone has to cook and many women have thought its betraying the sisterhood to learn how to cook when in reality its a skill both sexes should learn.
No, you said that women don’t cook because they believe it would be against the rules of feminism to do so.
The funny thing is that my views on National Insurance are well known and that my preference would be to abolish it entirely and increase income and capital gains tax but there will always be winners and losers in regard to tax policy but it’s the constant bleating about everything Labour are trying to do to stabilise the country’s finances which annoys me.
The mood of the thread is out of keeping with a thoughtful and measured article at the top of it.
In the thread there's a loud argument over whether it is better to tax a lot to pay for a large health budget, or to tax somewhat less to create a large deficit in health spending. Both imperfect outcomes. The article suggests reconciling the two positions by reducing the amount of health spending required to reach a given level of outcomes, by increasing the health of the nation by other means.
This may well be harder than a person would hope, but it merits serious attention. The argument over taxation is rather less consequential.
That's a medium to long term fix, though. And, TBF, also what Streeting is at least aiming to do.
Yes, Streeting plan is basically investment in public health, primary care and IT, with an explicit continuing squeeze on the hospital sector, apart from privately outsourced surgery.. Indeed pretty much what the header is asking for.
My own perception is that we are going through our own 'traumazone'. Lots of things don't work and are breaking down. The NHS is an example of that. The planning system is another.
There is no way of making the economy work other than to just keep managing it, kick the can down the road, and that is all this government can do. But there eventually comes a day where this is no longer an option.
The government is collapsing in debt, attempts to collect extra tax will stifle growth. Deregulation is politically impossible.
Then you have the list of extra things the government willingly spend money on, so £5 billion per year housing illegal migrants (50k per head), and now (in all probability) 'reparations' for slavery.
There are no ideas from the labour government and its MP's apart from taxing the rich (which it now realises it cannot do), and tackling racism.
It is beholden to ideas about 'rights' which it considers sacrosanct, but such ideas profoundly limit the scope for action, and even discussion of action.
What I see is there is no plan and there hasn't been one since 2019. The system is dead, it is not delivering and needs fundamental disruption.
Interesting piece by Max, I'd like to see real food cooking taught in all schools, national cooking/cookery campaigns, and more visits to farmers/farms at all levels of education.
One thing: I get leaflets through the door every other week from Dominos and PapaJohns, both of which I hate. Yes, they can post what they like - and no doubt this is part of an aggressive marketing campaign - but things like this combined with JustEat and Deliveroo make it very very easy to eat shit.
How do we make it easier to eat well?
And this is where the nannying definitely comes in, it might be dispiriting for people like us to contemplate advertising and leafleting bans for unhealthy foods and takeaways but the situation is only getting worse.
On healthy eating, it is already easy to do so, people just don't know how. I actually think we don't need to tackle cooking at school age, we need to do it for parents in their 30s and 40s who never learned. Make it part of eligibility for benefits to attend mandatory cooking classes, give people basic cooking equipment when they sign on and, frankly, be more intrusive about their spending. As I said any solution on healthy eating is going to feel like and be nannying, I think we need to get on board with this or there is no end to the tax rises, the £20bn salvo Labour are planning right now will look like child's play when we win in 2029 if action isn't taken.
I think the problem is not that people cannot cook, it's that they don't want to. It's too much hassle, which is why so many live off takeaways and ready meals.
Basically, humans are like all animals lazy and greedy. If they can ride they will not walk, and if they can eat high energy foods without cooking then they will do so. In order to choose healthy lifestyles we have to actively use intellect and deferred gratification over base instinct. That's why the fat jabs are such an appeal, we can become slim without effort.
Why don't they want to? Well, a lot of them are working long hours in stressful jobs for crap money under less than ideal conditions. Their housing costs are sky high and the transport infrastructure is crap etc etc. It's no coincidence that obesity is disproportionately high in the lower income brackets. Everything is interrelated.
There is a massive tanker to turnaround in this country. It is the work of many, many years. A lot of people are going to be discomfited by it. But it has to be done. Whether it will be is another matter, of course.
I don't buy that, I was working 60-70 hours a week at the start of my finance career and I still made the time to meal prep and cook. I had a very good income so it would have been easy to just order in or get an M&S ready meal on the way home.
It's a values, not time pressure that makes people choose unhealthy food. They don't value their health enough to make sure they aren't putting crap food into their bodies. A significant bit of that attitude is "well if I get sick the NHS will have to fix me" IMO which is something the government hasn't tackled for 30+ years.
Yes - blaming people for making bad decisions because they are morally weak and do not have the right values is much easier than confronting the multiple challenges many of these people face that may lead them to make such choices in the first place.
Max is right though. Its often just laziness. Much easier to phone for a takeaway.
Interesting piece by Max, I'd like to see real food cooking taught in all schools, national cooking/cookery campaigns, and more visits to farmers/farms at all levels of education.
One thing: I get leaflets through the door every other week from Dominos and PapaJohns, both of which I hate. Yes, they can post what they like - and no doubt this is part of an aggressive marketing campaign - but things like this combined with JustEat and Deliveroo make it very very easy to eat shit.
How do we make it easier to eat well?
And this is where the nannying definitely comes in, it might be dispiriting for people like us to contemplate advertising and leafleting bans for unhealthy foods and takeaways but the situation is only getting worse.
On healthy eating, it is already easy to do so, people just don't know how. I actually think we don't need to tackle cooking at school age, we need to do it for parents in their 30s and 40s who never learned. Make it part of eligibility for benefits to attend mandatory cooking classes, give people basic cooking equipment when they sign on and, frankly, be more intrusive about their spending. As I said any solution on healthy eating is going to feel like and be nannying, I think we need to get on board with this or there is no end to the tax rises, the £20bn salvo Labour are planning right now will look like child's play when we win in 2029 if action isn't taken.
I think the problem is not that people cannot cook, it's that they don't want to. It's too much hassle, which is why so many live off takeaways and ready meals.
Basically, humans are like all animals lazy and greedy. If they can ride they will not walk, and if they can eat high energy foods without cooking then they will do so. In order to choose healthy lifestyles we have to actively use intellect and deferred gratification over base instinct. That's why the fat jabs are such an appeal, we can become slim without effort.
Why don't they want to? Well, a lot of them are working long hours in stressful jobs for crap money under less than ideal conditions. Their housing costs are sky high and the transport infrastructure is crap etc etc. It's no coincidence that obesity is disproportionately high in the lower income brackets. Everything is interrelated.
There is a massive tanker to turnaround in this country. It is the work of many, many years. A lot of people are going to be discomfited by it. But it has to be done. Whether it will be is another matter, of course.
I don't buy that, I was working 60-70 hours a week at the start of my finance career and I still made the time to meal prep and cook. I had a very good income so it would have been easy to just order in or get an M&S ready meal on the way home.
It's a values, not time pressure that makes people choose unhealthy food. They don't value their health enough to make sure they aren't putting crap food into their bodies. A significant bit of that attitude is "well if I get sick the NHS will have to fix me" IMO which is something the government hasn't tackled for 30+ years.
Yes - blaming people for making bad decisions because they are morally weak and do not have the right values is much easier than confronting the multiple challenges many of these people face that may lead them to make such choices in the first place.
Max is right though. Its often just laziness. Much easier to phone for a takeaway.
So, essentially, people who live in the most deprived parts of the country and have the lowest incomes are just lazier than the rest of us. They get what they deserve.
Commonwealth leaders have agreed the "time has come" for a conversation about reparations for the slave trade, despite the UK's desire to keep the subject off the agenda at a two-day summit in Samoa.
A document signed by 56 heads of government, including UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, acknowledges calls for "discussions on reparatory justice" for the "abhorrent" transatlantic slave trade.
The statement says it is time for a "meaningful, truthful and respectful conversation".
Sir Keir said there had been no discussions about money at the meeting, and that the UK is "very clear" in its position that it would not pay reparations.
The UK has faced growing calls from Commonwealth leaders to apologise and pay reparations for the country’s historical role in the slave trade. Reparations for the benefit of those who suffered as a result of slavery could take many forms, from financial to symbolic.
🔺 NEW: Sir Keir Starmer has been forced to promise Commonwealth countries that Britain will discuss reparations for slavery next year as he failed to quash an official call for damages
Interesting piece by Max, I'd like to see real food cooking taught in all schools, national cooking/cookery campaigns, and more visits to farmers/farms at all levels of education.
One thing: I get leaflets through the door every other week from Dominos and PapaJohns, both of which I hate. Yes, they can post what they like - and no doubt this is part of an aggressive marketing campaign - but things like this combined with JustEat and Deliveroo make it very very easy to eat shit.
How do we make it easier to eat well?
And this is where the nannying definitely comes in, it might be dispiriting for people like us to contemplate advertising and leafleting bans for unhealthy foods and takeaways but the situation is only getting worse.
On healthy eating, it is already easy to do so, people just don't know how. I actually think we don't need to tackle cooking at school age, we need to do it for parents in their 30s and 40s who never learned. Make it part of eligibility for benefits to attend mandatory cooking classes, give people basic cooking equipment when they sign on and, frankly, be more intrusive about their spending. As I said any solution on healthy eating is going to feel like and be nannying, I think we need to get on board with this or there is no end to the tax rises, the £20bn salvo Labour are planning right now will look like child's play when we win in 2029 if action isn't taken.
I think the problem is not that people cannot cook, it's that they don't want to. It's too much hassle, which is why so many live off takeaways and ready meals.
Basically, humans are like all animals lazy and greedy. If they can ride they will not walk, and if they can eat high energy foods without cooking then they will do so. In order to choose healthy lifestyles we have to actively use intellect and deferred gratification over base instinct. That's why the fat jabs are such an appeal, we can become slim without effort.
Why don't they want to? Well, a lot of them are working long hours in stressful jobs for crap money under less than ideal conditions. Their housing costs are sky high and the transport infrastructure is crap etc etc. It's no coincidence that obesity is disproportionately high in the lower income brackets. Everything is interrelated.
There is a massive tanker to turnaround in this country. It is the work of many, many years. A lot of people are going to be discomfited by it. But it has to be done. Whether it will be is another matter, of course.
I don't buy that, I was working 60-70 hours a week at the start of my finance career and I still made the time to meal prep and cook. I had a very good income so it would have been easy to just order in or get an M&S ready meal on the way home.
It's a values, not time pressure that makes people choose unhealthy food. They don't value their health enough to make sure they aren't putting crap food into their bodies. A significant bit of that attitude is "well if I get sick the NHS will have to fix me" IMO which is something the government hasn't tackled for 30+ years.
Yes - blaming people for making bad decisions because they are morally weak and do not have the right values is much easier than confronting the multiple challenges many of these people face that may lead them to make such choices in the first place.
Max is right though. Its often just laziness. Much easier to phone for a takeaway.
However, all that has really happened is that the laziness has been democratised. As Victorian Radio Times might have put it,
My own perception is that we are going through our own 'traumazone'. Lots of things don't work and are breaking down. The NHS is an example of that. The planning system is another.
There is no way of making the economy work other than to just keep managing it, kick the can down the road, and that is all this government can do. But there eventually comes a day where this is no longer an option.
The government is collapsing in debt, attempts to collect extra tax will stifle growth. Deregulation is politically impossible.
Then you have the list of extra things the government willingly spend money on, so £5 billion per year housing illegal migrants (50k per head), and now (in all probability) 'reparations' for slavery.
There are no ideas from the labour government and its MP's apart from taxing the rich (which it now realises it cannot do), and tackling racism.
It is beholden to ideas about 'rights' which it considers sacrosanct, but such ideas profoundly limit the scope for action, and even discussion of action.
What I see is there is no plan and there hasn't been one since 2019. The system is dead, it is not delivering and needs fundamental disruption.
Indeed. Hence the Trump phenomenom in the usa. What is interesting is Trump is actually very popular with young white women. Many call him the goat. Its seems to be a yearning for a strong masculine figure.
Interesting piece by Max, I'd like to see real food cooking taught in all schools, national cooking/cookery campaigns, and more visits to farmers/farms at all levels of education.
One thing: I get leaflets through the door every other week from Dominos and PapaJohns, both of which I hate. Yes, they can post what they like - and no doubt this is part of an aggressive marketing campaign - but things like this combined with JustEat and Deliveroo make it very very easy to eat shit.
How do we make it easier to eat well?
And this is where the nannying definitely comes in, it might be dispiriting for people like us to contemplate advertising and leafleting bans for unhealthy foods and takeaways but the situation is only getting worse.
On healthy eating, it is already easy to do so, people just don't know how. I actually think we don't need to tackle cooking at school age, we need to do it for parents in their 30s and 40s who never learned. Make it part of eligibility for benefits to attend mandatory cooking classes, give people basic cooking equipment when they sign on and, frankly, be more intrusive about their spending. As I said any solution on healthy eating is going to feel like and be nannying, I think we need to get on board with this or there is no end to the tax rises, the £20bn salvo Labour are planning right now will look like child's play when we win in 2029 if action isn't taken.
I think the problem is not that people cannot cook, it's that they don't want to. It's too much hassle, which is why so many live off takeaways and ready meals.
Basically, humans are like all animals lazy and greedy. If they can ride they will not walk, and if they can eat high energy foods without cooking then they will do so. In order to choose healthy lifestyles we have to actively use intellect and deferred gratification over base instinct. That's why the fat jabs are such an appeal, we can become slim without effort.
Why don't they want to? Well, a lot of them are working long hours in stressful jobs for crap money under less than ideal conditions. Their housing costs are sky high and the transport infrastructure is crap etc etc. It's no coincidence that obesity is disproportionately high in the lower income brackets. Everything is interrelated.
There is a massive tanker to turnaround in this country. It is the work of many, many years. A lot of people are going to be discomfited by it. But it has to be done. Whether it will be is another matter, of course.
I don't buy that, I was working 60-70 hours a week at the start of my finance career and I still made the time to meal prep and cook. I had a very good income so it would have been easy to just order in or get an M&S ready meal on the way home.
It's a values, not time pressure that makes people choose unhealthy food. They don't value their health enough to make sure they aren't putting crap food into their bodies. A significant bit of that attitude is "well if I get sick the NHS will have to fix me" IMO which is something the government hasn't tackled for 30+ years.
Yes - blaming people for making bad decisions because they are morally weak and do not have the right values is much easier than confronting the multiple challenges many of these people face that may lead them to make such choices in the first place.
This is the kind of weakness that has resulted in millions of obese adults being treated like toddlers when they throw a tantrum about not getting their unhealthy food.
Interesting piece by Max, I'd like to see real food cooking taught in all schools, national cooking/cookery campaigns, and more visits to farmers/farms at all levels of education.
One thing: I get leaflets through the door every other week from Dominos and PapaJohns, both of which I hate. Yes, they can post what they like - and no doubt this is part of an aggressive marketing campaign - but things like this combined with JustEat and Deliveroo make it very very easy to eat shit.
How do we make it easier to eat well?
And this is where the nannying definitely comes in, it might be dispiriting for people like us to contemplate advertising and leafleting bans for unhealthy foods and takeaways but the situation is only getting worse.
On healthy eating, it is already easy to do so, people just don't know how. I actually think we don't need to tackle cooking at school age, we need to do it for parents in their 30s and 40s who never learned. Make it part of eligibility for benefits to attend mandatory cooking classes, give people basic cooking equipment when they sign on and, frankly, be more intrusive about their spending. As I said any solution on healthy eating is going to feel like and be nannying, I think we need to get on board with this or there is no end to the tax rises, the £20bn salvo Labour are planning right now will look like child's play when we win in 2029 if action isn't taken.
I think the problem is not that people cannot cook, it's that they don't want to. It's too much hassle, which is why so many live off takeaways and ready meals...
I think that's an unduly pessimistic view. Obviously you'll never get everyone cooking healthy meals, but that doesn't mean there isn't huge room for improvement.
Interesting piece by Max, I'd like to see real food cooking taught in all schools, national cooking/cookery campaigns, and more visits to farmers/farms at all levels of education.
One thing: I get leaflets through the door every other week from Dominos and PapaJohns, both of which I hate. Yes, they can post what they like - and no doubt this is part of an aggressive marketing campaign - but things like this combined with JustEat and Deliveroo make it very very easy to eat shit.
How do we make it easier to eat well?
And this is where the nannying definitely comes in, it might be dispiriting for people like us to contemplate advertising and leafleting bans for unhealthy foods and takeaways but the situation is only getting worse.
On healthy eating, it is already easy to do so, people just don't know how. I actually think we don't need to tackle cooking at school age, we need to do it for parents in their 30s and 40s who never learned. Make it part of eligibility for benefits to attend mandatory cooking classes, give people basic cooking equipment when they sign on and, frankly, be more intrusive about their spending. As I said any solution on healthy eating is going to feel like and be nannying, I think we need to get on board with this or there is no end to the tax rises, the £20bn salvo Labour are planning right now will look like child's play when we win in 2029 if action isn't taken.
I think the problem is not that people cannot cook, it's that they don't want to. It's too much hassle, which is why so many live off takeaways and ready meals.
Basically, humans are like all animals lazy and greedy. If they can ride they will not walk, and if they can eat high energy foods without cooking then they will do so. In order to choose healthy lifestyles we have to actively use intellect and deferred gratification over base instinct. That's why the fat jabs are such an appeal, we can become slim without effort.
No, I think you'd be shocked as to how lacking people are with culinary skills these days, people in their 30s and 40s who never learned. One of our friends managed to both overboil and burn her pasta when she had us over for dinner. It was inedible so we got a deliveroo instead. The thing without someone to teach her there is no resource for people like that to learn, they need to be spoonfed the basics of how to boil rice/pasta etc... until they've got that figured out, or how to replace sauce from a jar with sauce that's made fresh. She's even said to us that when her and her husband come to visit us she thinks being able to turn ingredients into amazing food is like magic but doesn't know where to start.
She's also not alone, there's millions of adults who just never learned to cook, even the basics, and now don't know where or how to start so subsist on microwave and frozen food.
That’s basic stupidity. Anyone with an iq over 100 who can read can learn to cook
Comments
Before then CSEs had proper cookery lessons afterwards (as a money saving exercise) Cookery was replaced with home economics as GCSEs were introduced and actually cooking was removed from the exam..
We raise £1 trillion in taxes a year. My view is that is plenty.
What specifics do you think they left on the table?
That isn't the case - you really have plucked figures from no-where..
That unwillingness to understand why the electorate delivered the most crushing defeat for the Tories since the 19th century is why the Tories are far from being electable again. They believe that bugging turn will deliver them back to power without any analysis of how comprehensively failed over recent parliaments.
I think Labour will lose seats next election, but the Tories will be way behind them in numbers of seats.
They just said what they needed to win the election, had a bit of break over the Summer - during which time they made some inept political moves - and then had an oh shit moment in September when they realised how hard it would be when their propaganda met reality.
You've got to bear in mind Starmer is a Tedious Tactical Triangulator and, now Sunak has gone, he has no-one to triangulate against and is exposed.
This is stressing him out. Which is why, sadly, he looks so harrowed in those photos.
A document signed by 56 heads of government, including UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, acknowledges calls for "discussions on reparatory justice" for the "abhorrent" transatlantic slave trade.
The statement says it is time for a "meaningful, truthful and respectful conversation".
Sir Keir said there had been no discussions about money at the meeting, and that the UK is "very clear" in its position that it would not pay reparations.
The UK has faced growing calls from Commonwealth leaders to apologise and pay reparations for the country’s historical role in the slave trade. Reparations for the benefit of those who suffered as a result of slavery could take many forms, from financial to symbolic.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c207m3m0xpjo
I am reminded of that meme, "boy, that's escalated quickly".
What we're seeing here is projection. You feel the Tories let you down with Brexit and a shift in their socio-cultural policy, so now want to keep them out long-term and you're working back from that, and are happy to defend the incumbent administration to further that, even if you personally can't bring yourself to vote Labour.
Labour (and this country) can't have 4 years of austerity so it needs to solve the day to day budget issues by increasing revenue. That should be via a bit on employer Ni and bits that hits richer pensioners (which is why I suggested my changes below).
It serves as a reminder that pensioner benefits are not means tested, and while someone on UC has their full personal circumstances assessed, including their housing costs and savings, you can have a ludicrous situation where pensioners with very few costs and huge assets get something like WFP.
Basically, humans are like all animals lazy and greedy. If they can ride they will not walk, and if they can eat high energy foods without cooking then they will do so. In order to choose healthy lifestyles we have to actively use intellect and deferred gratification over base instinct. That's why the fat jabs are such an appeal, we can become slim without effort.
Of course much of this would be hugely unpopular, but if we don't grasp the nettle we'll eventually go bankrupt.
If you are talking because their are 2 people - it's not 2x food costs for 2 people it's likely 1.5x
Council tax is paid once
Electric / Gas (say £150 a month) is only paid once - but will be higher because pensioners are at home all day
Water paid once
Your entire figure is made up of assumptions that simply aren't valid. For instance there will be pensioners who are receiving £13,000 and are paying rent on a council flat..
I think we part company over your diagnosis of the problem with peoples' health being their poor choices - we do make poor choices sometimes, but:
1. It is far from clear that the alternatives you suggest are healthier
2. There's far more potential to improve public health in the choices we don't make - imagine if the milk, bread, fats, vegetables and meat that we all consume every day was more full of vitamins, minerals and enzymes. How much more effective would that be than telling people off for eating chips?
To expand on 1, take saturated fat. Saturated fat (like butter or coconut oil) is not less healthy than unsaturated fat - indeed the opposite is true. You have said yourself that butter is better for you than marge - and you're right. Unsaturated fats are actually less stable due to their chemical structure, and therefore more likely to result in free radicals within the body that cause oxidative stress, which is a major cause of inflammation, diease and aging. We see this played out in Britain - we've actually achieved massive drops in the proportion of saturated fats that poorer Britons consume, a huge public health 'success' but health has declined in that time.
Also, look at Britain's diet during and after the war. There was rationing till 1955 (an astonishing and frankly distopian situation), with families entitled to ludicrously small amounts of butter and cheese within their weekly allowance. Then look at a picture of the victorious England team in 1966 - barely any teeth between them! And it was common even for young women to go over to dentures. Far from a race of superhumans, 10 years without these foods seems to have had some severe impacts. So I don’t think cracking down on 'sin' foods works, especially if they're not actually 'sins', they're actually the more nourishing foods - then it's a public health disaster.
End of part 1
2. What I do think would work is rather than 'eating healthier food', making the food we eat healthier. We could do this in a number of ways. Here are a few:
Dairy - we pasteurise virtually all milk, a heat treatment that inflicts serious damage to a very complex and nourishing product. It destroys all enzymes as well as many of the vitamins, but leaves the sugars (lactose) that those enzymes are catalysts for the digestion of. Little wonder so many of us have become lactose intolerant. Destroying pathogens by applying pressure to the milk (not heat) preserves the enzymes and it is logical to assume that the final milk would be a more nourishing product. We need more research to see if this could be rolled out nationally.
Bread. We still adulterate bread with chalk. There is scant evidence that we can absorb calcium from chalk, and calcium is a key component of arterial plaque. Also, I believe that soaked, sprouted flour and sourdough bread - all processes that eliminate anti-nutrients like phytic acid within baked products, are healthier and we should encourage their adoption more widely.
Produce. Our vegetables often as packed with nutrients as is claimed. All veg is not created equal, and a vegetable or fruit grown in poor soil, is, by its nature, not a nutrient-packed food. There's no miraculous process that can confer it with nutrients that it didn’t have access too. A lot of it is grown with nitrogen fertiliser that just produces bulk. We should have a huge programme to dress fields with minerals (mined in the UK), which as well as vastly improving quality, could also improve yield, improve drainage and reduce soil erosion, and (believe it or not) draw down carbon from the air and contribute to net zero.
I could go on all day, but you get the idea. Imagine if all our food was just better for you, what that would do for the NHS.
What I have found among my friends is that there's two distinct groups, people who can cook and do it really well and spend time becoming excellent home chefs or there's those who don't at all and basically just exist off frozen or ready meals and takeaways/eating out. I guess that's what has come from not having food education, people who wanted to learn to do it still did and got good, people who didn't weren't forced and never picked up the skills in the first place.
I don't have a problem regulating harmful adverts or supplements that do us real damage.
I agree with you on cooking. One small example, last night I looked at a chicken curry and thought.. I'd quite like something else with that. There were dried red lentils and a tin of tomatoes in the cupboard. I baulked at it, thinking I'd screw it up and it'd be shit, but a BBC receipe and 30 minutes later I had an amazing lentil curry, that we both polished off.
I agree with cooking classes for those on benefits. In fact, I think in general the government should fund and promote this. (As long as it's not captured by leftwing activists, who'll want to push "sustainability", veganism and non-dairy)
Then people can choose what to cook themselves. Not nannying.
It’s not for everyone, some people suffer from side-effects and there’s the danger of people with mental health issues such as anorexia getting hold of it, but it’s definitely something that would help a significant percentage of the population were it to be more widely available.
There is a massive tanker to turnaround in this country. It is the work of many, many years. A lot of people are going to be discomfited by it. But it has to be done. Whether it will be is another matter, of course.
BREAKING: The full list of speakers for Donald Trump's Madison Square Garden, New York rally has been announced.
RFK Jr.,
@ElonMusk
, Dana White, Tucker Carlson,
@ByronDonalds
,
@EricTrump
,
@DonaldJTrumpJr
and others.
https://x.com/EricLDaugh/status/1849991949052260633
We won't now.
I think plenty simply don't know, can't be arsed or were never introduced to non-processed food or fast food as children so just don't want it.
I'm just trying to demonstrate that the universal nature of pensioner benefits is deeply inefficient. 70% of pensioners own their homes outright.
I went to a single sex school and my mum really doesn't cook (they live on Marks ready meals and eating out - heck even the sheltered accommodation they moved to has a cafe in reception).
But as I've got older I've realised I'm lazy and will grab ready meals but given the choice I nowadays grab stir fries - relatively cheap, quick to cook and just about the only way I get enough vegetables in a day.
It's why you remain one of the most boring and tedious posters on here, except about healthcare reform where you have something genuinely interesting to say.
She's also not alone, there's millions of adults who just never learned to cook, even the basics, and now don't know where or how to start so subsist on microwave and frozen food.
Surprised to learn she abolished my cookery classes whilst no longer in power.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/10/26/jailed-iraqi-goat-herder-parable-uk-broken-asylum-system/
What a shit show.
But, can you blame them? They know a mug when they see one.
Asked if he had misled voters by not warning them about the billions in tax rises expected in the government’s first budget on Wednesday, the prime minister said: “No, we were very clear about the tax rises that we would necessarily have to make whatever the circumstances … I listed them I don’t know how many times in the campaign.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/oct/26/labour-did-not-mislead-public-tax-rises-starmer-budget-reeves-nics
I genuinely don't know why they are going with this line, nobody believes it. I thought the whole point of the £22bn £40bn, £100bn, black hole narrative was to setup the I am sorry, we are going to have to adjust what we said in the GE.
Your maths simply doesn't stack up, your assumptions are missing (and fundamentally wrong) and beyond that you miss so many points as to why we have a State pension that it's not worth arguing with you.
Cook a meal means spending a lot of those 50 minutes in the kitchen actually cooking
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/oct/26/small-boats-channel-crossings-figures-labour-home-office
It's a values, not time pressure that makes people choose unhealthy food. They don't value their health enough to make sure they aren't putting crap food into their bodies. A significant bit of that attitude is "well if I get sick the NHS will have to fix me" IMO which is something the government hasn't tackled for 30+ years.
Starmer and Labour used ambiguity but also signalled taxes would go up.
The public, at the time, understood the signals and thought taxes would go up, and more than Labour were indicating.
Now taxes are about to go up and more than Labour were indicating.
None of this is surprising or unusual. It is how politics has always worked.
https://x.com/DoctorTro/status/1849471403252125951
He should resign before it gets alot worse.
And, TBF, also what Streeting is at least aiming to do.
There is no way of making the economy work other than to just keep managing it, kick the can down the road, and that is all this government can do. But there eventually comes a day where this is no longer an option.
The government is collapsing in debt, attempts to collect extra tax will stifle growth. Deregulation is politically impossible.
Then you have the list of extra things the government willingly spend money on, so £5 billion per year housing illegal migrants (50k per head), and now (in all probability) 'reparations' for slavery.
There are no ideas from the labour government and its MP's apart from taxing the rich (which it now realises it cannot do), and tackling racism.
It is beholden to ideas about 'rights' which it considers sacrosanct, but such ideas profoundly limit the scope for action, and even discussion of action.
What I see is there is no plan and there hasn't been one since 2019. The system is dead, it is not delivering and needs fundamental disruption.
https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg189/documents/health-inequalities-briefing-2#:~:text=The greatest rates of adult,in the least deprived areas.
SKS truly screwed up here..
🔺 NEW: Sir Keir Starmer has been forced to promise Commonwealth countries that Britain will discuss reparations for slavery next year as he failed to quash an official call for damages
"Can't cook, won't cook, Cook cooks".