Interesting to see local Government re-organisation is back on the political agenda and will be an integral part of the English Devolution Bill, due to be published next month.
Will this finally mark the end of the two-tier system in England? If so, how will this impact the 2025 County Council elections especially if the authorities being elected could cease to exist within the life of the current Parliament?
Taking Surrey for example, will the County take over the functions of the eleven Districts and Boroughs (the Cornwall solution) ir will the County be divided into three with each having the population of a London Borough (roughly 350,000) ?
I am trying not to be cynical, but I am imagining Sir Humphrey rubbing his hands with glee at some ineffectual new layer of regional government being set up and a whole new Whitehall department being created to oversee the poor loves.
In Durham they just got rid of the district councils and the county council took on all duties. Sadly it did not adopt the name County of County Durham County Council.
Two tier is just daft. Rubbish in your bin - District Council; rubbish you take to the tip* - County Council.
*I believe that they are referring to as "Household Waste Recycling Centres" in wokespeak. But tip is shorter.
If we are going to combine more district and county councils into unitaries then we also need stronger Parish and Town councils. Otherwise many could find most of their council decisions taken over the other side of the county
I agree if you take a county like Surrey (population 1.2 million) and try to make it a single council (as the County Council Conservatives want) it would become ridiculous. The alternative might be to create three Unitary authorities each of about 300,000-350,000 residents centred on Guildford/Woking, Dorking and Reigate/Redhill.
Not all of Surrey has Parish Councils (the more rural areas have retained theirs).
Essex would be interesting as well - any thoughts?
Andy_Cooke asked: "What about if some states do not send in ratified slates of electors?"
According to the authors, the 12th Amendment provides some protection: "One plausible scenario involves Harris winning all of the swing states except North Carolina and Georgia, and thus besting Trump 287 to 251. Suppose that Trump then succeeds in preventing the appointment of any Pennsylvania electors. Harris should still win: 268 to 251.
This is where an accurate reading of the 12th Amendment comes in. It doesn’t matter that Harris’s 268 votes would not be a majority of the full 538 electoral college votes. The amendment says the victor must receive “a majority of the whole number of electors appointed” — not that could have been appointed. In this example, she would win by virtue of having received a majority of the 519 votes cast after Pennsylvania’s were discarded."
I said on here the minute it was announced that cutting WFA was a political disaster and I'm calling the £2 bus cut another disaster and i'm obvs not the only one.
Why are Lab doing this stupid stuff for a few quid?
Luke Tryl @LukeTryl · 9h If you want an idea of why removing the £2 bus fare cap may be so damaging beyond polls, read Greg's quote from our focus group. At a time of deep political distrust it's one of few recent examples of a policy people can point to that tangibly improves their lives for the better
Your dismissing of billions of pounds as a few quid is the problem.
Scrapping unnecessary expenditure like the WFA is precisely the right thing to do and when it saves billions of pounds per year that is massive not inconsequential.
If If had been done properly, but it was rushed and no thought given to the 800,000 who could claim pension credit and who the DWP are desperately trying to find which is more than likely to result in it costing more than it saves
Reeves should have announced it in her Statement on Wednesday
The other problem is the Scottish Couple have been given the approval to pursue it through the Scottish courts, and if they win in January all this years payments will have to be paid retrospectively
Means testing it is the right thing to do but it has been mishandled and resulted in it being unpopular
The only thing this will hurt is the newspaper and its staff. Bezos is too rich to care.
Many will lose jobs. Or the whole thing will close.
Now maybe you can argue the editor should have published the Harris endorsement and then resigned. Bezos can't actually stop the printing press.
Three of the editorial board have resigned.
I’m afraid it’s inevitable, though. Bezos apparently wants “more conservative voices”, so he seems set on turning it into something that’s not really the WaPo that its subscribers want. Will it attract other readers ? Perhaps; perhaps not.
What’s undeniable is that the timing of this is pretty crass. It just makes it look entirely done as a suck up to Trump.
Interesting to see local Government re-organisation is back on the political agenda and will be an integral part of the English Devolution Bill, due to be published next month.
Will this finally mark the end of the two-tier system in England? If so, how will this impact the 2025 County Council elections especially if the authorities being elected could cease to exist within the life of the current Parliament?
Taking Surrey for example, will the County take over the functions of the eleven Districts and Boroughs (the Cornwall solution) ir will the County be divided into three with each having the population of a London Borough (roughly 350,000) ?
I am trying not to be cynical, but I am imagining Sir Humphrey rubbing his hands with glee at some ineffectual new layer of regional government being set up and a whole new Whitehall department being created to oversee the poor loves.
In Durham they just got rid of the district councils and the county council took on all duties. Sadly it did not adopt the name County of County Durham County Council.
Two tier is just daft. Rubbish in your bin - District Council; rubbish you take to the tip* - County Council.
*I believe that they are referring to as "Household Waste Recycling Centres" in wokespeak. But tip is shorter.
If we are going to combine more district and county councils into unitaries then we also need stronger Parish and Town councils. Otherwise many could find most of their council decisions taken over the other side of the county
I agree if you take a county like Surrey (population 1.2 million) and try to make it a single council (as the County Council Conservatives want) it would become ridiculous. The alternative might be to create three Unitary authorities each of about 300,000-350,000 residents centred on Guildford/Woking, Dorking and Reigate/Redhill.
Not all of Surrey has Parish Councils (the more rural areas have retained theirs).
Essex would be interesting as well - any thoughts?
Birmingham is a single council with a population of 1.2 million.
Interesting to see local Government re-organisation is back on the political agenda and will be an integral part of the English Devolution Bill, due to be published next month.
Will this finally mark the end of the two-tier system in England? If so, how will this impact the 2025 County Council elections especially if the authorities being elected could cease to exist within the life of the current Parliament?
Taking Surrey for example, will the County take over the functions of the eleven Districts and Boroughs (the Cornwall solution) ir will the County be divided into three with each having the population of a London Borough (roughly 350,000) ?
I am trying not to be cynical, but I am imagining Sir Humphrey rubbing his hands with glee at some ineffectual new layer of regional government being set up and a whole new Whitehall department being created to oversee the poor loves.
In Durham they just got rid of the district councils and the county council took on all duties. Sadly it did not adopt the name County of County Durham County Council.
Two tier is just daft. Rubbish in your bin - District Council; rubbish you take to the tip* - County Council.
*I believe that they are referring to as "Household Waste Recycling Centres" in wokespeak. But tip is shorter.
If we are going to combine more district and county councils into unitaries then we also need stronger Parish and Town councils. Otherwise many could find most of their council decisions taken over the other side of the county
I agree if you take a county like Surrey (population 1.2 million) and try to make it a single council (as the County Council Conservatives want) it would become ridiculous. The alternative might be to create three Unitary authorities each of about 300,000-350,000 residents centred on Guildford/Woking, Dorking and Reigate/Redhill.
Not all of Surrey has Parish Councils (the more rural areas have retained theirs).
Essex would be interesting as well - any thoughts?
You could do Castle Point, Rochford and Basildon and Brentwood as 1 unitary, Epping Forest and Chelmsford and Harlow and Maldon as a second, Colchester and Braintree and Uttlesford and Tendring as the third. Southend and Thurrock are already unitaries
Though again you would still want stronger Parish and Town councils
I said on here the minute it was announced that cutting WFA was a political disaster and I'm calling the £2 bus cut another disaster and i'm obvs not the only one.
Why are Lab doing this stupid stuff for a few quid?
Luke Tryl @LukeTryl · 9h If you want an idea of why removing the £2 bus fare cap may be so damaging beyond polls, read Greg's quote from our focus group. At a time of deep political distrust it's one of few recent examples of a policy people can point to that tangibly improves their lives for the better
It's not a few quid, and you can't leave these caps unchanged given inflation.
And if you get a more frequent, comprehensive and reliable service for £3, it's worth it. Buses can and will become cheaper as patronage increases, English cities just need to reach that critical mass first.
I'd be sad if all blondes with blue eyes, strawberry blondes and gingers died out because, quite frankly - although it won't happen in my lifetime - I find them prettier than brunettes but that is probably the natural end point in c.200 years on current trends. Through the summations of millions of individual choices and intermixing we'll probably all eventually become mixed race, a bit like how the Spanish did and probably look a bit more like them.
I don't think it necessarily make you a racist if you mourned this, and nor does any one race have more value than another, but I don't share the worries that it will fundamentally change Britain because I think all those people will adopt the values of the prevailing culture, including their heritage and traditions as Eric Kaufmann argues in "Whiteshift". Bit would I miss the blondes? Yes, I would.
[Having said that, it's not irrevocable either - over tens of thousands of years pigmentation would tend to lighten again because it will have to in order to get enough vitamin D, recognising that evolution will be much much slower in an advanced society where far more people survive. If we decide to actually try to have kids, that is.]
An underappreciated comment. That said... if people with dark skin tend to find other people with dark skin more sexually attractive, and people with light skin (etc), then one might easily end up with a "islands" of physical characteristics.
It also is a misunderstanding of how genetics works. For example in "A Muppet Christmas Carol" Tiny Tim is a small frog, not some weird frog/pig hybrid. Its the same for people.
Always good when PBers bring solid evidence to an argument
I think Foxy may need to revise his genetics. To start with a frog is a different species from a human. Note the definition of a species....
I hope you’re not questioning the validity of the Muppet universe ?
Interesting to see local Government re-organisation is back on the political agenda and will be an integral part of the English Devolution Bill, due to be published next month.
Will this finally mark the end of the two-tier system in England? If so, how will this impact the 2025 County Council elections especially if the authorities being elected could cease to exist within the life of the current Parliament?
Taking Surrey for example, will the County take over the functions of the eleven Districts and Boroughs (the Cornwall solution) ir will the County be divided into three with each having the population of a London Borough (roughly 350,000) ?
I am trying not to be cynical, but I am imagining Sir Humphrey rubbing his hands with glee at some ineffectual new layer of regional government being set up and a whole new Whitehall department being created to oversee the poor loves.
In Durham they just got rid of the district councils and the county council took on all duties. Sadly it did not adopt the name County of County Durham County Council.
Two tier is just daft. Rubbish in your bin - District Council; rubbish you take to the tip* - County Council.
*I believe that they are referring to as "Household Waste Recycling Centres" in wokespeak. But tip is shorter.
If we are going to combine more district and county councils into unitaries then we also need stronger Parish and Town councils. Otherwise many could find most of their council decisions taken over the other side of the county
I agree if you take a county like Surrey (population 1.2 million) and try to make it a single council (as the County Council Conservatives want) it would become ridiculous. The alternative might be to create three Unitary authorities each of about 300,000-350,000 residents centred on Guildford/Woking, Dorking and Reigate/Redhill.
Not all of Surrey has Parish Councils (the more rural areas have retained theirs).
Essex would be interesting as well - any thoughts?
Birmingham is a single council with a population of 1.2 million.
1 big city, most of Surrey and Essex is rural or small towns
The only thing this will hurt is the newspaper and its staff. Bezos is too rich to care.
Many will lose jobs. Or the whole thing will close.
Now maybe you can argue the editor should have published the Harris endorsement and then resigned. Bezos can't actually stop the printing press.
Three of the editorial board have resigned.
I’m afraid it’s inevitable, though. Bezos apparently wants “more conservative voices”, so he seems set on turning it into something that’s not really the WaPo that its subscribers want. Will it attract other readers ? Perhaps; perhaps not.
What’s undeniable is that the timing of this is pretty crass. It just makes it look entirely done as a suck up to Trump.
I suspect there are $x0bn reasons why the owner of AWS may want to keep the next potential president happy...
No doubt. It’s his publication - which he subsidises. But while he can pretty well do what he wants with it, his readers don’t have to go along with it - and cancelling a subscription is the only way to make that clear in a way that even a billionaire can’t completely ignore.
I said on here the minute it was announced that cutting WFA was a political disaster and I'm calling the £2 bus cut another disaster and i'm obvs not the only one.
Why are Lab doing this stupid stuff for a few quid?
Well when you are dumb enough to rule out changing the rates of VAT, national insurance, income tax, and corporation tax — which are the main fiscal levers — all you are left with are relatively small changes at the margins. Those small changes are often disproportionately painful to particular groups, whilst raising quite small amounts of money, or alternately not cutting costs that much.
So we end with scrapping the winter fuel allowance, which will really hurt those just above the threshold, raising employer national insurance (making employment more expensive), and the brainwave of making bus travel more expensive which hurts some of the poorest people and makes public transport less attractive. VAT on school fees is another daft idea, I don't even like the idea of private education, but I'm damned if I can see the sense in making any type of education more expensive.
Short of pulling the mother of all rabbits out of the hat on Wednesday I expect that the budget is going to be an absolute stinker. By Thursday a hell of a lot of people are going to be asking themselves why did they vote Labour.
History will long debate whether they could have won without the promise not to change the rates of income, NI, VAT etc.
The ghost of '92 hangs heavily still over Labour''s folk memory.
I'd be sad if all blondes with blue eyes, strawberry blondes and gingers died out because, quite frankly - although it won't happen in my lifetime - I find them prettier than brunettes but that is probably the natural end point in c.200 years on current trends. Through the summations of millions of individual choices and intermixing we'll probably all eventually become mixed race, a bit like how the Spanish did and probably look a bit more like them.
I don't think it necessarily make you a racist if you mourned this, and nor does any one race have more value than another, but I don't share the worries that it will fundamentally change Britain because I think all those people will adopt the values of the prevailing culture, including their heritage and traditions as Eric Kaufmann argues in "Whiteshift". Bit would I miss the blondes? Yes, I would.
[Having said that, it's not irrevocable either - over tens of thousands of years pigmentation would tend to lighten again because it will have to in order to get enough vitamin D, recognising that evolution will be much much slower in an advanced society where far more people survive. If we decide to actually try to have kids, that is.]
An underappreciated comment. That said... if people with dark skin tend to find other people with dark skin more sexually attractive, and people with light skin (etc), then one might easily end up with a "islands" of physical characteristics.
It also is a misunderstanding of how genetics works. For example in "A Muppet Christmas Carol" Tiny Tim is a small frog, not some weird frog/pig hybrid. Its the same for people.
Always good when PBers bring solid evidence to an argument
I think Foxy may need to revise his genetics. To start with a frog is a different species from a human. Note the definition of a species....
Mendel demonstrated in his pea experiments that if a gene is dominant then the F1 generation will be all tall peas, but the F2 generation will be a mix of 75% tall and 25% dwarf peas. There are no mid sized peas.
This is why we have human diversity, even in a population without assortive mating.
A Muppet Christmas Carol is accurate on this point.
Interesting to see local Government re-organisation is back on the political agenda and will be an integral part of the English Devolution Bill, due to be published next month.
Will this finally mark the end of the two-tier system in England? If so, how will this impact the 2025 County Council elections especially if the authorities being elected could cease to exist within the life of the current Parliament?
Taking Surrey for example, will the County take over the functions of the eleven Districts and Boroughs (the Cornwall solution) ir will the County be divided into three with each having the population of a London Borough (roughly 350,000) ?
I am trying not to be cynical, but I am imagining Sir Humphrey rubbing his hands with glee at some ineffectual new layer of regional government being set up and a whole new Whitehall department being created to oversee the poor loves.
In Durham they just got rid of the district councils and the county council took on all duties. Sadly it did not adopt the name County of County Durham County Council.
Two tier is just daft. Rubbish in your bin - District Council; rubbish you take to the tip* - County Council.
*I believe that they are referring to as "Household Waste Recycling Centres" in wokespeak. But tip is shorter.
If we are going to combine more district and county councils into unitaries then we also need stronger Parish and Town councils. Otherwise many could find most of their council decisions taken over the other side of the county
I agree if you take a county like Surrey (population 1.2 million) and try to make it a single council (as the County Council Conservatives want) it would become ridiculous. The alternative might be to create three Unitary authorities each of about 300,000-350,000 residents centred on Guildford/Woking, Dorking and Reigate/Redhill.
Not all of Surrey has Parish Councils (the more rural areas have retained theirs).
Essex would be interesting as well - any thoughts?
Birmingham is a single council with a population of 1.2 million.
I'd be sad if all blondes with blue eyes, strawberry blondes and gingers died out because, quite frankly - although it won't happen in my lifetime - I find them prettier than brunettes but that is probably the natural end point in c.200 years on current trends. Through the summations of millions of individual choices and intermixing we'll probably all eventually become mixed race, a bit like how the Spanish did and probably look a bit more like them.
I don't think it necessarily make you a racist if you mourned this, and nor does any one race have more value than another, but I don't share the worries that it will fundamentally change Britain because I think all those people will adopt the values of the prevailing culture, including their heritage and traditions as Eric Kaufmann argues in "Whiteshift". Bit would I miss the blondes? Yes, I would.
[Having said that, it's not irrevocable either - over tens of thousands of years pigmentation would tend to lighten again because it will have to in order to get enough vitamin D, recognising that evolution will be much much slower in an advanced society where far more people survive. If we decide to actually try to have kids, that is.]
An underappreciated comment. That said... if people with dark skin tend to find other people with dark skin more sexually attractive, and people with light skin (etc), then one might easily end up with a "islands" of physical characteristics.
It also is a misunderstanding of how genetics works. For example in "A Muppet Christmas Carol" Tiny Tim is a small frog, not some weird frog/pig hybrid. Its the same for people.
Always good when PBers bring solid evidence to an argument
I think Foxy may need to revise his genetics. To start with a frog is a different species from a human. Note the definition of a species....
Mendel demonstrated in his pea experiments that if a gene is dominant then the F1 generation will be all tall peas, but the F2 generation will be a mix of 75% tall and 25% dwarf peas. There are no mid sized peas.
This is why we have human diversity, even in a population without assortive mating.
A Muppet Christmas Carol is accurate on this point.
I said on here the minute it was announced that cutting WFA was a political disaster and I'm calling the £2 bus cut another disaster and i'm obvs not the only one.
Why are Lab doing this stupid stuff for a few quid?
Well when you are dumb enough to rule out changing the rates of VAT, national insurance, income tax, and corporation tax — which are the main fiscal levers — all you are left with are relatively small changes at the margins. Those small changes are often disproportionately painful to particular groups, whilst raising quite small amounts of money, or alternately not cutting costs that much.
So we end with scrapping the winter fuel allowance, which will really hurt those just above the threshold, raising employer national insurance (making employment more expensive), and the brainwave of making bus travel more expensive which hurts some of the poorest people and makes public transport less attractive. VAT on school fees is another daft idea, I don't even like the idea of private education, but I'm damned if I can see the sense in making any type of education more expensive.
Short of pulling the mother of all rabbits out of the hat on Wednesday I expect that the budget is going to be an absolute stinker. By Thursday a hell of a lot of people are going to be asking themselves why did they vote Labour.
History will long debate whether they could have won without the promise not to change the rates of income, NI, VAT etc.
The ghost of '92 hangs heavily still over Labour''s folk memory.
The rot set in last October when Labour should have simply said - "Are you sure the money is there for that NI tax cut?"
if that had been set you could now simply reverse them with the statement "we were correct the money wasn't there so"
I'd be sad if all blondes with blue eyes, strawberry blondes and gingers died out because, quite frankly - although it won't happen in my lifetime - I find them prettier than brunettes but that is probably the natural end point in c.200 years on current trends. Through the summations of millions of individual choices and intermixing we'll probably all eventually become mixed race, a bit like how the Spanish did and probably look a bit more like them.
I don't think it necessarily make you a racist if you mourned this, and nor does any one race have more value than another, but I don't share the worries that it will fundamentally change Britain because I think all those people will adopt the values of the prevailing culture, including their heritage and traditions as Eric Kaufmann argues in "Whiteshift". Bit would I miss the blondes? Yes, I would.
[Having said that, it's not irrevocable either - over tens of thousands of years pigmentation would tend to lighten again because it will have to in order to get enough vitamin D, recognising that evolution will be much much slower in an advanced society where far more people survive. If we decide to actually try to have kids, that is.]
An underappreciated comment. That said... if people with dark skin tend to find other people with dark skin more sexually attractive, and people with light skin (etc), then one might easily end up with a "islands" of physical characteristics.
It also is a misunderstanding of how genetics works. For example in "A Muppet Christmas Carol" Tiny Tim is a small frog, not some weird frog/pig hybrid. Its the same for people.
Always good when PBers bring solid evidence to an argument
I think Foxy may need to revise his genetics. To start with a frog is a different species from a human. Note the definition of a species....
Mendel demonstrated in his pea experiments that if a gene is dominant then the F1 generation will be all tall peas, but the F2 generation will be a mix of 75% tall and 25% dwarf peas. There are no mid sized peas.
This is why we have human diversity, even in a population without assortive mating.
A Muppet Christmas Carol is accurate on this point.
It's one of the best films ever made. Easily the best Dickens adaptation and maybe Michael Caine's best film too.
I said on here the minute it was announced that cutting WFA was a political disaster and I'm calling the £2 bus cut another disaster and i'm obvs not the only one.
Why are Lab doing this stupid stuff for a few quid?
Well when you are dumb enough to rule out changing the rates of VAT, national insurance, income tax, and corporation tax — which are the main fiscal levers — all you are left with are relatively small changes at the margins. Those small changes are often disproportionately painful to particular groups, whilst raising quite small amounts of money, or alternately not cutting costs that much.
So we end with scrapping the winter fuel allowance, which will really hurt those just above the threshold, raising employer national insurance (making employment more expensive), and the brainwave of making bus travel more expensive which hurts some of the poorest people and makes public transport less attractive. VAT on school fees is another daft idea, I don't even like the idea of private education, but I'm damned if I can see the sense in making any type of education more expensive.
Short of pulling the mother of all rabbits out of the hat on Wednesday I expect that the budget is going to be an absolute stinker. By Thursday a hell of a lot of people are going to be asking themselves why did they vote Labour.
History will long debate whether they could have won without the promise not to change the rates of income, NI, VAT etc.
The ghost of '92 hangs heavily still over Labour''s folk memory.
The rot set in last October when Labour should have simply said - "Are you sure the money is there for that NI tax cut?"
if that had been set you could now simply reverse them with the statement "we were correct the money wasn't there so"
They boxed themselves in to get elected and we see the consequences of not telling it as it is
The only thing this will hurt is the newspaper and its staff. Bezos is too rich to care.
Many will lose jobs. Or the whole thing will close.
Now maybe you can argue the editor should have published the Harris endorsement and then resigned. Bezos can't actually stop the printing press.
Three of the editorial board have resigned.
I’m afraid it’s inevitable, though. Bezos apparently wants “more conservative voices”, so he seems set on turning it into something that’s not really the WaPo that its subscribers want. Will it attract other readers ? Perhaps; perhaps not.
What’s undeniable is that the timing of this is pretty crass. It just makes it look entirely done as a suck up to Trump.
I think that's because it is a suck up to Trump.
It's been fairly well established it was a blatant suck up to Trump. Blue Origin executives met with Trump shortly after the decision was made to pull it the agreed endorsement.
It'll be very funny if Harris wins and all of a sudden Bezos has nuked the Washington Post's credibility - and his own remaining bona fides with liberal America - for worse than nothing. Especially given Musk's behiviour, and possibly now this, means there'll be significant pressure among Democrats to reign in billionaire tech plutocrats' power and how entwined government is with their companies.
History will long debate whether they could have won without the promise not to change the rates of income, NI, VAT etc.
The ghost of '92 hangs heavily still over Labour''s folk memory.
Labour can't claim to be ready to make tough decisions and simultaneously have been frightened so much that they painted themselves into a corner. It doesn't make sense. True boldness would be to say "we rule nothing out".
I've already revised my view that Sunak was exceptionally politically inept, I think Starmer is proving to be at least as bad.
I said on here the minute it was announced that cutting WFA was a political disaster and I'm calling the £2 bus cut another disaster and i'm obvs not the only one.
Why are Lab doing this stupid stuff for a few quid?
Well when you are dumb enough to rule out changing the rates of VAT, national insurance, income tax, and corporation tax — which are the main fiscal levers — all you are left with are relatively small changes at the margins. Those small changes are often disproportionately painful to particular groups, whilst raising quite small amounts of money, or alternately not cutting costs that much.
So we end with scrapping the winter fuel allowance, which will really hurt those just above the threshold, raising employer national insurance (making employment more expensive), and the brainwave of making bus travel more expensive which hurts some of the poorest people and makes public transport less attractive. VAT on school fees is another daft idea, I don't even like the idea of private education, but I'm damned if I can see the sense in making any type of education more expensive.
Short of pulling the mother of all rabbits out of the hat on Wednesday I expect that the budget is going to be an absolute stinker. By Thursday a hell of a lot of people are going to be asking themselves why did they vote Labour.
History will long debate whether they could have won without the promise not to change the rates of income, NI, VAT etc.
The ghost of '92 hangs heavily still over Labour''s folk memory.
The rot set in last October when Labour should have simply said - "Are you sure the money is there for that NI tax cut?"
if that had been set you could now simply reverse them with the statement "we were correct the money wasn't there so"
"Yes. Because we, unlike the party opposite (cheers) will continue to be efficient when it comes to public spending."
Palpable tosh, but very difficult to disprove. And NI reversal would have been all about Labour's weakness... heck, we're seeing that line anyway.
If it weren't for the details that I live in Britain and am fond of the old place, it would have been utterly hilarious to see Sunak and co trying to keep the show on the road after a July 4 victory.
Interesting to see local Government re-organisation is back on the political agenda and will be an integral part of the English Devolution Bill, due to be published next month.
Will this finally mark the end of the two-tier system in England? If so, how will this impact the 2025 County Council elections especially if the authorities being elected could cease to exist within the life of the current Parliament?
Taking Surrey for example, will the County take over the functions of the eleven Districts and Boroughs (the Cornwall solution) ir will the County be divided into three with each having the population of a London Borough (roughly 350,000) ?
I am trying not to be cynical, but I am imagining Sir Humphrey rubbing his hands with glee at some ineffectual new layer of regional government being set up and a whole new Whitehall department being created to oversee the poor loves.
In Durham they just got rid of the district councils and the county council took on all duties. Sadly it did not adopt the name County of County Durham County Council.
Two tier is just daft. Rubbish in your bin - District Council; rubbish you take to the tip* - County Council.
*I believe that they are referring to as "Household Waste Recycling Centres" in wokespeak. But tip is shorter.
If we are going to combine more district and county councils into unitaries then we also need stronger Parish and Town councils. Otherwise many could find most of their council decisions taken over the other side of the county
This is the same old argument that has been made since the late 1969s. The old urban and rural districts were scrapped and counties were redrawn. In Scotland burghs were amalgamated and Regions swept away long standing counties. We keep trying to reinvent the wheel. The problem now is that all the changes are being made for short term reasons, as local government goes bust under the prolonged onslaught of austerity. The reality is that a Royal Commission should examine the whole question of local government with a view to defining the purpose and funding of local government. What will most probably happen, however, is ad hoc and short term and as a result local government will become ever less sustainable.
History will long debate whether they could have won without the promise not to change the rates of income, NI, VAT etc.
The ghost of '92 hangs heavily still over Labour''s folk memory.
Labour can't claim to be ready to make tough decisions and simultaneously have been frightened so much that they painted themselves into a corner. It doesn't make sense. True boldness would be to say "we rule nothing out".
I've already revised my view that Sunak was exceptionally politically inept, I think Starmer is proving to be at least as bad.
Both rocketed to the leadership within a handful of years of becoming a MP.
Labour’s Fare Betrayal: SKS "Takes £520 a Year Out of the Pockets of Workers Travelling by Bus"
Although he could neither define a worker or recall what a bus is.
*Workers in England.
Here in the glorious world of West Scotia we are still at the mercy of FirstBus and their ilk. Sometimes they graciously limit a daily charge if the fancy takes them, sometimes not. Either way, you're getting milked.
I'm in Scotland this week. Had a lovely reminder on Sunday of what life without Sunday trading hours could be like. Bit of a bugger that the SNP all voted to force England to retain it. The bishops cam fuck off on this one too, obviously.
But then you have the 9.45pm sprint to get another bottle of vodka...
I'd be sad if all blondes with blue eyes, strawberry blondes and gingers died out because, quite frankly - although it won't happen in my lifetime - I find them prettier than brunettes but that is probably the natural end point in c.200 years on current trends. Through the summations of millions of individual choices and intermixing we'll probably all eventually become mixed race, a bit like how the Spanish did and probably look a bit more like them.
I don't think it necessarily make you a racist if you mourned this, and nor does any one race have more value than another, but I don't share the worries that it will fundamentally change Britain because I think all those people will adopt the values of the prevailing culture, including their heritage and traditions as Eric Kaufmann argues in "Whiteshift". Bit would I miss the blondes? Yes, I would.
[Having said that, it's not irrevocable either - over tens of thousands of years pigmentation would tend to lighten again because it will have to in order to get enough vitamin D, recognising that evolution will be much much slower in an advanced society where far more people survive. If we decide to actually try to have kids, that is.]
An underappreciated comment. That said... if people with dark skin tend to find other people with dark skin more sexually attractive, and people with light skin (etc), then one might easily end up with a "islands" of physical characteristics.
It also is a misunderstanding of how genetics works. For example in "A Muppet Christmas Carol" Tiny Tim is a small frog, not some weird frog/pig hybrid. Its the same for people.
Always good when PBers bring solid evidence to an argument
I think Foxy may need to revise his genetics. To start with a frog is a different species from a human. Note the definition of a species....
Mendel demonstrated in his pea experiments that if a gene is dominant then the F1 generation will be all tall peas, but the F2 generation will be a mix of 75% tall and 25% dwarf peas. There are no mid sized peas.
This is why we have human diversity, even in a population without assortive mating.
A Muppet Christmas Carol is accurate on this point.
It's one of the best films ever made. Easily the best Dickens adaptation and maybe Michael Caine's best film too.
The best Christmas film. Even better than Die Hard.
History will long debate whether they could have won without the promise not to change the rates of income, NI, VAT etc.
The ghost of '92 hangs heavily still over Labour''s folk memory.
Labour can't claim to be ready to make tough decisions and simultaneously have been frightened so much that they painted themselves into a corner. It doesn't make sense. True boldness would be to say "we rule nothing out".
I've already revised my view that Sunak was exceptionally politically inept, I think Starmer is proving to be at least as bad.
Both rocketed to the leadership within a handful of years of becoming a MP.
I said on here the minute it was announced that cutting WFA was a political disaster and I'm calling the £2 bus cut another disaster and i'm obvs not the only one.
Why are Lab doing this stupid stuff for a few quid?
Well when you are dumb enough to rule out changing the rates of VAT, national insurance, income tax, and corporation tax — which are the main fiscal levers — all you are left with are relatively small changes at the margins. Those small changes are often disproportionately painful to particular groups, whilst raising quite small amounts of money, or alternately not cutting costs that much.
So we end with scrapping the winter fuel allowance, which will really hurt those just above the threshold, raising employer national insurance (making employment more expensive), and the brainwave of making bus travel more expensive which hurts some of the poorest people and makes public transport less attractive. VAT on school fees is another daft idea, I don't even like the idea of private education, but I'm damned if I can see the sense in making any type of education more expensive.
Short of pulling the mother of all rabbits out of the hat on Wednesday I expect that the budget is going to be an absolute stinker. By Thursday a hell of a lot of people are going to be asking themselves why did they vote Labour.
History will long debate whether they could have won without the promise not to change the rates of income, NI, VAT etc.
The ghost of '92 hangs heavily still over Labour''s folk memory.
Labour can't claim to be ready to make tough decisions and simultaneously have been frightened so much that they painted themselves into a corner. It doesn't make sense. True boldness would be to say "we rule nothing out".
I've already revised my view that Sunak was exceptionally politically inept, I think Starmer is proving to be at least as bad.
Both rocketed to the leadership within a handful of years of becoming a MP.
Interesting to see local Government re-organisation is back on the political agenda and will be an integral part of the English Devolution Bill, due to be published next month.
Will this finally mark the end of the two-tier system in England? If so, how will this impact the 2025 County Council elections especially if the authorities being elected could cease to exist within the life of the current Parliament?
Taking Surrey for example, will the County take over the functions of the eleven Districts and Boroughs (the Cornwall solution) ir will the County be divided into three with each having the population of a London Borough (roughly 350,000) ?
I am trying not to be cynical, but I am imagining Sir Humphrey rubbing his hands with glee at some ineffectual new layer of regional government being set up and a whole new Whitehall department being created to oversee the poor loves.
In Durham they just got rid of the district councils and the county council took on all duties. Sadly it did not adopt the name County of County Durham County Council.
Two tier is just daft. Rubbish in your bin - District Council; rubbish you take to the tip* - County Council.
*I believe that they are referring to as "Household Waste Recycling Centres" in wokespeak. But tip is shorter.
If we are going to combine more district and county councils into unitaries then we also need stronger Parish and Town councils. Otherwise many could find most of their council decisions taken over the other side of the county
I agree if you take a county like Surrey (population 1.2 million) and try to make it a single council (as the County Council Conservatives want) it would become ridiculous. The alternative might be to create three Unitary authorities each of about 300,000-350,000 residents centred on Guildford/Woking, Dorking and Reigate/Redhill.
Not all of Surrey has Parish Councils (the more rural areas have retained theirs).
Essex would be interesting as well - any thoughts?
What might make sense, but be very controversial, would be a Blackwater Valley Council with Camberley, Farnham, Aldershot, Farnborough, maybe Sandhurst, parts of Hart
The only thing this will hurt is the newspaper and its staff. Bezos is too rich to care.
Many will lose jobs. Or the whole thing will close.
Now maybe you can argue the editor should have published the Harris endorsement and then resigned. Bezos can't actually stop the printing press.
Three of the editorial board have resigned.
I’m afraid it’s inevitable, though. Bezos apparently wants “more conservative voices”, so he seems set on turning it into something that’s not really the WaPo that its subscribers want. Will it attract other readers ? Perhaps; perhaps not.
What’s undeniable is that the timing of this is pretty crass. It just makes it look entirely done as a suck up to Trump.
I suspect there are $x0bn reasons why the owner of AWS may want to keep the next potential president happy...
He might also want Amazon exempt from paying tariffs on goods imported from China.
Interesting to see local Government re-organisation is back on the political agenda and will be an integral part of the English Devolution Bill, due to be published next month.
Will this finally mark the end of the two-tier system in England? If so, how will this impact the 2025 County Council elections especially if the authorities being elected could cease to exist within the life of the current Parliament?
Taking Surrey for example, will the County take over the functions of the eleven Districts and Boroughs (the Cornwall solution) ir will the County be divided into three with each having the population of a London Borough (roughly 350,000) ?
History will long debate whether they could have won without the promise not to change the rates of income, NI, VAT etc.
The ghost of '92 hangs heavily still over Labour''s folk memory.
Labour can't claim to be ready to make tough decisions and simultaneously have been frightened so much that they painted themselves into a corner. It doesn't make sense. True boldness would be to say "we rule nothing out".
I've already revised my view that Sunak was exceptionally politically inept, I think Starmer is proving to be at least as bad.
Both rocketed to the leadership within a handful of years of becoming a MP.
Hmmm. Correlation or causation.
Hmm, how long have Jenrick and Badenoch been MPs?
Jenrick since 2014 Badenoch since 2017
Dave became Tory leader after just four years as MP.
History will long debate whether they could have won without the promise not to change the rates of income, NI, VAT etc.
The ghost of '92 hangs heavily still over Labour''s folk memory.
Labour can't claim to be ready to make tough decisions and simultaneously have been frightened so much that they painted themselves into a corner. It doesn't make sense. True boldness would be to say "we rule nothing out".
I've already revised my view that Sunak was exceptionally politically inept, I think Starmer is proving to be at least as bad.
Both rocketed to the leadership within a handful of years of becoming a MP.
Hmmm. Correlation or causation.
Hmm, how long have Jenrick and Badenoch been MPs?
Jenrick since 2014 Badenoch since 2017
Dave became Tory leader after just four years as MP.
And look how that ended up!
The binfires in both big parties in recent years have done horrible things to the talent (no sniggering) pipelines. Badenoch ran in 2022 to be PM. OK, it was putting down a marker, but even still, it's a saucy thing to have done.
@MattW from previous thread I think - I bookmarked to read later - your images all led to this totally unreadable thing: https://us.v-cdn.net/5020679/uploads/editor/wb/1woii3vevd2r.png - I find your disability posts very interesting from a perspective I don't know anything about, have you got more readable versions?
History will long debate whether they could have won without the promise not to change the rates of income, NI, VAT etc.
The ghost of '92 hangs heavily still over Labour''s folk memory.
Labour can't claim to be ready to make tough decisions and simultaneously have been frightened so much that they painted themselves into a corner. It doesn't make sense. True boldness would be to say "we rule nothing out".
I've already revised my view that Sunak was exceptionally politically inept, I think Starmer is proving to be at least as bad.
Labour judged that to win the election they had to promise not to raise income tax, NI on employees, or VAT. If they had said "we rule nothing out", their judgement was that they would probably lose the election as the Tories and their media allies would make hay and run, effectively, with the "tax bombshell" under Labour line. Labour won the election, handsomely. I'd have liked them to be bold and not to rule out raising taxes. But I also wanted them to win the election. The problem is that any inkling of raising taxes under our current political culture is an election loser.
I said on here the minute it was announced that cutting WFA was a political disaster and I'm calling the £2 bus cut another disaster and i'm obvs not the only one.
Why are Lab doing this stupid stuff for a few quid?
Luke Tryl @LukeTryl · 9h If you want an idea of why removing the £2 bus fare cap may be so damaging beyond polls, read Greg's quote from our focus group. At a time of deep political distrust it's one of few recent examples of a policy people can point to that tangibly improves their lives for the better
Your dismissing of billions of pounds as a few quid is the problem.
Scrapping unnecessary expenditure like the WFA is precisely the right thing to do and when it saves billions of pounds per year that is massive not inconsequential.
If If had been done properly, but it was rushed and no thought given to the 800,000 who could claim pension credit and who the DWP are desperately trying to find which is more than likely to result in it costing more than it saves
Reeves should have announced it in her Statement on Wednesday
The other problem is the Scottish Couple have been given the approval to pursue it through the Scottish courts, and if they win in January all this years payments will have to be paid retrospectively
Means testing it is the right thing to do but it has been mishandled and resulted in it being unpopular
Who cares, it’s happening whether they like it or not
I said on here the minute it was announced that cutting WFA was a political disaster and I'm calling the £2 bus cut another disaster and i'm obvs not the only one.
Why are Lab doing this stupid stuff for a few quid?
Luke Tryl @LukeTryl · 9h If you want an idea of why removing the £2 bus fare cap may be so damaging beyond polls, read Greg's quote from our focus group. At a time of deep political distrust it's one of few recent examples of a policy people can point to that tangibly improves their lives for the better
Your dismissing of billions of pounds as a few quid is the problem.
Scrapping unnecessary expenditure like the WFA is precisely the right thing to do and when it saves billions of pounds per year that is massive not inconsequential.
If If had been done properly, but it was rushed and no thought given to the 800,000 who could claim pension credit and who the DWP are desperately trying to find which is more than likely to result in it costing more than it saves
Reeves should have announced it in her Statement on Wednesday
The other problem is the Scottish Couple have been given the approval to pursue it through the Scottish courts, and if they win in January all this years payments will have to be paid retrospectively
Means testing it is the right thing to do but it has been mishandled and resulted in it being unpopular
Who cares, it’s happening whether they like it or not
I said on here the minute it was announced that cutting WFA was a political disaster and I'm calling the £2 bus cut another disaster and i'm obvs not the only one.
Why are Lab doing this stupid stuff for a few quid?
Luke Tryl @LukeTryl · 9h If you want an idea of why removing the £2 bus fare cap may be so damaging beyond polls, read Greg's quote from our focus group. At a time of deep political distrust it's one of few recent examples of a policy people can point to that tangibly improves their lives for the better
Your dismissing of billions of pounds as a few quid is the problem.
Scrapping unnecessary expenditure like the WFA is precisely the right thing to do and when it saves billions of pounds per year that is massive not inconsequential.
If If had been done properly, but it was rushed and no thought given to the 800,000 who could claim pension credit and who the DWP are desperately trying to find which is more than likely to result in it costing more than it saves
Reeves should have announced it in her Statement on Wednesday
The other problem is the Scottish Couple have been given the approval to pursue it through the Scottish courts, and if they win in January all this years payments will have to be paid retrospectively
Means testing it is the right thing to do but it has been mishandled and resulted in it being unpopular
Who cares, it’s happening whether they like it or not
Labour and its supporters are sounding very late stage Paris Commune-y at the moment. They know it's not going to last long but be damned if they're not going to shoot some people before they go.
I said on here the minute it was announced that cutting WFA was a political disaster and I'm calling the £2 bus cut another disaster and i'm obvs not the only one.
Why are Lab doing this stupid stuff for a few quid?
Luke Tryl @LukeTryl · 9h If you want an idea of why removing the £2 bus fare cap may be so damaging beyond polls, read Greg's quote from our focus group. At a time of deep political distrust it's one of few recent examples of a policy people can point to that tangibly improves their lives for the better
Your dismissing of billions of pounds as a few quid is the problem.
Scrapping unnecessary expenditure like the WFA is precisely the right thing to do and when it saves billions of pounds per year that is massive not inconsequential.
If If had been done properly, but it was rushed and no thought given to the 800,000 who could claim pension credit and who the DWP are desperately trying to find which is more than likely to result in it costing more than it saves
Reeves should have announced it in her Statement on Wednesday
The other problem is the Scottish Couple have been given the approval to pursue it through the Scottish courts, and if they win in January all this years payments will have to be paid retrospectively
Means testing it is the right thing to do but it has been mishandled and resulted in it being unpopular
Who cares, it’s happening whether they like it or not
And it's hardly been mishandled - in fact, it's working exactly as intended by providing WFP to those who need it most. Taking away a freebie for pensioners with higher incomes was always going to unpopular - universal benefits tend to be permanent benefits for that reason.
I'm not sure whether a ruling in Scotland would actually apply in E&W - different legal system, and WFP is technically devolved (though still administered by DWP rather than SSS).
History will long debate whether they could have won without the promise not to change the rates of income, NI, VAT etc.
The ghost of '92 hangs heavily still over Labour''s folk memory.
Labour can't claim to be ready to make tough decisions and simultaneously have been frightened so much that they painted themselves into a corner. It doesn't make sense. True boldness would be to say "we rule nothing out".
I've already revised my view that Sunak was exceptionally politically inept, I think Starmer is proving to be at least as bad.
Labour judged that to win the election they had to promise not to raise income tax, NI on employees, or VAT. If they had said "we rule nothing out", their judgement was that they would probably lose the election as the Tories and their media allies would make hay and run, effectively, with the "tax bombshell" under Labour line. Labour won the election, handsomely. I'd have liked them to be bold and not to rule out raising taxes. But I also wanted them to win the election. The problem is that any inkling of raising taxes under our current political culture is an election loser.
I don’t think that is necessarily true. I think they could’ve won and still been bolder in the GE campaign. Their majority might have been smaller, but I think people were ready to get rid of the Tories.
With our Cheshire Police and Crime Commissioner @danpricelab and Frodsham @cwaclabour Cllrs listening to residents' concerns and ideas for policing and community safety @LucyRSumner"
If the Greens turn this into a a campaign issue then it might just start to hurt Labour. Though this really is in their core vote areas, so would take a lot to make a material difference.
I think an increase in fuel duty is much more likely to cause them issues, even though motoring has actually got cheaper over the last decade or so.
I said on here the minute it was announced that cutting WFA was a political disaster and I'm calling the £2 bus cut another disaster and i'm obvs not the only one.
Why are Lab doing this stupid stuff for a few quid?
Luke Tryl @LukeTryl · 9h If you want an idea of why removing the £2 bus fare cap may be so damaging beyond polls, read Greg's quote from our focus group. At a time of deep political distrust it's one of few recent examples of a policy people can point to that tangibly improves their lives for the better
Your dismissing of billions of pounds as a few quid is the problem.
Scrapping unnecessary expenditure like the WFA is precisely the right thing to do and when it saves billions of pounds per year that is massive not inconsequential.
If If had been done properly, but it was rushed and no thought given to the 800,000 who could claim pension credit and who the DWP are desperately trying to find which is more than likely to result in it costing more than it saves
Reeves should have announced it in her Statement on Wednesday
The other problem is the Scottish Couple have been given the approval to pursue it through the Scottish courts, and if they win in January all this years payments will have to be paid retrospectively
Means testing it is the right thing to do but it has been mishandled and resulted in it being unpopular
Who cares, it’s happening whether they like it or not
And it's hardly been mishandled - in fact, it's working exactly as intended by providing WFP to those who need it most. Taking away a freebie for pensioners with higher incomes was always going to unpopular - universal benefits tend to be permanent benefits for that reason.
I'm not sure whether a ruling in Scotland would actually apply in E&W - different legal system, and WFP is technically devolved (though still administered by DWP rather than SSS).
I would suggest Reeves had overlooked the consequences of expanding the pension credits as they maintained it would save 1.5 billion which it wont
The only thing this will hurt is the newspaper and its staff. Bezos is too rich to care.
Many will lose jobs. Or the whole thing will close.
Now maybe you can argue the editor should have published the Harris endorsement and then resigned. Bezos can't actually stop the printing press.
Three of the editorial board have resigned.
I’m afraid it’s inevitable, though. Bezos apparently wants “more conservative voices”, so he seems set on turning it into something that’s not really the WaPo that its subscribers want. Will it attract other readers ? Perhaps; perhaps not.
What’s undeniable is that the timing of this is pretty crass. It just makes it look entirely done as a suck up to Trump.
I suspect there are $x0bn reasons why the owner of AWS may want to keep the next potential president happy...
He might also want Amazon exempt from paying tariffs on goods imported from China.
Crony capitalism is a truly shitty thing.
"Corruption is great when it works in your favour".
Interesting to see local Government re-organisation is back on the political agenda and will be an integral part of the English Devolution Bill, due to be published next month.
Will this finally mark the end of the two-tier system in England? If so, how will this impact the 2025 County Council elections especially if the authorities being elected could cease to exist within the life of the current Parliament?
Taking Surrey for example, will the County take over the functions of the eleven Districts and Boroughs (the Cornwall solution) ir will the County be divided into three with each having the population of a London Borough (roughly 350,000) ?
I am trying not to be cynical, but I am imagining Sir Humphrey rubbing his hands with glee at some ineffectual new layer of regional government being set up and a whole new Whitehall department being created to oversee the poor loves.
In Durham they just got rid of the district councils and the county council took on all duties. Sadly it did not adopt the name County of County Durham County Council.
Two tier is just daft. Rubbish in your bin - District Council; rubbish you take to the tip* - County Council.
*I believe that they are referring to as "Household Waste Recycling Centres" in wokespeak. But tip is shorter.
If we are going to combine more district and county councils into unitaries then we also need stronger Parish and Town councils. Otherwise many could find most of their council decisions taken over the other side of the county
I agree if you take a county like Surrey (population 1.2 million) and try to make it a single council (as the County Council Conservatives want) it would become ridiculous. The alternative might be to create three Unitary authorities each of about 300,000-350,000 residents centred on Guildford/Woking, Dorking and Reigate/Redhill.
Not all of Surrey has Parish Councils (the more rural areas have retained theirs).
Essex would be interesting as well - any thoughts?
What might make sense, but be very controversial, would be a Blackwater Valley Council with Camberley, Farnham, Aldershot, Farnborough, maybe Sandhurst, parts of Hart
It will be interesting to see what they come up with:
Option 1 - minimum change, just converting all 2 tier councils to unitaries Option 2 - Option 1 plus relooking at some of the smaller 1990s unitaries such as Blackburn, Torbay and those in Berkshire and Teeside etc Option 3 - A complete redraw including looking at things like the boundary of Greater London
Option 3 is the most interesting as that hasn't really been done since the big 1970s reorg and a lot of places will have changed substantially. However, it also has the potential to cause the most upset and lead to big fights.
You mention Blackwater Valley - the original 1970s proposal was to move Farnborough, Fleet and Aldershot to Surrey
I said on here the minute it was announced that cutting WFA was a political disaster and I'm calling the £2 bus cut another disaster and i'm obvs not the only one.
Why are Lab doing this stupid stuff for a few quid?
Luke Tryl @LukeTryl · 9h If you want an idea of why removing the £2 bus fare cap may be so damaging beyond polls, read Greg's quote from our focus group. At a time of deep political distrust it's one of few recent examples of a policy people can point to that tangibly improves their lives for the better
Your dismissing of billions of pounds as a few quid is the problem.
Scrapping unnecessary expenditure like the WFA is precisely the right thing to do and when it saves billions of pounds per year that is massive not inconsequential.
If If had been done properly, but it was rushed and no thought given to the 800,000 who could claim pension credit and who the DWP are desperately trying to find which is more than likely to result in it costing more than it saves
Reeves should have announced it in her Statement on Wednesday
The other problem is the Scottish Couple have been given the approval to pursue it through the Scottish courts, and if they win in January all this years payments will have to be paid retrospectively
Means testing it is the right thing to do but it has been mishandled and resulted in it being unpopular
Who cares, it’s happening whether they like it or not
And it's hardly been mishandled - in fact, it's working exactly as intended by providing WFP to those who need it most. Taking away a freebie for pensioners with higher incomes was always going to unpopular - universal benefits tend to be permanent benefits for that reason.
I'm not sure whether a ruling in Scotland would actually apply in E&W - different legal system, and WFP is technically devolved (though still administered by DWP rather than SSS).
I would suggest Reeves had overlooked the consequences of expanding the pension credits as they maintained it would save 1.5 billion which it wont
Well, they've saved 1.5 billion which they've then used to help pensioners in poverty. The low uptake of Pension Credit was a minor scandal and it's good to see it fixed.
If you want a high tax, high spend government that espouses universal benefits, you'd have to vote Plaid or SNP (though even they have gone along with the means testing for WFP).
If the Greens turn this into a a campaign issue then it might just start to hurt Labour. Though this really is in their core vote areas, so would take a lot to make a material difference.
I think an increase in fuel duty is much more likely to cause them issues, even though motoring has actually got cheaper over the last decade or so.
The London Boroughs are up in 2026 and Lab will be defending from a strong position
Interesting to see local Government re-organisation is back on the political agenda and will be an integral part of the English Devolution Bill, due to be published next month.
Will this finally mark the end of the two-tier system in England? If so, how will this impact the 2025 County Council elections especially if the authorities being elected could cease to exist within the life of the current Parliament?
Taking Surrey for example, will the County take over the functions of the eleven Districts and Boroughs (the Cornwall solution) ir will the County be divided into three with each having the population of a London Borough (roughly 350,000) ?
I am trying not to be cynical, but I am imagining Sir Humphrey rubbing his hands with glee at some ineffectual new layer of regional government being set up and a whole new Whitehall department being created to oversee the poor loves.
In Durham they just got rid of the district councils and the county council took on all duties. Sadly it did not adopt the name County of County Durham County Council.
Two tier is just daft. Rubbish in your bin - District Council; rubbish you take to the tip* - County Council.
*I believe that they are referring to as "Household Waste Recycling Centres" in wokespeak. But tip is shorter.
If we are going to combine more district and county councils into unitaries then we also need stronger Parish and Town councils. Otherwise many could find most of their council decisions taken over the other side of the county
I agree if you take a county like Surrey (population 1.2 million) and try to make it a single council (as the County Council Conservatives want) it would become ridiculous. The alternative might be to create three Unitary authorities each of about 300,000-350,000 residents centred on Guildford/Woking, Dorking and Reigate/Redhill.
Not all of Surrey has Parish Councils (the more rural areas have retained theirs).
Essex would be interesting as well - any thoughts?
What might make sense, but be very controversial, would be a Blackwater Valley Council with Camberley, Farnham, Aldershot, Farnborough, maybe Sandhurst, parts of Hart
It will be interesting to see what they come up with:
Option 1 - minimum change, just converting all 2 tier councils to unitaries Option 2 - Option 1 plus relooking at some of the smaller 1990s unitaries such as Blackburn, Torbay and those in Berkshire and Teeside etc Option 3 - A complete redraw including looking at things like the boundary of Greater London
Option 3 is the most interesting as that hasn't really been done since the big 1970s reorg and a lot of places will have changed substantially. However, it also has the potential to cause the most upset and lead to big fights.
You mention Blackwater Valley - the original 1970s proposal was to move Farnborough, Fleet and Aldershot to Surrey
Yougov last relased a voting intention poll on the 24th of July. Have they left polling? I don’t see how they can expect to maintain a reputation as a respected polling organisation.
Yougov last relased a voting intention poll on the 24th of July. Have they left polling? I don’t see how they can expect to maintain a reputation as a respected polling organisation.
The lack of VI polling since the GE hasn’t been great. I’m hoping the budget marks a sea change on that front.
Yougov last relased a voting intention poll on the 24th of July. Have they left polling? I don’t see how they can expect to maintain a reputation as a respected polling organisation.
It's the same with Ipsos, Savanta and Survation.
Bizarre!
I notice The Times (who have published YouGov polls since around 2005) went with More In Common on their most recent published opinion poll.
Incredible intelligence-led sting by cyclist on bike thief. Typical reluctance from the police.
I read this earlier. Very impressive and resourceful. But you have to wonder about the Police and their whole attitude. It seems any forces treat bike theft as a minor inconvenience.
They do. Cyclists, phone and laptop owners who have tracking data of their stolen possessions are treated as major inconveniences.
A friend had her bike stolen. The bike was lo-jacked in about seven different ways. Not going reveal all of them - some were her custom ideas (works in IT). Sufice it to say, location was just the first thing.
When she reported this to the police, she showed them what she had on her laptop on the bike. And got told that having that much information on the thieves was dodgy!
Be quite funny to turn it into a haunted bike that does naughty things to wifi...
"I'm a thirty second bomb! I'm a thirty second bomb! Twenty-nine! Twenty-eight! Twenty-seven!..."
EDIT: many years back a chap in Oxford was prosecuted for boobytrapping his bike. Involved a 1 Farad capacitor, IIRC.
Ouch! Does seem a bit naughty, if amusing.
I wonder what static voltage you could get a bike (and passenger) up to (assuming it isn't raining) with a suitable modification to the wheel hub?
A small extra incentive not to put your foot down...
[I had a (fairly distinctive) bike stolen in Oxford many years ago that was actually recovered by a very observant policeman. Sadly written off by a car later although it did complete a good number of tours first.]
A fully charged 1 Farad capacitor could be lethal, I think.
Depending on the maximum voltage, certainly.
This is why you should be very careful fixing microwaves as the high voltage circuit that powers the magnetron has a similarly large capacitor. Usually this has a high valued resistor across it to dissipate the charge over time but if that fails for any reason it can retain lethal voltages for a looong time.
You can have fun playing with the coils from microwaves but you didn't hear that from me.
Interesting to see local Government re-organisation is back on the political agenda and will be an integral part of the English Devolution Bill, due to be published next month.
Will this finally mark the end of the two-tier system in England? If so, how will this impact the 2025 County Council elections especially if the authorities being elected could cease to exist within the life of the current Parliament?
Taking Surrey for example, will the County take over the functions of the eleven Districts and Boroughs (the Cornwall solution) ir will the County be divided into three with each having the population of a London Borough (roughly 350,000) ?
I am trying not to be cynical, but I am imagining Sir Humphrey rubbing his hands with glee at some ineffectual new layer of regional government being set up and a whole new Whitehall department being created to oversee the poor loves.
In Durham they just got rid of the district councils and the county council took on all duties. Sadly it did not adopt the name County of County Durham County Council.
Two tier is just daft. Rubbish in your bin - District Council; rubbish you take to the tip* - County Council.
*I believe that they are referring to as "Household Waste Recycling Centres" in wokespeak. But tip is shorter.
If we are going to combine more district and county councils into unitaries then we also need stronger Parish and Town councils. Otherwise many could find most of their council decisions taken over the other side of the county
I agree if you take a county like Surrey (population 1.2 million) and try to make it a single council (as the County Council Conservatives want) it would become ridiculous. The alternative might be to create three Unitary authorities each of about 300,000-350,000 residents centred on Guildford/Woking, Dorking and Reigate/Redhill.
Not all of Surrey has Parish Councils (the more rural areas have retained theirs).
Essex would be interesting as well - any thoughts?
What might make sense, but be very controversial, would be a Blackwater Valley Council with Camberley, Farnham, Aldershot, Farnborough, maybe Sandhurst, parts of Hart
It will be interesting to see what they come up with:
Option 1 - minimum change, just converting all 2 tier councils to unitaries Option 2 - Option 1 plus relooking at some of the smaller 1990s unitaries such as Blackburn, Torbay and those in Berkshire and Teeside etc Option 3 - A complete redraw including looking at things like the boundary of Greater London
Option 3 is the most interesting as that hasn't really been done since the big 1970s reorg and a lot of places will have changed substantially. However, it also has the potential to cause the most upset and lead to big fights.
You mention Blackwater Valley - the original 1970s proposal was to move Farnborough, Fleet and Aldershot to Surrey
Yougov last relased a voting intention poll on the 24th of July. Have they left polling? I don’t see how they can expect to maintain a reputation as a respected polling organisation.
The lack of VI polling since the GE hasn’t been great. I’m hoping the budget marks a sea change on that front.
After the budget and Kemi becoming LOTO, hopefully it'll be game on... 🎯
Yougov last relased a voting intention poll on the 24th of July. Have they left polling? I don’t see how they can expect to maintain a reputation as a respected polling organisation.
The lack of VI polling since the GE hasn’t been great. I’m hoping the budget marks a sea change on that front.
After the budget and Kemi becoming LOTO, hopefully it'll be game on... 🎯
A Reform by-election win would put the cat among the pigeons.
Yougov last relased a voting intention poll on the 24th of July. Have they left polling? I don’t see how they can expect to maintain a reputation as a respected polling organisation.
The lack of VI polling since the GE hasn’t been great. I’m hoping the budget marks a sea change on that front.
After the budget and Kemi becoming LOTO, hopefully it'll be game on... 🎯
A Reform by-election win would put the cat among the pigeons.
Well yeah, but I'm hoping the first thing Kemi does as LOTO is crush Farage with her size 5 high heels and grind him into the dirt once and for all... 😂
Interesting comment, need to look at the numbers properly and see if he's right:
"I'm going to keep beating this hammer: the Republican hack firms are showing numbers in line with the average. Is it because the Republican hack firms have changed methodologies to become more accurate? Is it a stopped-clock right twice a day situation? Or is the average just... way off?"
Interesting comment, need to look at the numbers properly and see if he's right:
"I'm going to keep beating this hammer: the Republican hack firms are showing numbers in line with the average. Is it because the Republican hack firms have changed methodologies to become more accurate? Is it a stopped-clock right twice a day situation? Or is the average just... way off?"
Comment there: "Rasmussen (republican best case scenario polling) has Trump barely over 50% in Texas is either a massive warning sign for Republicans or Rasmussen decided to become a legit polling shop."
The Trump campaign seems to have two different modes, it has "play to win" mode and "self-indulgent" mode. They thought they were winning so they went into self-indulgent mode and did the Vance pick, then it didn't look so good and they went basically professional for a while, then their numbers improved and their vibes improved more and they went back into self-indulgent mode and did the thing with the racist comedian etc.
The Trump campaign seems to have two different modes, it has "play to win" mode and "self-indulgent" mode. They thought they were winning so they went into self-indulgent mode and did the Vance pick, then it didn't look so good and they went basically professional for a while, then their numbers improved and their vibes improved more and they went back into self-indulgent mode and did the thing with the racist comedian etc.
Or they have a "they just can't help themselves" mode that kicks in at random times in the campaign.
Could anything make Bezos/ WaPo decision look worse?
It turns out something could! An op-ed by the man himself.
If he actually believed any of this piety, he could have made the choice before 2016 election, or 2020, or two years ago. Or *after* this one. Any time except the "Comey unit," 11 days before election day. https://x.com/JamesFallows/status/1851060450680570170
Could anything make Bezos/ WaPo decision look worse?
It turns out something could! An op-ed by the man himself.
If he actually believed any of this piety, he could have made the choice before 2016 election, or 2020, or two years ago. Or *after* this one. Any time except the "Comey unit," 11 days before election day. https://x.com/JamesFallows/status/1851060450680570170
Which raises the interesting question whether there might also be a Comey Limit - a time to go before the election, beyond which it's impossible to undo the electoral damage of a major gaffe ?
Trump’s Puerto Rico fallout is ‘spreading like wildfire’ in Pennsylvania https://www.politico.com/news/2024/10/28/trump-rally-puerto-rico-pennsylvania-fallout-00185935 ... “If we weren’t engaged before, we’re all paying attention now,” Martinez said. He added the morning radio show he hosts was chock-full of callers Monday sounding off on the Trump rally comments, including a Puerto Rican Trump supporter who is now telling people not to vote for the former president...
Could anything make Bezos/ WaPo decision look worse?
It turns out something could! An op-ed by the man himself.
If he actually believed any of this piety, he could have made the choice before 2016 election, or 2020, or two years ago. Or *after* this one. Any time except the "Comey unit," 11 days before election day. https://x.com/JamesFallows/status/1851060450680570170
Which raises the interesting question whether there might also be a Comey Limit - a time to go before the election, beyond which it's impossible to undo the electoral damage of a major gaffe ?
Trump’s Puerto Rico fallout is ‘spreading like wildfire’ in Pennsylvania https://www.politico.com/news/2024/10/28/trump-rally-puerto-rico-pennsylvania-fallout-00185935 ... “If we weren’t engaged before, we’re all paying attention now,” Martinez said. He added the morning radio show he hosts was chock-full of callers Monday sounding off on the Trump rally comments, including a Puerto Rican Trump supporter who is now telling people not to vote for the former president...
Vance's take probably doesn't help. .. “Our country was built by frontiersmen who conquered the wilderness,” Vance said. “We’re not going to restore the greatness of American civilization if we get offended at every little thing. Let’s have a sense of humor and let’s have a little fun.”..
Can't we just have a little fun with the odd racist joke, or two, while "restoring the greatness of American civilisation" ?
Could anything make Bezos/ WaPo decision look worse?
It turns out something could! An op-ed by the man himself.
If he actually believed any of this piety, he could have made the choice before 2016 election, or 2020, or two years ago. Or *after* this one. Any time except the "Comey unit," 11 days before election day. https://x.com/JamesFallows/status/1851060450680570170
Which raises the interesting question whether there might also be a Comey Limit - a time to go before the election, beyond which it's impossible to undo the electoral damage of a major gaffe ?
Trump’s Puerto Rico fallout is ‘spreading like wildfire’ in Pennsylvania https://www.politico.com/news/2024/10/28/trump-rally-puerto-rico-pennsylvania-fallout-00185935 ... “If we weren’t engaged before, we’re all paying attention now,” Martinez said. He added the morning radio show he hosts was chock-full of callers Monday sounding off on the Trump rally comments, including a Puerto Rican Trump supporter who is now telling people not to vote for the former president...
Until now it’s been assumed that the winner of Pa wins the election, given the high correlation between swing states. Something to remember on election night, in case Pa now becomes the outlier among the swing states.
Budget: I get £2,750 a month in benefits and I'm freaking out over cuts.
Nicole Healing, 44, Unemployed.
"Nicole, who uses them and they pronoun, said they receive Employment and Support Allowance of £1,042, Personal Independent Payments of £798, and Housing Benefit of £917 per month.
Though they feel in a "fortunate position" currently, Nicole says: "I feel I am at the mercy of the DWP."
That's £33,000 a year in benefits for a single person.
Budget: I get £2,750 a month in benefits and I'm freaking out over cuts.
Nicole Healing, 44, Unemployed.
"Nicole, who uses them and they pronoun, said they receive Employment and Support Allowance of £1,042, Personal Independent Payments of £798, and Housing Benefit of £917 per month.
Though they feel in a "fortunate position" currently, Nicole says: "I feel I am at the mercy of the DWP."
That's £33,000 a year in benefits for a single person.
I was considering a "them" / "plural" gag, and then thought better of it.
Yougov last relased a voting intention poll on the 24th of July. Have they left polling? I don’t see how they can expect to maintain a reputation as a respected polling organisation.
The lack of VI polling since the GE hasn’t been great. I’m hoping the budget marks a sea change on that front.
After the budget and Kemi becoming LOTO, hopefully it'll be game on... 🎯
I don’t see why those things would change the policy (or lack of it).
I also don't know why PB (which presumably has some sort of relationship with these companies) isn't politely asking what's going on.
Budget: I get £2,750 a month in benefits and I'm freaking out over cuts.
Nicole Healing, 44, Unemployed.
"Nicole, who uses them and they pronoun, said they receive Employment and Support Allowance of £1,042, Personal Independent Payments of £798, and Housing Benefit of £917 per month.
Though they feel in a "fortunate position" currently, Nicole says: "I feel I am at the mercy of the DWP."
That's £33,000 a year in benefits for a single person.
I think I’d feel in a “fortunate” position if some fairy godmother was giving me £33,000 a year.
Budget: I get £2,750 a month in benefits and I'm freaking out over cuts.
Nicole Healing, 44, Unemployed.
"Nicole, who uses them and they pronoun, said they receive Employment and Support Allowance of £1,042, Personal Independent Payments of £798, and Housing Benefit of £917 per month.
Though they feel in a "fortunate position" currently, Nicole says: "I feel I am at the mercy of the DWP."
That's £33,000 a year in benefits for a single person.
I know a few people in a category possibly similar to the above. They are educated to a very high (ie postgraduate) level. They become unable to work, sometimes after a few unsuccessful attempts, due to health conditions that seem to be predominantly psychological disorders. Then they get benefit payments from the government that are equivalent to the wage you would get from a full time professional job.
In the end I can only really feel sorry for them. People don't take them seriously, they are viewed as a drain on the state - and they know it.
“I am fearful about the negative rhetoric in the media about disabled people in receipt of benefits."
Budget: I get £2,750 a month in benefits and I'm freaking out over cuts.
Nicole Healing, 44, Unemployed.
"Nicole, who uses them and they pronoun, said they receive Employment and Support Allowance of £1,042, Personal Independent Payments of £798, and Housing Benefit of £917 per month.
Though they feel in a "fortunate position" currently, Nicole says: "I feel I am at the mercy of the DWP."
That's £33,000 a year in benefits for a single person.
I know a few people in a category possibly similar to the above. They are educated to a very high (ie postgraduate) level. They become unable to work, sometimes after a few unsuccessful attempts, due to health conditions that seem to be predominantly psychological disorders. Then they get benefit payments from the government that are equivalent to the wage you would get from a full time professional job.
In the end I can only really feel sorry for them. People don't take them seriously, they are viewed as a drain on the state - and they know it.
“I am fearful about the negative rhetoric in the media about disabled people in receipt of benefits."
One symptom of the psychological disorder seems to be ordering copious quantities of shit off Temu which I have to lug to their door for 55 hours a week in order to earn that much
While my outgoings are small, I was making less than that £33,000 before AI and other technical changes destroyed what had been regular work from two different clients for six years.
Budget: I get £2,750 a month in benefits and I'm freaking out over cuts.
Nicole Healing, 44, Unemployed.
"Nicole, who uses them and they pronoun, said they receive Employment and Support Allowance of £1,042, Personal Independent Payments of £798, and Housing Benefit of £917 per month.
Though they feel in a "fortunate position" currently, Nicole says: "I feel I am at the mercy of the DWP."
That's £33,000 a year in benefits for a single person.
I think I’d feel in a “fortunate” position if some fairy godmother was giving me £33,000 a year.
I was astonished to read it and that she has a £1,250 pcm flat in Brighton.
PB Tories wouldn’t get out of bed for £33k a year.
I'm surprised. I thought judging by their howling over capital gains tax they were in favour of people making lots of money while doing no work for it.
Budget: I get £2,750 a month in benefits and I'm freaking out over cuts.
Nicole Healing, 44, Unemployed.
"Nicole, who uses them and they pronoun, said they receive Employment and Support Allowance of £1,042, Personal Independent Payments of £798, and Housing Benefit of £917 per month.
Though they feel in a "fortunate position" currently, Nicole says: "I feel I am at the mercy of the DWP."
That's £33,000 a year in benefits for a single person.
I know a few people in a category possibly similar to the above. They are educated to a very high (ie postgraduate) level. They become unable to work, sometimes after a few unsuccessful attempts, due to health conditions that seem to be predominantly psychological disorders. Then they get benefit payments from the government that are equivalent to the wage you would get from a full time professional job.
In the end I can only really feel sorry for them. People don't take them seriously, they are viewed as a drain on the state - and they know it.
“I am fearful about the negative rhetoric in the media about disabled people in receipt of benefits."
She was in digital marketing in the civil service so hardly working down the mines.
Whilst I have sympathy for anyone who's not feeling OK those benefits are excessive. I doubt she's fundamentally disabled and unable to do any work.
We all feel awful and struggle from time to time. It doesn't mean we expect everyone else to pay for us.
Comments
Not all of Surrey has Parish Councils (the more rural areas have retained theirs).
Essex would be interesting as well - any thoughts?
According to the authors, the 12th Amendment provides some protection: "One plausible scenario involves Harris winning all of the swing states except North Carolina and Georgia, and thus besting Trump 287 to 251. Suppose that Trump then succeeds in preventing the appointment of any Pennsylvania electors. Harris should still win: 268 to 251.
This is where an accurate reading of the 12th Amendment comes in. It doesn’t matter that Harris’s 268 votes would not be a majority of the full 538 electoral college votes. The amendment says the victor must receive “a majority of the whole number of electors appointed” — not that could have been appointed. In this example, she would win by virtue of having received a majority of the 519 votes cast after Pennsylvania’s were discarded."
Reeves should have announced it in her Statement on Wednesday
The other problem is the Scottish Couple have been given the approval to pursue it through the Scottish courts, and if they win in January all this years payments will have to be paid retrospectively
Means testing it is the right thing to do but it has been mishandled and resulted in it being unpopular
Though again you would still want stronger Parish and Town councils
It's a long way back to 2010 levels of provision.
It’s his publication - which he subsidises. But while he can pretty well do what he wants with it, his readers don’t have to go along with it - and cancelling a subscription is the only way to make that clear in a way that even a billionaire can’t completely ignore.
The ghost of '92 hangs heavily still over Labour''s folk memory.
This is why we have human diversity, even in a population without assortive mating.
A Muppet Christmas Carol is accurate on this point.
if that had been set you could now simply reverse them with the statement "we were correct the money wasn't there so"
It'll be very funny if Harris wins and all of a sudden Bezos has nuked the Washington Post's credibility - and his own remaining bona fides with liberal America - for worse than nothing. Especially given Musk's behiviour, and possibly now this, means there'll be significant pressure among Democrats to reign in billionaire tech plutocrats' power and how entwined government is with their companies.
I've already revised my view that Sunak was exceptionally politically inept, I think Starmer is proving to be at least as bad.
Palpable tosh, but very difficult to disprove. And NI reversal would have been all about Labour's weakness... heck, we're seeing that line anyway.
If it weren't for the details that I live in Britain and am fond of the old place, it would have been utterly hilarious to see Sunak and co trying to keep the show on the road after a July 4 victory.
We keep trying to reinvent the wheel. The problem now is that all the changes are being made for short term reasons, as local government goes bust under the prolonged onslaught of austerity. The reality is that a Royal Commission should examine the whole question of local government with a view to defining the purpose and funding of local government. What will most probably happen, however, is ad hoc and short term and as a result local government will become ever less sustainable.
Maybe I am being thick but i think there is £5K NI exemption for small businesses.
Hmmm. Correlation or causation.
https://x.com/Robillard/status/1850999304217133338
Badenoch since 2017
Crony capitalism is a truly shitty thing.
The binfires in both big parties in recent years have done horrible things to the talent (no sniggering) pipelines. Badenoch ran in 2022 to be PM. OK, it was putting down a marker, but even still, it's a saucy thing to have done.
I'd have liked them to be bold and not to rule out raising taxes. But I also wanted them to win the election. The problem is that any inkling of raising taxes under our current political culture is an election loser.
Aaron Bastani
@AaronBastani
·
8h
Fewer than half of households in the bottom 1/5th of income have access to a car. Less than 50%!
This is a direct attack on the poorest in society. Someone who uses the bus to get to work every day will be hundreds of pounds worse off as a result.
https://x.com/AaronBastani/status/1850909090643320933
https://x.com/Mr_Berman/status/1850891769262510403
I'm not sure whether a ruling in Scotland would actually apply in E&W - different legal system, and WFP is technically devolved (though still administered by DWP rather than SSS).
"@MikeAmesburyMP
With our Cheshire Police and Crime Commissioner @danpricelab and Frodsham @cwaclabour Cllrs listening to residents' concerns and ideas for policing and community safety @LucyRSumner"
https://x.com/MikeAmesburyMP/status/1849885522975445031
I think an increase in fuel duty is much more likely to cause them issues, even though motoring has actually got cheaper over the last decade or so.
Option 1 - minimum change, just converting all 2 tier councils to unitaries
Option 2 - Option 1 plus relooking at some of the smaller 1990s unitaries such as Blackburn, Torbay and those in Berkshire and Teeside etc
Option 3 - A complete redraw including looking at things like the boundary of Greater London
Option 3 is the most interesting as that hasn't really been done since the big 1970s reorg and a lot of places will have changed substantially. However, it also has the potential to cause the most upset and lead to big fights.
You mention Blackwater Valley - the original 1970s proposal was to move Farnborough, Fleet and Aldershot to Surrey
There's a good summary here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_Government_Act_1972
Also interesting to see a number of non-London areas were originally planned to be included in Greater London
Cheshunt - Enfield borough
Chigwell - Waltham Forest/Redbridge
Staines and Sunbury - Hounslow
Epsom and Ewell - Sutton
Esher - Kingston
If you want a high tax, high spend government that espouses universal benefits, you'd have to vote Plaid or SNP (though even they have gone along with the means testing for WFP).
🔵 Harris 51% (+4)
🔴 Trump 47%
YouGov (CES) - 48k LV - 10/25
https://x.com/PpollingNumbers/status/1850936919448010758
https://338canada.com/saskatchewan/
Yougov last relased a voting intention poll on the 24th of July. Have they left polling? I don’t see how they can expect to maintain a reputation as a respected polling organisation.
Republicans against Trump
@RpsAgainstTrump
·
31m
“For Puerto Ricans, this is our October surprise.”
Trump’s hate rally at MSG could cost him the election
https://x.com/RpsAgainstTrump/status/1851037612384907661
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gG8sZGWJX_Q
Bizarre!
I notice The Times (who have published YouGov polls since around 2005) went with More In Common on their most recent published opinion poll.
This is why you should be very careful fixing microwaves as the high voltage circuit that powers the magnetron has a similarly large capacitor. Usually this has a high valued resistor across it to dissipate the charge over time but if that fails for any reason it can retain lethal voltages for a looong time.
You can have fun playing with the coils from microwaves but you didn't hear that from me.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=igILhbNWvlk
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwyv8y68e25o
"I'm going to keep beating this hammer: the Republican hack firms are showing numbers in line with the average. Is it because the Republican hack firms have changed methodologies to become more accurate? Is it a stopped-clock right twice a day situation? Or is the average just... way off?"
https://bsky.app/profile/johnbrownstan.bsky.social/post/3l7lp2a6i6c2k
It turns out something could! An op-ed by the man himself.
If he actually believed any of this piety, he could have made the choice before 2016 election, or 2020, or two years ago. Or *after* this one. Any time except the "Comey unit," 11 days before election day.
https://x.com/JamesFallows/status/1851060450680570170
Trump’s Puerto Rico fallout is ‘spreading like wildfire’ in Pennsylvania
https://www.politico.com/news/2024/10/28/trump-rally-puerto-rico-pennsylvania-fallout-00185935
... “If we weren’t engaged before, we’re all paying attention now,” Martinez said. He added the morning radio show he hosts was chock-full of callers Monday sounding off on the Trump rally comments, including a Puerto Rican Trump supporter who is now telling people not to vote for the former president...
.. “Our country was built by frontiersmen who conquered the wilderness,” Vance said. “We’re not going to restore the greatness of American civilization if we get offended at every little thing. Let’s have a sense of humor and let’s have a little fun.”..
Can't we just have a little fun with the odd racist joke, or two, while "restoring the greatness of American civilisation" ?
Nicole Healing, 44, Unemployed.
"Nicole, who uses them and they pronoun, said they receive Employment and Support Allowance of £1,042, Personal Independent Payments of £798, and Housing Benefit of £917 per month.
Though they feel in a "fortunate position" currently, Nicole says: "I feel I am at the mercy of the DWP."
That's £33,000 a year in benefits for a single person.
I also don't know why PB (which presumably has some sort of relationship with these companies) isn't politely asking what's going on.
level. They become unable to work, sometimes after a few unsuccessful attempts, due to health conditions that seem to be predominantly psychological disorders. Then they get benefit payments from the government that are equivalent to the wage you would get from a full time professional job.
In the end I can only really feel sorry for them. People don't take them seriously, they are viewed as a drain on the state - and they know it.
“I am fearful about the negative rhetoric in the media about disabled people in receipt of benefits."
While my outgoings are small, I was making less than that £33,000 before AI and other technical changes destroyed what had been regular work from two different clients for six years.
Whilst I have sympathy for anyone who's not feeling OK those benefits are excessive. I doubt she's fundamentally disabled and unable to do any work.
We all feel awful and struggle from time to time. It doesn't mean we expect everyone else to pay for us.