There could be a serious sting in the tail. Hunt and Sunak set up a trap - they cut NI using “headroom” that was actually heavy cuts in departmental budgets in the next parliament. Reeves budget needs to bring in enough income to addresses Sunak’s and Hunts swinging departmental cuts planned for this parliament before she can spend more on top of that. Otherwise it doesn’t balance.
The look on her face as the SNP got routed, priceless.
Are we STILL waiting on the decision over charges for certain Scottish politicians? Like the historic sex crimes investigations that had people in limbo for years, either charge or don't, but keeping it going like this is cruel.
What’s in it for the police and prosecutors to come to a decision?
If they charge, a chunk of the SNP will hate them. Forever.
If they don’t charge, a chunk of the rest of Scottish politics will have it in for them. Forever.
So after about 6 months in my current job I've decided it's not for me. I'm going to take a year or so out to spend with the family while my wife goes back to work and keeps the mortgage paid and I'll decide what I'm going to do next. It will be the first time I'm actually unemployed for about 15 years and I'm really looking forwards to slowing down a bit and being a house husband.
If you don't mind me asking what were you doing? I know previously you were a Sony man.
VP of Data at a b2b fintech scale up. It is about the most dull thing I've ever done. I was trying to kid myself that I liked it but my daughter looked at me a few weeks ago and said "daddy why do you look so sad all the time" and I couldn't really deny it any longer. The job was getting me down, I didn't enjoy the work, I hated the people and I wanted out. I spoke to my wife last weekend and she fully supported me and since she's going back to work in January we figured it would be a good time for me to resign. We're going to spend the winter in Sicily and then when we come back I'll be a full time dad, though my daughter will be at nursery for 3 days a week, my son will be home with me though which is a bit scary!
It sounds like you have made a very wise decision. Life is too short, especially if you have a young family.
I have previous had the odd career diversion, for similar reasons really and never regretted taking a period out, resetting and finding a new opportunity that brings more enjoyment. Hating doing something you spend so many hours in the day at, even if it pays well, is demoralising.
So after about 6 months in my current job I've decided it's not for me. I'm going to take a year or so out to spend with the family while my wife goes back to work and keeps the mortgage paid and I'll decide what I'm going to do next. It will be the first time I'm actually unemployed for about 15 years and I'm really looking forwards to slowing down a bit and being a house husband.
If you don't mind me asking what were you doing? I know previously you were a Sony man.
VP of Data at a b2b fintech scale up. It is about the most dull thing I've ever done. I was trying to kid myself that I liked it but my daughter looked at me a few weeks ago and said "daddy why do you look so sad all the time" and I couldn't really deny it any longer. The job was getting me down, I didn't enjoy the work, I hated the people and I wanted out. I spoke to my wife last weekend and she fully supported me and since she's going back to work in January we figured it would be a good time for me to resign. We're going to spend the winter in Sicily and then when we come back I'll be a full time dad, though my daughter will be at nursery for 3 days a week, my son will be home with me though which is a bit scary!
Your story sounds similar to mine. They do say that the child is father (daughter) to the man.
My young son (four or five at the time) said to me: "Daddy why do you always forget the question I have just asked you?"
I was hopelessly distracted by a miserable job, and that was my trigger to find pastures new. Never looked back.
My dad actually said the same thing, he quit as treasury manger of a City bank after my sister made a similar comment to him when she was 13 (I would have been 11). It's amazing how much kids change your life (and priorities)!
So after about 6 months in my current job I've decided it's not for me. I'm going to take a year or so out to spend with the family while my wife goes back to work and keeps the mortgage paid and I'll decide what I'm going to do next. It will be the first time I'm actually unemployed for about 15 years and I'm really looking forwards to slowing down a bit and being a house husband.
If you don't mind me asking what were you doing? I know previously you were a Sony man.
VP of Data at a b2b fintech scale up. It is about the most dull thing I've ever done. I was trying to kid myself that I liked it but my daughter looked at me a few weeks ago and said "daddy why do you look so sad all the time" and I couldn't really deny it any longer. The job was getting me down, I didn't enjoy the work, I hated the people and I wanted out. I spoke to my wife last weekend and she fully supported me and since she's going back to work in January we figured it would be a good time for me to resign. We're going to spend the winter in Sicily and then when we come back I'll be a full time dad, though my daughter will be at nursery for 3 days a week, my son will be home with me though which is a bit scary!
I used to love working/contacting at start-ups or scale-ups. I don't like companies when they're too big and you get pigeonholed. As you say, much depends on the people. The Cambridge Crew were generally excellent to work with.
Don't worry about being at home with the kids. It'll be fun if you make it fun. And don't do too much with them, either: sometimes just staying at home and playing with ice in a tray for an hour or two, the TV blaring Little Baby Bum in the background, can be enough.
Background: Previous studies have explored the association between social media use and mental health among adolescents. However, few studies using nationally representative longitudinal data have explored this relationship for adults and how the effect might change depending on how people use social media.
Objective: This study investigated the longitudinal relationship between the frequency of viewing and posting on social media and mental health problems among UK adults.
Methods: This study included 15,836 adults (aged 16 years and older) who participated in Understanding Society, a UK longitudinal survey. Social media use was measured with questions about the frequency of viewing social media and posting on social media in Understanding Society Wave 11 (2019-2021). We explored viewing and posting separately, as well as a combined exposure: (1) high viewing, high posting; (2) high viewing, low posting; (3) low viewing, high posting; and (4) low viewing, low posting. Mental health problems were measured in Wave 12 (2020-2022) using the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12), a validated scale for identifying symptoms of common mental health problems, where higher scores indicated more mental health problems (0 to 36). Unadjusted and adjusted linear regression models were estimated for viewing social media and posting on social media, adjusting for the baseline GHQ score, gender, age, ethnicity, employment, and education. We found no evidence for effect modification by gender and age so overall associations were reported.
Results: In our adjusted models, we found no evidence of an association between the frequency of viewing social media and mental health problems in the following year. We found that adults who posted daily on social media had more mental health problems than those who never posted on social media, corresponding to a 0.35-point increase in GHQ score (β=0.35, 95% CI 0.01-0.68; P=.04). When we considered both social media behaviors, we found that those who frequently viewed and posted on social media scored 0.31 points higher on the GHQ score (β=0.31, 95% CI 0.04-0.58; P=.03) in the following year compared to those who rarely viewed or posted on social media.
Conclusions: We found that a high frequency of posting on social media was associated with increased mental health problems a year later. However, we did not find evidence of a similar association based on the frequency of viewing social media content. This provides evidence that some types of active social media use (ie, posting) have a stronger link to mental health outcomes than some types of passive social media use (viewing). These results highlighted that the relationship between social media use and mental health is complex, and more research is needed to understand the mechanisms underlying these patterns to inform targeted interventions and policies.
So after about 6 months in my current job I've decided it's not for me. I'm going to take a year or so out to spend with the family while my wife goes back to work and keeps the mortgage paid and I'll decide what I'm going to do next. It will be the first time I'm actually unemployed for about 15 years and I'm really looking forwards to slowing down a bit and being a house husband.
If you don't mind me asking what were you doing? I know previously you were a Sony man.
VP of Data at a b2b fintech scale up. It is about the most dull thing I've ever done. I was trying to kid myself that I liked it but my daughter looked at me a few weeks ago and said "daddy why do you look so sad all the time" and I couldn't really deny it any longer. The job was getting me down, I didn't enjoy the work, I hated the people and I wanted out. I spoke to my wife last weekend and she fully supported me and since she's going back to work in January we figured it would be a good time for me to resign. We're going to spend the winter in Sicily and then when we come back I'll be a full time dad, though my daughter will be at nursery for 3 days a week, my son will be home with me though which is a bit scary!
3-to-1 the wife comes home to find that you’ve got the two of them running LLMs to look for patterns in the financial markets….
I'm finding being at home alone for a week with two four-month old kittens to be much more dauting than I did being home alone with a human baby ever was...
So after about 6 months in my current job I've decided it's not for me. I'm going to take a year or so out to spend with the family while my wife goes back to work and keeps the mortgage paid and I'll decide what I'm going to do next. It will be the first time I'm actually unemployed for about 15 years and I'm really looking forwards to slowing down a bit and being a house husband.
I left full-time employment a while ago and it was nerve-wracking at the time, but in the end the best thing I ever did.
Did you tell your employer? Or did you just stop working full time?
I did a "part time" PhD on that basis. Worked out alright.
People living in the European Union should stockpile emergency supplies in the event of war breaking out or another major emergency, a new report has advised.
As part of this strategy, the EU should advise households to be prepared to be self-sufficient for a minimum of 72 hours in the event of an emergency, the report says.
The look on her face as the SNP got routed, priceless.
Are we STILL waiting on the decision over charges for certain Scottish politicians? Like the historic sex crimes investigations that had people in limbo for years, either charge or don't, but keeping it going like this is cruel.
What’s in it for the police and prosecutors to come to a decision?
If they charge, a chunk of the SNP will hate them. Forever.
If they don’t charge, a chunk of the rest of Scottish politics will have it in for them. Forever.
Anyway before I disappear off into the ether again in the next day ir so, my US prediction is for the following states go be won by Trump in an easy EC victory for him
All of 2020 plus
Pennsylvania Michigan (Coin Toss) Wisconsin Georgia Nevada Arizona (Coin toss) Virginia (Perhaps) New Hampshire
Why New Hampshire?
Because he'll run her very close there. I think NJ might ge close enough to raise some eyebrows too
A few months ago I thought of writing an article about how modern-day issues - abortion, trans, immigration, insurrection - produced choropleths which can be used to produce bands of states, which when compared to the existing state rankings could indicate value or a flip. I abandoned it because of time issues, but one of those maps stuck in my mind because it had NH as red. It's too late to revisit but it's beginning to bug me...
Had to laugh at this:
High-Risk States (AR, IA, IN, MO, NE, NH, OH, SC, WV): All of these states have passed some anti-trans adult laws, but they haven't reached the same level of severity as the worst states. Missouri and West Virginia, for example, prohibit gender-affirming care for incarcerated adults as well as transgender youth…
Imagine going so far as to not fund sex changes for prisoners and children.
So you think it good policy to legally prohibit the supply of hormones, for example, to transitioned individuals ?
Fake news. The law prohibits inmates being given gender transition surgery, not medication:
That's a prohibition on surgery, not "gender affirming care", then.
Would you say the people who wrote the article were fearmongering in that case?
Given the bit that Sandpit quoted said "High-Risk States (AR, IA, IN, MO, NE, NH, OH, SC, WV): All of these states have passed some anti-trans adult laws, but they haven't reached the same level of severity as the worst states. Missouri and West Virginia, for example, prohibit gender-affirming care for incarcerated adults as well as transgender youth…", it would appear not. Which bit in that passage do you think is factually inaccurate?
It's not gender-affirming "care" that's being prohibited for incarcerated adults but surgery.
The look on her face as the SNP got routed, priceless.
Are we STILL waiting on the decision over charges for certain Scottish politicians? Like the historic sex crimes investigations that had people in limbo for years, either charge or don't, but keeping it going like this is cruel.
What’s in it for the police and prosecutors to come to a decision?
If they charge, a chunk of the SNP will hate them. Forever.
If they don’t charge, a chunk of the rest of Scottish politics will have it in for them. Forever.
So after about 6 months in my current job I've decided it's not for me. I'm going to take a year or so out to spend with the family while my wife goes back to work and keeps the mortgage paid and I'll decide what I'm going to do next. It will be the first time I'm actually unemployed for about 15 years and I'm really looking forwards to slowing down a bit and being a house husband.
If you don't mind me asking what were you doing? I know previously you were a Sony man.
VP of Data at a b2b fintech scale up. It is about the most dull thing I've ever done. I was trying to kid myself that I liked it but my daughter looked at me a few weeks ago and said "daddy why do you look so sad all the time" and I couldn't really deny it any longer. The job was getting me down, I didn't enjoy the work, I hated the people and I wanted out. I spoke to my wife last weekend and she fully supported me and since she's going back to work in January we figured it would be a good time for me to resign. We're going to spend the winter in Sicily and then when we come back I'll be a full time dad, though my daughter will be at nursery for 3 days a week, my son will be home with me though which is a bit scary!
Your story sounds similar to mine. They do say that the child is father (daughter) to the man.
My young son (four or five at the time) said to me: "Daddy why do you always forget the question I have just asked you?"
I was hopelessly distracted by a miserable job, and that was my trigger to find pastures new. Never looked back.
My dad actually said the same thing, he quit as treasury manger of a City bank after my sister made a similar comment to him when she was 13 (I would have been 11). It's amazing how much kids change your life (and priorities)!
It's quite weird these last five minutes thinking back. My son is now 15 years of age, and I realise I have never thanked him for literally changing my life! I now will.
So after about 6 months in my current job I've decided it's not for me. I'm going to take a year or so out to spend with the family while my wife goes back to work and keeps the mortgage paid and I'll decide what I'm going to do next. It will be the first time I'm actually unemployed for about 15 years and I'm really looking forwards to slowing down a bit and being a house husband.
Good for you.
The problem ("problem") many people face is that before they ponder what they really want to do they think "City" and "retire by 40". Needless to say the City is fiercely competitive and demands its pound of flesh. That is not for everyone. It needs tremendous focus and sacrifice often to "make it" and sometimes people make the calculation that it ain't werf it.
Of course once the money has been made then it seems that it was the right decision, and there are plenty of people who live well-rounded lives and are also fabulously successful in the City, but there are also many who are missing something. Whether that be years with their family, or broader and eclectic interests and pursuits, or whatnot.
Take a moment to think what you would really like to do.
As an example a friend of mine (actually son of a friend of mine) went from Goldman, to Hedge Fund, and now has given it up to pursue an independent (AI-related) project as a start up in his kitchen and is loving it.
So after about 6 months in my current job I've decided it's not for me. I'm going to take a year or so out to spend with the family while my wife goes back to work and keeps the mortgage paid and I'll decide what I'm going to do next. It will be the first time I'm actually unemployed for about 15 years and I'm really looking forwards to slowing down a bit and being a house husband.
I left full-time employment a while ago and it was nerve-wracking at the time, but in the end the best thing I ever did.
Did you tell your employer? Or did you just stop working full time?
I did a "part time" PhD on that basis. Worked out alright.
As a PhD supervisor, I am glad that worked out well for you, but I would strongly advise against this approach in general.
People living in the European Union should stockpile emergency supplies in the event of war breaking out or another major emergency, a new report has advised.
As part of this strategy, the EU should advise households to be prepared to be self-sufficient for a minimum of 72 hours in the event of an emergency, the report says.
We are at war with Russia. It is a cold war, but a war nonetheless. The war will not cool down if a certain Trump becomes president and abandons Ukraine and slaps tariffs on anything furrin.
Rachel Reeves’s tax raid on employer national insurance contributions will not raise “anything like” the £25bn claimed by the Chancellor, the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) has said.
Paul Johnson, director of the IFS said the jobs tax raid will result in lower wages, reducing the amount of revenue raised from employer National Insurance contributions. Lower wages will also reduce the amount of tax collected from employee National Insurance contributions (NICs) and income tax. This means that the Government will raise only £10bn after accounting for lower pay awards and its decision to shield public sector workers.
People living in the European Union should stockpile emergency supplies in the event of war breaking out or another major emergency, a new report has advised.
As part of this strategy, the EU should advise households to be prepared to be self-sufficient for a minimum of 72 hours in the event of an emergency, the report says.
People should always have a few basics in stockpile IMHO. It’s just good common sense.
People living in the European Union should stockpile emergency supplies in the event of war breaking out or another major emergency, a new report has advised.
As part of this strategy, the EU should advise households to be prepared to be self-sufficient for a minimum of 72 hours in the event of an emergency, the report says.
Hasn't that long been UK govt advice too?
Years back, my Mum used to have a draw full of tinned and dried goods in case of a pandemic. She was right! Oh, except she hadn't stocked loo roll, which was the only thing that was ever problematic during COVID...
So after about 6 months in my current job I've decided it's not for me. I'm going to take a year or so out to spend with the family while my wife goes back to work and keeps the mortgage paid and I'll decide what I'm going to do next. It will be the first time I'm actually unemployed for about 15 years and I'm really looking forwards to slowing down a bit and being a house husband.
Very best of luck to you, Max. I remember all those years ago your attending the interview and my offering some tips (sartorial: always err on the side of being too smart rather than vice versa; procedural: if the interviewer is talking a lot, let them – they will literally talk themselves into hiring you) and your very graciously thanking me before you actually were offered the job. It seems that we have now gone full circle and you'll be back in your joggers for the very best of reasons.
More power to your elbow.
It does seem like a lifetime ago Bob, almost 10 years to the day since I made my move into the City!
Yes, that timeline absolutely fits. God, time flies – sometimes more so when you are NOT having fun!
Charlie Kirk is upset that Republican women may “undermine their husbands” and secretly vote for Harris while telling their husbands they voted for Trump, even though the husband “works his tail off to make sure that she can have a nice life.” https://x.com/RonFilipkowski/status/1851815354009342217
Seems to be a GOP thing. Here's the Fox News host who just married the researcher he had an affair with, while married to his first wife.
Jesse: if i found out my wife secretly voted for harris, "that's the same thing as having an affair... that violates the sanctity of our marriage... that would be D Day" https://x.com/cynicalzoomer/status/1851744214071332869
The United States really is just turning into Iran with more guns and worse food, isn't it.
Er, no.
What is it with previously respected posters that have turned to ludicrous hyperbole?
I can only assume that you've spent too much time on Twitter. Like Southam.
Actually, I've more-or-less come off Twitter because Musk has made it both unusable and awful.
.
Twitter was corrosive and toxic well before Musk bought it.
I'm glad you've come off it though. It wasn't good for me or my mental health at all.
I don't miss it.
It still remains marginally useful for info from reliable sources, when you can find them and when they're not hidden in your feed. Legacy media still feel the need to tweet there and that's helpful. But as a window on the world, it's gone. Likewise, the useful communities and networks are breaking down as people come off and/or migrate elsewhere.
I can get everything good twitter used to have from Bluesky and Substack. And like 90% less toxicity.
Rachel Reeves’s tax raid on employer national insurance contributions will not raise “anything like” the £25bn claimed by the Chancellor, the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) has said.
Paul Johnson, director of the IFS said the jobs tax raid will result in lower wages, reducing the amount of revenue raised from employer National Insurance contributions. Lower wages will also reduce the amount of tax collected from employee National Insurance contributions (NICs) and income tax. This means that the Government will raise only £10bn after accounting for lower pay awards and its decision to shield public sector workers.
That is quite some black hole...
Paul's maths is completely wrong..
33.37 m people work in the UK - if they earn £9100 each that's £20bn by itself...
Now it's not going to be the full £20bn but you can't tell me that 17m people are self employed, earn less than £5000 or work in the public sector..
and that is the figure you need to get the figure of £10bn rather than £20bn.
People living in the European Union should stockpile emergency supplies in the event of war breaking out or another major emergency, a new report has advised.
As part of this strategy, the EU should advise households to be prepared to be self-sufficient for a minimum of 72 hours in the event of an emergency, the report says.
Hasn't that long been UK govt advice too?
Years back, my Mum used to have a draw full of tinned and dried goods in case of a pandemic. She was right! Oh, except she hadn't stocked loo roll, which was the only thing that was ever problematic during COVID...
Pasta. I remember going to about 4 or 5 different shops for pasta, I think the day before lockdown was announced.
For all the worry that the US election might end up in a total sh!tshow of AI disinformation, some of the artificial output campaign videos are both clearly obvious and funny as hell.
So after about 6 months in my current job I've decided it's not for me. I'm going to take a year or so out to spend with the family while my wife goes back to work and keeps the mortgage paid and I'll decide what I'm going to do next. It will be the first time I'm actually unemployed for about 15 years and I'm really looking forwards to slowing down a bit and being a house husband.
Good for you.
The problem ("problem") many people face is that before they ponder what they really want to do they think "City" and "retire by 40". Needless to say the City is fiercely competitive and demands its pound of flesh. That is not for everyone. It needs tremendous focus and sacrifice often to "make it" and sometimes people make the calculation that it ain't werf it.
Of course once the money has been made then it seems that it was the right decision, and there are plenty of people who live well-rounded lives and are also fabulously successful in the City, but there are also many who are missing something. Whether that be years with their family, or broader and eclectic interests and pursuits, or whatnot.
Take a moment to think what you would really like to do.
As an example a friend of mine (actually son of a friend of mine) went from Goldman, to Hedge Fund, and now has given it up to pursue an independent (AI-related) project as a start up in his kitchen and is loving it.
I've been pondering on what's next for a while and what I'd really like to do is something that promotes local goods and sustainability, I don't think the market for it would be huge but if I can get even a few thousand people buying from their local producers rather than shipping something from the other side of the world then that I think would be a net benefit for the country and the world. Right now I haven't figured out what that looks like but I'll ponder on it over the next few months and once my son starts nursery in April next year I'll probably get the wheels turning.
People living in the European Union should stockpile emergency supplies in the event of war breaking out or another major emergency, a new report has advised.
As part of this strategy, the EU should advise households to be prepared to be self-sufficient for a minimum of 72 hours in the event of an emergency, the report says.
That's probably the best advice the EU has ever given. *Everybody* should have enough canned food, pasta, rice, etc at home to deal with a 10-14 period where the shops aren't open.
We could have another pandemic. We could have a solar flare knock out electricity and other infrastructure. There could be a terrorist attack that takes out electricity. Or a nuclear plant could spew radioactive waste into the sky requiring us all to shelter in place.
Having a week or two's worth of shelf safe food is very cheap insurance.
People living in the European Union should stockpile emergency supplies in the event of war breaking out or another major emergency, a new report has advised.
As part of this strategy, the EU should advise households to be prepared to be self-sufficient for a minimum of 72 hours in the event of an emergency, the report says.
Hasn't that long been UK govt advice too?
Years back, my Mum used to have a draw full of tinned and dried goods in case of a pandemic. She was right! Oh, except she hadn't stocked loo roll, which was the only thing that was ever problematic during COVID...
Pasta. I remember going to about 4 or 5 different shops for pasta, I think the day before lockdown was announced.
I remember, just after lockdown began, asking an elderly neighbour, from a safe distance, if there were any essentials they needed as I was going to the shops. "Could you get a couple of mangoes?" came the answer. #itsgrimupnorthlondon
Background: Previous studies have explored the association between social media use and mental health among adolescents. However, few studies using nationally representative longitudinal data have explored this relationship for adults and how the effect might change depending on how people use social media.
Objective: This study investigated the longitudinal relationship between the frequency of viewing and posting on social media and mental health problems among UK adults.
Methods: This study included 15,836 adults (aged 16 years and older) who participated in Understanding Society, a UK longitudinal survey. Social media use was measured with questions about the frequency of viewing social media and posting on social media in Understanding Society Wave 11 (2019-2021). We explored viewing and posting separately, as well as a combined exposure: (1) high viewing, high posting; (2) high viewing, low posting; (3) low viewing, high posting; and (4) low viewing, low posting. Mental health problems were measured in Wave 12 (2020-2022) using the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12), a validated scale for identifying symptoms of common mental health problems, where higher scores indicated more mental health problems (0 to 36). Unadjusted and adjusted linear regression models were estimated for viewing social media and posting on social media, adjusting for the baseline GHQ score, gender, age, ethnicity, employment, and education. We found no evidence for effect modification by gender and age so overall associations were reported.
Results: In our adjusted models, we found no evidence of an association between the frequency of viewing social media and mental health problems in the following year. We found that adults who posted daily on social media had more mental health problems than those who never posted on social media, corresponding to a 0.35-point increase in GHQ score (β=0.35, 95% CI 0.01-0.68; P=.04). When we considered both social media behaviors, we found that those who frequently viewed and posted on social media scored 0.31 points higher on the GHQ score (β=0.31, 95% CI 0.04-0.58; P=.03) in the following year compared to those who rarely viewed or posted on social media.
Conclusions: We found that a high frequency of posting on social media was associated with increased mental health problems a year later. However, we did not find evidence of a similar association based on the frequency of viewing social media content. This provides evidence that some types of active social media use (ie, posting) have a stronger link to mental health outcomes than some types of passive social media use (viewing). These results highlighted that the relationship between social media use and mental health is complex, and more research is needed to understand the mechanisms underlying these patterns to inform targeted interventions and policies.
Virtually every research abstract concludes “more work needed give us a grant”
So after about 6 months in my current job I've decided it's not for me. I'm going to take a year or so out to spend with the family while my wife goes back to work and keeps the mortgage paid and I'll decide what I'm going to do next. It will be the first time I'm actually unemployed for about 15 years and I'm really looking forwards to slowing down a bit and being a house husband.
I left full-time employment a while ago and it was nerve-wracking at the time, but in the end the best thing I ever did.
Did you tell your employer? Or did you just stop working full time?
The job I quit was in the public sector so I don't think anybody's noticed yet ...
Anyway before I disappear off into the ether again in the next day ir so, my US prediction is for the following states go be won by Trump in an easy EC victory for him
All of 2020 plus
Pennsylvania Michigan (Coin Toss) Wisconsin Georgia Nevada Arizona (Coin toss) Virginia (Perhaps) New Hampshire
Why New Hampshire?
Because he'll run her very close there. I think NJ might ge close enough to raise some eyebrows too
A few months ago I thought of writing an article about how modern-day issues - abortion, trans, immigration, insurrection - produced choropleths which can be used to produce bands of states, which when compared to the existing state rankings could indicate value or a flip. I abandoned it because of time issues, but one of those maps stuck in my mind because it had NH as red. It's too late to revisit but it's beginning to bug me...
Had to laugh at this:
High-Risk States (AR, IA, IN, MO, NE, NH, OH, SC, WV): All of these states have passed some anti-trans adult laws, but they haven't reached the same level of severity as the worst states. Missouri and West Virginia, for example, prohibit gender-affirming care for incarcerated adults as well as transgender youth…
Imagine going so far as to not fund sex changes for prisoners and children.
So you think it good policy to legally prohibit the supply of hormones, for example, to transitioned individuals ?
Fake news. The law prohibits inmates being given gender transition surgery, not medication:
That's a prohibition on surgery, not "gender affirming care", then.
Would you say the people who wrote the article were fearmongering in that case?
Given the bit that Sandpit quoted said "High-Risk States (AR, IA, IN, MO, NE, NH, OH, SC, WV): All of these states have passed some anti-trans adult laws, but they haven't reached the same level of severity as the worst states. Missouri and West Virginia, for example, prohibit gender-affirming care for incarcerated adults as well as transgender youth…", it would appear not. Which bit in that passage do you think is factually inaccurate?
It's not gender-affirming "care" that's being prohibited for incarcerated adults but surgery.
I think the latter is included in the former. As it appears does the author. Insofar as rapidly-evolving terms can be said to have a definition that is.
Background: Previous studies have explored the association between social media use and mental health among adolescents. However, few studies using nationally representative longitudinal data have explored this relationship for adults and how the effect might change depending on how people use social media.
Objective: This study investigated the longitudinal relationship between the frequency of viewing and posting on social media and mental health problems among UK adults.
Methods: This study included 15,836 adults (aged 16 years and older) who participated in Understanding Society, a UK longitudinal survey. Social media use was measured with questions about the frequency of viewing social media and posting on social media in Understanding Society Wave 11 (2019-2021). We explored viewing and posting separately, as well as a combined exposure: (1) high viewing, high posting; (2) high viewing, low posting; (3) low viewing, high posting; and (4) low viewing, low posting. Mental health problems were measured in Wave 12 (2020-2022) using the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12), a validated scale for identifying symptoms of common mental health problems, where higher scores indicated more mental health problems (0 to 36). Unadjusted and adjusted linear regression models were estimated for viewing social media and posting on social media, adjusting for the baseline GHQ score, gender, age, ethnicity, employment, and education. We found no evidence for effect modification by gender and age so overall associations were reported.
Results: In our adjusted models, we found no evidence of an association between the frequency of viewing social media and mental health problems in the following year. We found that adults who posted daily on social media had more mental health problems than those who never posted on social media, corresponding to a 0.35-point increase in GHQ score (β=0.35, 95% CI 0.01-0.68; P=.04). When we considered both social media behaviors, we found that those who frequently viewed and posted on social media scored 0.31 points higher on the GHQ score (β=0.31, 95% CI 0.04-0.58; P=.03) in the following year compared to those who rarely viewed or posted on social media.
Conclusions: We found that a high frequency of posting on social media was associated with increased mental health problems a year later. However, we did not find evidence of a similar association based on the frequency of viewing social media content. This provides evidence that some types of active social media use (ie, posting) have a stronger link to mental health outcomes than some types of passive social media use (viewing). These results highlighted that the relationship between social media use and mental health is complex, and more research is needed to understand the mechanisms underlying these patterns to inform targeted interventions and policies.
Virtually every research abstract concludes “more work needed give us a grant”
That's how incentive structures have been set up in research!
Rachel Reeves’s tax raid on employer national insurance contributions will not raise “anything like” the £25bn claimed by the Chancellor, the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) has said.
Paul Johnson, director of the IFS said the jobs tax raid will result in lower wages, reducing the amount of revenue raised from employer National Insurance contributions. Lower wages will also reduce the amount of tax collected from employee National Insurance contributions (NICs) and income tax. This means that the Government will raise only £10bn after accounting for lower pay awards and its decision to shield public sector workers.
That is quite some black hole...
Paul's maths is completely wrong..
33.37 m people work in the UK - if they earn £9100 each that's £20bn by itself...
Now it's not going to be the full £20bn but you can't tell me that 17m people are self employed, earn less than £5000 or work in the public sector..
and that is the figure you need to get the figure of £10bn rather than £20bn.
The OBR say something very similar,
"As the OBR note, it will result in lower wages, reducing the amount raised from employer NI and reducing employee NI and income tax revenues. That takes the net revenue down to some £16bn. On top of that there will be an effective £6bn of compensation for public sector employers."
Charlie Kirk is upset that Republican women may “undermine their husbands” and secretly vote for Harris while telling their husbands they voted for Trump, even though the husband “works his tail off to make sure that she can have a nice life.” https://x.com/RonFilipkowski/status/1851815354009342217
Seems to be a GOP thing. Here's the Fox News host who just married the researcher he had an affair with, while married to his first wife.
Jesse: if i found out my wife secretly voted for harris, "that's the same thing as having an affair... that violates the sanctity of our marriage... that would be D Day" https://x.com/cynicalzoomer/status/1851744214071332869
The United States really is just turning into Iran with more guns and worse food, isn't it.
Er, no.
What is it with previously respected posters that have turned to ludicrous hyperbole?
I can only assume that you've spent too much time on Twitter. Like Southam.
Actually, I've more-or-less come off Twitter because Musk has made it both unusable and awful.
.
Twitter was corrosive and toxic well before Musk bought it.
I'm glad you've come off it though. It wasn't good for me or my mental health at all.
I don't miss it.
It still remains marginally useful for info from reliable sources, when you can find them and when they're not hidden in your feed. Legacy media still feel the need to tweet there and that's helpful. But as a window on the world, it's gone. Likewise, the useful communities and networks are breaking down as people come off and/or migrate elsewhere.
I can get everything good twitter used to have from Bluesky and Substack. And like 90% less toxicity.
I'm more active on BlueSky now. But it still doesn't have the reach that Twitter did, and mainstream journalists and institutions still feel obliged to post there, rather than on BS, which is why I continue to lurk on it. But a greater proportion of private accounts that I follow/ed have moved.
People living in the European Union should stockpile emergency supplies in the event of war breaking out or another major emergency, a new report has advised.
As part of this strategy, the EU should advise households to be prepared to be self-sufficient for a minimum of 72 hours in the event of an emergency, the report says.
The farmers lobby will be all over that in their budget criticism.
People living in the European Union should stockpile emergency supplies in the event of war breaking out or another major emergency, a new report has advised.
As part of this strategy, the EU should advise households to be prepared to be self-sufficient for a minimum of 72 hours in the event of an emergency, the report says.
What sort of utter wazzock doesn't have 72 hours supplies?!
People living in the European Union should stockpile emergency supplies in the event of war breaking out or another major emergency, a new report has advised.
As part of this strategy, the EU should advise households to be prepared to be self-sufficient for a minimum of 72 hours in the event of an emergency, the report says.
Hasn't that long been UK govt advice too?
Years back, my Mum used to have a draw full of tinned and dried goods in case of a pandemic. She was right! Oh, except she hadn't stocked loo roll, which was the only thing that was ever problematic during COVID...
Pasta. I remember going to about 4 or 5 different shops for pasta, I think the day before lockdown was announced.
I remember, just after lockdown began, asking an elderly neighbour, from a safe distance, if there were any essentials they needed as I was going to the shops. "Could you get a couple of mangoes?" came the answer. #itsgrimupnorthlondon
I asked a similar question of an elderly couple near me and got the answer '4 bottles of beer'. #rightpriorities
People living in the European Union should stockpile emergency supplies in the event of war breaking out or another major emergency, a new report has advised.
As part of this strategy, the EU should advise households to be prepared to be self-sufficient for a minimum of 72 hours in the event of an emergency, the report says.
People living in the European Union should stockpile emergency supplies in the event of war breaking out or another major emergency, a new report has advised.
As part of this strategy, the EU should advise households to be prepared to be self-sufficient for a minimum of 72 hours in the event of an emergency, the report says.
What sort of utter wazzock doesn't have 72 hours supplies?!
People living in the European Union should stockpile emergency supplies in the event of war breaking out or another major emergency, a new report has advised.
As part of this strategy, the EU should advise households to be prepared to be self-sufficient for a minimum of 72 hours in the event of an emergency, the report says.
What sort of utter wazzock doesn't have 72 hours supplies?!
Given how much stuff Mrs U bought from CostCo at the start of COVID, I think we still have 72 days worth....
Anyway before I disappear off into the ether again in the next day ir so, my US prediction is for the following states go be won by Trump in an easy EC victory for him
All of 2020 plus
Pennsylvania Michigan (Coin Toss) Wisconsin Georgia Nevada Arizona (Coin toss) Virginia (Perhaps) New Hampshire
Why New Hampshire?
Because he'll run her very close there. I think NJ might ge close enough to raise some eyebrows too
A few months ago I thought of writing an article about how modern-day issues - abortion, trans, immigration, insurrection - produced choropleths which can be used to produce bands of states, which when compared to the existing state rankings could indicate value or a flip. I abandoned it because of time issues, but one of those maps stuck in my mind because it had NH as red. It's too late to revisit but it's beginning to bug me...
Had to laugh at this:
High-Risk States (AR, IA, IN, MO, NE, NH, OH, SC, WV): All of these states have passed some anti-trans adult laws, but they haven't reached the same level of severity as the worst states. Missouri and West Virginia, for example, prohibit gender-affirming care for incarcerated adults as well as transgender youth…
Imagine going so far as to not fund sex changes for prisoners and children.
So you think it good policy to legally prohibit the supply of hormones, for example, to transitioned individuals ?
Fake news. The law prohibits inmates being given gender transition surgery, not medication:
That's a prohibition on surgery, not "gender affirming care", then.
Would you say the people who wrote the article were fearmongering in that case?
Given the bit that Sandpit quoted said "High-Risk States (AR, IA, IN, MO, NE, NH, OH, SC, WV): All of these states have passed some anti-trans adult laws, but they haven't reached the same level of severity as the worst states. Missouri and West Virginia, for example, prohibit gender-affirming care for incarcerated adults as well as transgender youth…", it would appear not. Which bit in that passage do you think is factually inaccurate?
It's not gender-affirming "care" that's being prohibited for incarcerated adults but surgery.
I think the latter is included in the former. As it appears does the author. Insofar as rapidly-evolving terms can be said to have a definition that is.
They define what's prohibited for inmates in the law:
(a) Surgical procedures that sterilize, including, but not limited to, castration, vasectomy, hysterectomy, oophorectomy, orchiectomy, or penectomy; (b) Surgical procedures that artificially construct tissue with the appearance of genitalia that differs from the individual's biological sex, including, but not limited to, metoidioplasty, phalloplasty, or vaginoplasty; or (c) Augmentation mammoplasty or subcutaneous mastectomy
So after about 6 months in my current job I've decided it's not for me. I'm going to take a year or so out to spend with the family while my wife goes back to work and keeps the mortgage paid and I'll decide what I'm going to do next. It will be the first time I'm actually unemployed for about 15 years and I'm really looking forwards to slowing down a bit and being a house husband.
Good for you.
The problem ("problem") many people face is that before they ponder what they really want to do they think "City" and "retire by 40". Needless to say the City is fiercely competitive and demands its pound of flesh. That is not for everyone. It needs tremendous focus and sacrifice often to "make it" and sometimes people make the calculation that it ain't werf it.
Of course once the money has been made then it seems that it was the right decision, and there are plenty of people who live well-rounded lives and are also fabulously successful in the City, but there are also many who are missing something. Whether that be years with their family, or broader and eclectic interests and pursuits, or whatnot.
Take a moment to think what you would really like to do.
As an example a friend of mine (actually son of a friend of mine) went from Goldman, to Hedge Fund, and now has given it up to pursue an independent (AI-related) project as a start up in his kitchen and is loving it.
I've been pondering on what's next for a while and what I'd really like to do is something that promotes local goods and sustainability, I don't think the market for it would be huge but if I can get even a few thousand people buying from their local producers rather than shipping something from the other side of the world then that I think would be a net benefit for the country and the world. Right now I haven't figured out what that looks like but I'll ponder on it over the next few months and once my son starts nursery in April next year I'll probably get the wheels turning.
The question is how far you can take a b2c startup without the massive marketing campaign. Is it now possible to make six figures in net income purely from the North London mummy whatsapp groups?
So after about 6 months in my current job I've decided it's not for me. I'm going to take a year or so out to spend with the family while my wife goes back to work and keeps the mortgage paid and I'll decide what I'm going to do next. It will be the first time I'm actually unemployed for about 15 years and I'm really looking forwards to slowing down a bit and being a house husband.
If you don't mind me asking what were you doing? I know previously you were a Sony man.
VP of Data at a b2b fintech scale up. It is about the most dull thing I've ever done. I was trying to kid myself that I liked it but my daughter looked at me a few weeks ago and said "daddy why do you look so sad all the time" and I couldn't really deny it any longer. The job was getting me down, I didn't enjoy the work, I hated the people and I wanted out. I spoke to my wife last weekend and she fully supported me and since she's going back to work in January we figured it would be a good time for me to resign. We're going to spend the winter in Sicily and then when we come back I'll be a full time dad, though my daughter will be at nursery for 3 days a week, my son will be home with me though which is a bit scary!
Your story sounds similar to mine. They do say that the child is father (daughter) to the man.
My young son (four or five at the time) said to me: "Daddy why do you always forget the question I have just asked you?"
I was hopelessly distracted by a miserable job, and that was my trigger to find pastures new. Never looked back.
My dad actually said the same thing, he quit as treasury manger of a City bank after my sister made a similar comment to him when she was 13 (I would have been 11). It's amazing how much kids change your life (and priorities)!
It's quite weird these last five minutes thinking back. My son is now 15 years of age, and I realise I have never thanked him for literally changing my life! I now will.
Don't forget to give him extra pocket money. Cash in hand should suffice
Anyway before I disappear off into the ether again in the next day ir so, my US prediction is for the following states go be won by Trump in an easy EC victory for him
All of 2020 plus
Pennsylvania Michigan (Coin Toss) Wisconsin Georgia Nevada Arizona (Coin toss) Virginia (Perhaps) New Hampshire
Why New Hampshire?
Because he'll run her very close there. I think NJ might ge close enough to raise some eyebrows too
A few months ago I thought of writing an article about how modern-day issues - abortion, trans, immigration, insurrection - produced choropleths which can be used to produce bands of states, which when compared to the existing state rankings could indicate value or a flip. I abandoned it because of time issues, but one of those maps stuck in my mind because it had NH as red. It's too late to revisit but it's beginning to bug me...
Had to laugh at this:
High-Risk States (AR, IA, IN, MO, NE, NH, OH, SC, WV): All of these states have passed some anti-trans adult laws, but they haven't reached the same level of severity as the worst states. Missouri and West Virginia, for example, prohibit gender-affirming care for incarcerated adults as well as transgender youth…
Imagine going so far as to not fund sex changes for prisoners and children.
So you think it good policy to legally prohibit the supply of hormones, for example, to transitioned individuals ?
Fake news. The law prohibits inmates being given gender transition surgery, not medication:
That's a prohibition on surgery, not "gender affirming care", then.
Would you say the people who wrote the article were fearmongering in that case?
Given the bit that Sandpit quoted said "High-Risk States (AR, IA, IN, MO, NE, NH, OH, SC, WV): All of these states have passed some anti-trans adult laws, but they haven't reached the same level of severity as the worst states. Missouri and West Virginia, for example, prohibit gender-affirming care for incarcerated adults as well as transgender youth…", it would appear not. Which bit in that passage do you think is factually inaccurate?
It's not gender-affirming "care" that's being prohibited for incarcerated adults but surgery.
I think the latter is included in the former. As it appears does the author. Insofar as rapidly-evolving terms can be said to have a definition that is.
They define what's prohibited for inmates in the law:
(a) Surgical procedures that sterilize, including, but not limited to, castration, vasectomy, hysterectomy, oophorectomy, orchiectomy, or penectomy; (b) Surgical procedures that artificially construct tissue with the appearance of genitalia that differs from the individual's biological sex, including, but not limited to, metoidioplasty, phalloplasty, or vaginoplasty; or (c) Augmentation mammoplasty or subcutaneous mastectomy
There are lots of different medical reasons why you might need some of those (hysterectomy, oophorectomy, orchiectomy, penectomy, mastectomy), like cancer. Presumably those are allowed? Or is it another atrociously written US law?
Rachel Reeves’s tax raid on employer national insurance contributions will not raise “anything like” the £25bn claimed by the Chancellor, the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) has said.
Paul Johnson, director of the IFS said the jobs tax raid will result in lower wages, reducing the amount of revenue raised from employer National Insurance contributions. Lower wages will also reduce the amount of tax collected from employee National Insurance contributions (NICs) and income tax. This means that the Government will raise only £10bn after accounting for lower pay awards and its decision to shield public sector workers.
That is quite some black hole...
Paul's maths is completely wrong..
33.37 m people work in the UK - if they earn £9100 each that's £20bn by itself...
Now it's not going to be the full £20bn but you can't tell me that 17m people are self employed, earn less than £5000 or work in the public sector..
and that is the figure you need to get the figure of £10bn rather than £20bn.
6m Public sector. 4.3m Self employed.
The working out is here. The figures are from the OBR, not IFS. £25.7B reverts to £16.1B after behavioral changes (see below for how). Then deduct £5.9B for public sector.
People living in the European Union should stockpile emergency supplies in the event of war breaking out or another major emergency, a new report has advised.
As part of this strategy, the EU should advise households to be prepared to be self-sufficient for a minimum of 72 hours in the event of an emergency, the report says.
What sort of utter wazzock doesn't have 72 hours supplies?!
the people that panic buy on boxing day
I mean a couple could fit 72 hours food in a shoebox. Or just buy a box of ships biscuits and some sweeties. 72 hours. Lol. Idiots.
People living in the European Union should stockpile emergency supplies in the event of war breaking out or another major emergency, a new report has advised.
As part of this strategy, the EU should advise households to be prepared to be self-sufficient for a minimum of 72 hours in the event of an emergency, the report says.
Hasn't that long been UK govt advice too?
Years back, my Mum used to have a draw full of tinned and dried goods in case of a pandemic. She was right! Oh, except she hadn't stocked loo roll, which was the only thing that was ever problematic during COVID...
Pasta. I remember going to about 4 or 5 different shops for pasta, I think the day before lockdown was announced.
I remember, just after lockdown began, asking an elderly neighbour, from a safe distance, if there were any essentials they needed as I was going to the shops. "Could you get a couple of mangoes?" came the answer. #itsgrimupnorthlondon
When people complain about how hard our lockdowns were etc, we need to remember that for some, the issues were they couldn't get the right kind of olive oil...
(This doesn't alter how bad it was for those with young kids in high rise flats, but a sense of perspective is always useful)
As we enter the last half hour of voting, Betfair stands at Kemi 1.14 Bob J 7.6
When is the winner announced?
Saturday.
And based on PB anecdotal - such as my house where Bobby got a vote and Kemi didn’t - the Bobby price is clearly value 😆
Tomorrow we will know who has won, because one candidate will be at home sweeping up autumn leaves, the other will be at the conference venue in discussion with party officials and new security arrangements. So candidate watch the next 24hrs and you will know the winner long before it’s announced. That betfair should surely move based on where the candidates are who they are talking to tomorrow?
People living in the European Union should stockpile emergency supplies in the event of war breaking out or another major emergency, a new report has advised.
As part of this strategy, the EU should advise households to be prepared to be self-sufficient for a minimum of 72 hours in the event of an emergency, the report says.
What sort of utter wazzock doesn't have 72 hours supplies?!
the people that panic buy on boxing day
There are 'supplies' and there are 'supplies'.
We probably keep at least a week or so's food in cupboards downstairs: pasta, tined soups, beans, etc, etc. We could live off that food for quite a while. But it would not be what we wanted to eat given a choice, and might get a little boring. But we'd live.
Then there are the people who cannot live without their fresh avocados, and instead of making do, insist on having them.
I'd rapidly miss fresh fruit, though. But we'd live. In fact, it'd be just like I was a student again.
There's another question: supplies with no electricity. In other words, the things in your fridge or freezer rapidly go off...
(We keep a few months' worth of toilet paper, as it never goes out of date and it's annoying when you run out...)
Rachel Reeves’s tax raid on employer national insurance contributions will not raise “anything like” the £25bn claimed by the Chancellor, the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) has said.
Paul Johnson, director of the IFS said the jobs tax raid will result in lower wages, reducing the amount of revenue raised from employer National Insurance contributions. Lower wages will also reduce the amount of tax collected from employee National Insurance contributions (NICs) and income tax. This means that the Government will raise only £10bn after accounting for lower pay awards and its decision to shield public sector workers.
That is quite some black hole...
Well not exactly....
In the first year 2025-6 £24bn becomes £18.3 billion due to behavioual responses (lower wages, less profits, reduction in employment).
In 5 years time the behaviour responses reduce the tax take from £25.7bn to £16.1bn.
Then additional £6 bn is as result of additional ERS NI on public sector paybillm which of course is in the spend forecast.
People living in the European Union should stockpile emergency supplies in the event of war breaking out or another major emergency, a new report has advised.
As part of this strategy, the EU should advise households to be prepared to be self-sufficient for a minimum of 72 hours in the event of an emergency, the report says.
What sort of utter wazzock doesn't have 72 hours supplies?!
Plenty wouldn’t. Certainly not what we would consider the “fundamental” basic supplies. A lot of people will just get through a packet of say cereal or a weeks worth of tinned soup, and then go and get some more. This is a symptom of the accessibility of convenience shops (the Tesco Metros etc of this world) nowadays. If you live in a flat you might not have the space for a lot of extra food.
I would say anyone over the age of 40-45 was pretty much taught to “keep things in” though.
Anyway before I disappear off into the ether again in the next day ir so, my US prediction is for the following states go be won by Trump in an easy EC victory for him
All of 2020 plus
Pennsylvania Michigan (Coin Toss) Wisconsin Georgia Nevada Arizona (Coin toss) Virginia (Perhaps) New Hampshire
Why New Hampshire?
Because he'll run her very close there. I think NJ might ge close enough to raise some eyebrows too
A few months ago I thought of writing an article about how modern-day issues - abortion, trans, immigration, insurrection - produced choropleths which can be used to produce bands of states, which when compared to the existing state rankings could indicate value or a flip. I abandoned it because of time issues, but one of those maps stuck in my mind because it had NH as red. It's too late to revisit but it's beginning to bug me...
Had to laugh at this:
High-Risk States (AR, IA, IN, MO, NE, NH, OH, SC, WV): All of these states have passed some anti-trans adult laws, but they haven't reached the same level of severity as the worst states. Missouri and West Virginia, for example, prohibit gender-affirming care for incarcerated adults as well as transgender youth…
Imagine going so far as to not fund sex changes for prisoners and children.
So you think it good policy to legally prohibit the supply of hormones, for example, to transitioned individuals ?
Fake news. The law prohibits inmates being given gender transition surgery, not medication:
That's a prohibition on surgery, not "gender affirming care", then.
Would you say the people who wrote the article were fearmongering in that case?
Given the bit that Sandpit quoted said "High-Risk States (AR, IA, IN, MO, NE, NH, OH, SC, WV): All of these states have passed some anti-trans adult laws, but they haven't reached the same level of severity as the worst states. Missouri and West Virginia, for example, prohibit gender-affirming care for incarcerated adults as well as transgender youth…", it would appear not. Which bit in that passage do you think is factually inaccurate?
It's not gender-affirming "care" that's being prohibited for incarcerated adults but surgery.
I think the latter is included in the former. As it appears does the author. Insofar as rapidly-evolving terms can be said to have a definition that is.
They define what's prohibited for inmates in the law:
(a) Surgical procedures that sterilize, including, but not limited to, castration, vasectomy, hysterectomy, oophorectomy, orchiectomy, or penectomy; (b) Surgical procedures that artificially construct tissue with the appearance of genitalia that differs from the individual's biological sex, including, but not limited to, metoidioplasty, phalloplasty, or vaginoplasty; or (c) Augmentation mammoplasty or subcutaneous mastectomy
I'm not sure you can construct a definition of "gender-affirming care" that excludes those things
(Incidentally, what is the "or" doing at the end of clause b? Breasts aren't genitals.)
Anyway before I disappear off into the ether again in the next day ir so, my US prediction is for the following states go be won by Trump in an easy EC victory for him
All of 2020 plus
Pennsylvania Michigan (Coin Toss) Wisconsin Georgia Nevada Arizona (Coin toss) Virginia (Perhaps) New Hampshire
Why New Hampshire?
Because he'll run her very close there. I think NJ might ge close enough to raise some eyebrows too
A few months ago I thought of writing an article about how modern-day issues - abortion, trans, immigration, insurrection - produced choropleths which can be used to produce bands of states, which when compared to the existing state rankings could indicate value or a flip. I abandoned it because of time issues, but one of those maps stuck in my mind because it had NH as red. It's too late to revisit but it's beginning to bug me...
Had to laugh at this:
High-Risk States (AR, IA, IN, MO, NE, NH, OH, SC, WV): All of these states have passed some anti-trans adult laws, but they haven't reached the same level of severity as the worst states. Missouri and West Virginia, for example, prohibit gender-affirming care for incarcerated adults as well as transgender youth…
Imagine going so far as to not fund sex changes for prisoners and children.
So you think it good policy to legally prohibit the supply of hormones, for example, to transitioned individuals ?
Fake news. The law prohibits inmates being given gender transition surgery, not medication:
That's a prohibition on surgery, not "gender affirming care", then.
Would you say the people who wrote the article were fearmongering in that case?
Given the bit that Sandpit quoted said "High-Risk States (AR, IA, IN, MO, NE, NH, OH, SC, WV): All of these states have passed some anti-trans adult laws, but they haven't reached the same level of severity as the worst states. Missouri and West Virginia, for example, prohibit gender-affirming care for incarcerated adults as well as transgender youth…", it would appear not. Which bit in that passage do you think is factually inaccurate?
It's not gender-affirming "care" that's being prohibited for incarcerated adults but surgery.
I think the latter is included in the former. As it appears does the author. Insofar as rapidly-evolving terms can be said to have a definition that is.
They define what's prohibited for inmates in the law:
(a) Surgical procedures that sterilize, including, but not limited to, castration, vasectomy, hysterectomy, oophorectomy, orchiectomy, or penectomy; (b) Surgical procedures that artificially construct tissue with the appearance of genitalia that differs from the individual's biological sex, including, but not limited to, metoidioplasty, phalloplasty, or vaginoplasty; or (c) Augmentation mammoplasty or subcutaneous mastectomy
There are lots of different medical reasons why you might need some of those (hysterectomy, oophorectomy, orchiectomy, penectomy, mastectomy), like cancer. Presumably those are allowed? Or is it another atrociously written US law?
Yes, that would be allowed. It's only procedures "performed for the purpose of assisting an individual with a gender transition" that are prohibited.
So after about 6 months in my current job I've decided it's not for me. I'm going to take a year or so out to spend with the family while my wife goes back to work and keeps the mortgage paid and I'll decide what I'm going to do next. It will be the first time I'm actually unemployed for about 15 years and I'm really looking forwards to slowing down a bit and being a house husband.
I left full-time employment a while ago and it was nerve-wracking at the time, but in the end the best thing I ever did.
Did you tell your employer? Or did you just stop working full time?
The job I quit was in the public sector so I don't think anybody's noticed yet ...
"This was the worst Budget I have ever heard a British Chancellor deliver, by an enormous margin." - Allister Heath today.
"This was the best Budget I have ever heard a British Chancellor deliver, by a massive margin." Allister Heath on Kwarteng budget.
⁷ That's a philosophical question I don't think I've encountered before.
Which is bigger; enormous or massive?...
Pause
Pause
YOU BROKE MY BRAIN.
Enormous is bigger.
Massive derives from the word relating to acceleration so is technically about speed, after a fashion.
Massive derives from mass, which derives from maza, Greek for barley
Are you on speed?
Speed?
“Pop quiz, hotshot. There's a bomb on a bus. Once the bus goes 50 miles an hour, the bomb is armed. If it drops below 50, it blows up. What do you do? What do you do?”
Anyway before I disappear off into the ether again in the next day ir so, my US prediction is for the following states go be won by Trump in an easy EC victory for him
All of 2020 plus
Pennsylvania Michigan (Coin Toss) Wisconsin Georgia Nevada Arizona (Coin toss) Virginia (Perhaps) New Hampshire
Why New Hampshire?
Because he'll run her very close there. I think NJ might ge close enough to raise some eyebrows too
A few months ago I thought of writing an article about how modern-day issues - abortion, trans, immigration, insurrection - produced choropleths which can be used to produce bands of states, which when compared to the existing state rankings could indicate value or a flip. I abandoned it because of time issues, but one of those maps stuck in my mind because it had NH as red. It's too late to revisit but it's beginning to bug me...
Had to laugh at this:
High-Risk States (AR, IA, IN, MO, NE, NH, OH, SC, WV): All of these states have passed some anti-trans adult laws, but they haven't reached the same level of severity as the worst states. Missouri and West Virginia, for example, prohibit gender-affirming care for incarcerated adults as well as transgender youth…
Imagine going so far as to not fund sex changes for prisoners and children.
So you think it good policy to legally prohibit the supply of hormones, for example, to transitioned individuals ?
Fake news. The law prohibits inmates being given gender transition surgery, not medication:
That's a prohibition on surgery, not "gender affirming care", then.
Would you say the people who wrote the article were fearmongering in that case?
Given the bit that Sandpit quoted said "High-Risk States (AR, IA, IN, MO, NE, NH, OH, SC, WV): All of these states have passed some anti-trans adult laws, but they haven't reached the same level of severity as the worst states. Missouri and West Virginia, for example, prohibit gender-affirming care for incarcerated adults as well as transgender youth…", it would appear not. Which bit in that passage do you think is factually inaccurate?
It's not gender-affirming "care" that's being prohibited for incarcerated adults but surgery.
I think the latter is included in the former. As it appears does the author. Insofar as rapidly-evolving terms can be said to have a definition that is.
They define what's prohibited for inmates in the law:
(a) Surgical procedures that sterilize, including, but not limited to, castration, vasectomy, hysterectomy, oophorectomy, orchiectomy, or penectomy; (b) Surgical procedures that artificially construct tissue with the appearance of genitalia that differs from the individual's biological sex, including, but not limited to, metoidioplasty, phalloplasty, or vaginoplasty; or (c) Augmentation mammoplasty or subcutaneous mastectomy
I'm not sure you can construct a definition of "gender-affirming care" that excludes those things
(Incidentally, what is the "or" doing at the end of clause b? Breasts aren't genitals.)
The whole thing is a single sentence punctuated as a list.
Minimum 2 weeks food and water 'basics', preferably have enough for a month etc. The chances of governments getting organised in 72 hours to 'assist' are close to zero, especially in an 'out of the blue' scenario.
Apologies if this has been covered but I need to raise this concern somewhere and think PB is a proven place to check things! I'm astonished how little focus is on the impact on part time workers / low paid jobs by the employer NI changes - especially the secondary threshold being lowered to £5k from £9.1k pa. I make it that the employer NI cost for someone earning just £12,000pa will increase from the current £400pa to a stonking £1,050pa.
I think that's right and surely that's going to risk lost jobs, the Chancellor previously called Employer NI raises as a tax on jobs, but isn't this actually a tax on low-paying jobs and those who most likely can least afford to risk those jobs?
I know the employment allowance is doubled at least but....
Ever since the minimum wage was introdced we have had crocodile tears about how its going to cost jobs for the lowest paid. Yet we are still waiting for this tsunami of unemployment.
Until about 6 months ago, it was beneficial for large employers to offer no more than 16 hours a week, so that pay was under the Secondary Threshold. This was compounded by the fact working tax credit kicks in at 16 hours.
Why design a system to get people to work 2 days a week to survive on additional benefits while at the same time large employers avoid NI contributions ?
In the vast majority of the country people can walk into low paid, part time work.
The problem is that it is the employees not the employers incentivised to go for 16 hours. Work 16 hours and you can get potentially tens of thousands in benefits on top of that, but work any more and you're taxed at about 80%
For employers there's no real incentive like that. Oh and it's a legal requirement to allow "flexible working" unless there's a good reason not to - so employers are obliged to accept part timers if they can.
The only solution is to have serious reforms so that employees want to work full time as they're better off if they do.
The Budget did absolutely nothing to fix the situation.
There could be a serious sting in the tail. Hunt and Sunak set up a trap - they cut NI using “headroom” that was actually heavy cuts in departmental budgets in the next parliament. Reeves budget needs to bring in enough income to addresses Sunak’s and Hunts swinging departmental cuts planned for this parliament before she can spend more on top of that. Otherwise it doesn’t balance.
Wasn't that baked in?
We knew that the Sunak mininsters were pulling all kind of con tricks to attempt to save themselves. I've had the view that the voters were wise to at least the principle, if not the detail, and that is why they were flushed away so thoroughly.
Apologies if this has been covered but I need to raise this concern somewhere and think PB is a proven place to check things! I'm astonished how little focus is on the impact on part time workers / low paid jobs by the employer NI changes - especially the secondary threshold being lowered to £5k from £9.1k pa. I make it that the employer NI cost for someone earning just £12,000pa will increase from the current £400pa to a stonking £1,050pa.
I think that's right and surely that's going to risk lost jobs, the Chancellor previously called Employer NI raises as a tax on jobs, but isn't this actually a tax on low-paying jobs and those who most likely can least afford to risk those jobs?
I know the employment allowance is doubled at least but....
Ever since the minimum wage was introdced we have had crocodile tears about how its going to cost jobs for the lowest paid. Yet we are still waiting for this tsunami of unemployment.
Until about 6 months ago, it was beneficial for large employers to offer no more than 16 hours a week, so that pay was under the Secondary Threshold. This was compounded by the fact working tax credit kicks in at 16 hours.
Why design a system to get people to work 2 days a week to survive on additional benefits while at the same time large employers avoid NI contributions ?
In the vast majority of the country people can walk into low paid, part time work.
The problem is that it is the employees not the employers incentivised to go for 16 hours. Work 16 hours and you can get potentially tens of thousands in benefits on top of that, but work any more and you're taxed at about 80%
For employers there's no real incentive like that. Oh and it's a legal requirement to allow "flexible working" unless there's a good reason not to - so employers are obliged to accept part timers if they can.
The only solution is to have serious reforms so that employees want to work full time as they're better off if they do.
The Budget did absolutely nothing to fix the situation.
A group representing 1,400 private schools will press ahead with plans for a legal challenge against the government’s introduction of VAT from January, the BBC can reveal.
In a board meeting on Thursday, the Independent Schools Council (ISC), the body which includes most independent schools in the UK, voted to pave the way for legal action.
Lord David Pannick KC, one of the country’s leading barristers in cases relating to government decisions, is to lead the challenge which will be brought on behalf of parents, including those with children with special educational needs and disabilities (Send).
Rachel Reeves’s tax raid on employer national insurance contributions will not raise “anything like” the £25bn claimed by the Chancellor, the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) has said.
Paul Johnson, director of the IFS said the jobs tax raid will result in lower wages, reducing the amount of revenue raised from employer National Insurance contributions. Lower wages will also reduce the amount of tax collected from employee National Insurance contributions (NICs) and income tax. This means that the Government will raise only £10bn after accounting for lower pay awards and its decision to shield public sector workers.
That is quite some black hole...
I said yesterday the sums don't add up.
A terrible budget for business, for growth, for jobs.
Rachel Reeves’s tax raid on employer national insurance contributions will not raise “anything like” the £25bn claimed by the Chancellor, the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) has said.
Paul Johnson, director of the IFS said the jobs tax raid will result in lower wages, reducing the amount of revenue raised from employer National Insurance contributions. Lower wages will also reduce the amount of tax collected from employee National Insurance contributions (NICs) and income tax. This means that the Government will raise only £10bn after accounting for lower pay awards and its decision to shield public sector workers.
That is quite some black hole...
I said yesterday the sums don't add up.
A terrible budget for business, for growth, for jobs.
You cannot tax your way to prosperity.
Well Labour are going to give it the good old British try.
People living in the European Union should stockpile emergency supplies in the event of war breaking out or another major emergency, a new report has advised.
As part of this strategy, the EU should advise households to be prepared to be self-sufficient for a minimum of 72 hours in the event of an emergency, the report says.
What sort of utter wazzock doesn't have 72 hours supplies?!
Plenty wouldn’t. Certainly not what we would consider the “fundamental” basic supplies. A lot of people will just get through a packet of say cereal or a weeks worth of tinned soup, and then go and get some more. This is a symptom of the accessibility of convenience shops (the Tesco Metros etc of this world) nowadays. If you live in a flat you might not have the space for a lot of extra food.
I would say anyone over the age of 40-45 was pretty much taught to “keep things in” though.
We used to make do and mend too, but that's also passé it seems. Oh well. I'm as well covered as sensible and dont broadcast it to the 'I'll just take yours' crowd so bring on those bombs
For a couple of years now, we've had these little white robot delivery vehicles in our village. Anyway, someone has put halloween stickers/masks on some of them for Halloween.
A lovely little idea. Annoyingly I was driving so I couldn't take a piccie.
Thinly-veiled I want a dashcam for Christmas.
LOL. I'm not to bothered about a dashcam; but I'm really considering getting one for my bike. Especially if I start training for longer-distance races.
This 'hobby' can get very expensive, very, very quickly.
"This was the worst Budget I have ever heard a British Chancellor deliver, by an enormous margin." - Allister Heath today.
"This was the best Budget I have ever heard a British Chancellor deliver, by a massive margin." Allister Heath on Kwarteng budget.
⁷ That's a philosophical question I don't think I've encountered before.
Which is bigger; enormous or massive?...
Pause
Pause
YOU BROKE MY BRAIN.
Enormous is bigger.
Massive derives from the word relating to acceleration so is technically about speed, after a fashion.
Massive derives from mass, which derives from maza, Greek for barley
Are you on speed?
Speed?
“Pop quiz, hotshot. There's a bomb on a bus. Once the bus goes 50 miles an hour, the bomb is armed. If it drops below 50, it blows up. What do you do? What do you do?”
Is there anything to be said for saying another mass?
A group representing 1,400 private schools will press ahead with plans for a legal challenge against the government’s introduction of VAT from January, the BBC can reveal.
In a board meeting on Thursday, the Independent Schools Council (ISC), the body which includes most independent schools in the UK, voted to pave the way for legal action.
Lord David Pannick KC, one of the country’s leading barristers in cases relating to government decisions, is to lead the challenge which will be brought on behalf of parents, including those with children with special educational needs and disabilities (Send).
The apparent government indifference to the way this change will affect SEND children is quite startling. I'd have expected there to have been a token 'gift' to such parents, as it's an obvious issue.
For a couple of years now, we've had these little white robot delivery vehicles in our village. Anyway, someone has put halloween stickers/masks on some of them for Halloween.
A lovely little idea. Annoyingly I was driving so I couldn't take a piccie.
Thinly-veiled I want a dashcam for Christmas.
LOL. I'm not to bothered about a dashcam; but I'm really considering getting one for my bike. Especially if I start training for longer-distance races.
This 'hobby' can get very expensive, very, very quickly.
People living in the European Union should stockpile emergency supplies in the event of war breaking out or another major emergency, a new report has advised.
As part of this strategy, the EU should advise households to be prepared to be self-sufficient for a minimum of 72 hours in the event of an emergency, the report says.
What sort of utter wazzock doesn't have 72 hours supplies?!
the people that panic buy on boxing day
I mean a couple could fit 72 hours food in a shoebox. Or just buy a box of ships biscuits and some sweeties. 72 hours. Lol. Idiots.
"This little girl survived longer than that with no weapons and no training!"
People living in the European Union should stockpile emergency supplies in the event of war breaking out or another major emergency, a new report has advised.
As part of this strategy, the EU should advise households to be prepared to be self-sufficient for a minimum of 72 hours in the event of an emergency, the report says.
What sort of utter wazzock doesn't have 72 hours supplies?!
Plenty wouldn’t. Certainly not what we would consider the “fundamental” basic supplies. A lot of people will just get through a packet of say cereal or a weeks worth of tinned soup, and then go and get some more. This is a symptom of the accessibility of convenience shops (the Tesco Metros etc of this world) nowadays. If you live in a flat you might not have the space for a lot of extra food.
I would say anyone over the age of 40-45 was pretty much taught to “keep things in” though.
People living in the European Union should stockpile emergency supplies in the event of war breaking out or another major emergency, a new report has advised.
As part of this strategy, the EU should advise households to be prepared to be self-sufficient for a minimum of 72 hours in the event of an emergency, the report says.
What sort of utter wazzock doesn't have 72 hours supplies?!
Plenty wouldn’t. Certainly not what we would consider the “fundamental” basic supplies. A lot of people will just get through a packet of say cereal or a weeks worth of tinned soup, and then go and get some more. This is a symptom of the accessibility of convenience shops (the Tesco Metros etc of this world) nowadays. If you live in a flat you might not have the space for a lot of extra food.
I would say anyone over the age of 40-45 was pretty much taught to “keep things in” though.
We used to make do and mend too, but that's also passé it seems. Oh well. I'm as well covered as sensible and dont broadcast it to the 'I'll just take yours' crowd so bring on those bombs
Make do and mend (particularly re consumer goods) might make a comeback if we get a Trump trade war with China - all those cheap parts won’t be quite so easy to source all of a sudden…
For a couple of years now, we've had these little white robot delivery vehicles in our village. Anyway, someone has put halloween stickers/masks on some of them for Halloween.
A lovely little idea. Annoyingly I was driving so I couldn't take a piccie.
Thinly-veiled I want a dashcam for Christmas.
LOL. I'm not to bothered about a dashcam; but I'm really considering getting one for my bike. Especially if I start training for longer-distance races.
This 'hobby' can get very expensive, very, very quickly.
You need a Garmin Varia radar.
Oooh, never heard of that! Thanks!
(Starts investigating)
And a Pass Pixi sign, which is a little less expensive.
There are a number of options around eg 2 or 3 radar options, and several lights-with-video.
Reviews over at road.cc are a good place to start.
People living in the European Union should stockpile emergency supplies in the event of war breaking out or another major emergency, a new report has advised.
As part of this strategy, the EU should advise households to be prepared to be self-sufficient for a minimum of 72 hours in the event of an emergency, the report says.
What sort of utter wazzock doesn't have 72 hours supplies?!
the people that panic buy on boxing day
I mean a couple could fit 72 hours food in a shoebox. Or just buy a box of ships biscuits and some sweeties. 72 hours. Lol. Idiots.
"This little girl survived longer than that with no weapons and no training!"
Rachel Reeves’s tax raid on employer national insurance contributions will not raise “anything like” the £25bn claimed by the Chancellor, the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) has said.
Paul Johnson, director of the IFS said the jobs tax raid will result in lower wages, reducing the amount of revenue raised from employer National Insurance contributions. Lower wages will also reduce the amount of tax collected from employee National Insurance contributions (NICs) and income tax. This means that the Government will raise only £10bn after accounting for lower pay awards and its decision to shield public sector workers.
That is quite some black hole...
I said yesterday the sums don't add up.
A terrible budget for business, for growth, for jobs.
You cannot tax your way to prosperity.
You also can't generate growth from nowhere given that we've had no real growth for 16 years and no one has a clue how to actually create some..
There could be a serious sting in the tail. Hunt and Sunak set up a trap - they cut NI using “headroom” that was actually heavy cuts in departmental budgets in the next parliament. Reeves budget needs to bring in enough income to addresses Sunak’s and Hunts swinging departmental cuts planned for this parliament before she can spend more on top of that. Otherwise it doesn’t balance.
Wasn't that baked in?
We knew that the Sunak mininsters were pulling all kind of con tricks to attempt to save themselves. I've had the view that the voters were wise to at least the principle, if not the detail, and that is why they were flushed away so thoroughly.
Some of it, yes. But I get the impression that some of the spending that was uncovered- the huge amount on hotels for asylum unpeople, for example- was a shock even beyond the "we've opened the books and it's a shock" stagey shock.
But yeah- overall, the tax rises and the borrowing and the spending cuts in some areas were the minimum needed to stop critical things falling over.
Comments
There could be a serious sting in the tail. Hunt and Sunak set up a trap - they cut NI using “headroom” that was actually heavy cuts in departmental budgets in the next parliament. Reeves budget needs to bring in enough income to addresses Sunak’s and Hunts swinging departmental cuts planned for this parliament before she can spend more on top of that. Otherwise it doesn’t balance.
If they charge, a chunk of the SNP will hate them. Forever.
If they don’t charge, a chunk of the rest of Scottish politics will have it in for them. Forever.
So why not keep it going?
I have previous had the odd career diversion, for similar reasons really and never regretted taking a period out, resetting and finding a new opportunity that brings more enjoyment. Hating doing something you spend so many hours in the day at, even if it pays well, is demoralising.
Don't worry about being at home with the kids. It'll be fun if you make it fun. And don't do too much with them, either: sometimes just staying at home and playing with ice in a tray for an hour or two, the TV blaring Little Baby Bum in the background, can be enough.
Background:
Previous studies have explored the association between social media use and mental health among adolescents. However, few studies using nationally representative longitudinal data have explored this relationship for adults and how the effect might change depending on how people use social media.
Objective:
This study investigated the longitudinal relationship between the frequency of viewing and posting on social media and mental health problems among UK adults.
Methods:
This study included 15,836 adults (aged 16 years and older) who participated in Understanding Society, a UK longitudinal survey. Social media use was measured with questions about the frequency of viewing social media and posting on social media in Understanding Society Wave 11 (2019-2021). We explored viewing and posting separately, as well as a combined exposure: (1) high viewing, high posting; (2) high viewing, low posting; (3) low viewing, high posting; and (4) low viewing, low posting. Mental health problems were measured in Wave 12 (2020-2022) using the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12), a validated scale for identifying symptoms of common mental health problems, where higher scores indicated more mental health problems (0 to 36). Unadjusted and adjusted linear regression models were estimated for viewing social media and posting on social media, adjusting for the baseline GHQ score, gender, age, ethnicity, employment, and education. We found no evidence for effect modification by gender and age so overall associations were reported.
Results:
In our adjusted models, we found no evidence of an association between the frequency of viewing social media and mental health problems in the following year. We found that adults who posted daily on social media had more mental health problems than those who never posted on social media, corresponding to a 0.35-point increase in GHQ score (β=0.35, 95% CI 0.01-0.68; P=.04). When we considered both social media behaviors, we found that those who frequently viewed and posted on social media scored 0.31 points higher on the GHQ score (β=0.31, 95% CI 0.04-0.58; P=.03) in the following year compared to those who rarely viewed or posted on social media.
Conclusions:
We found that a high frequency of posting on social media was associated with increased mental health problems a year later. However, we did not find evidence of a similar association based on the frequency of viewing social media content. This provides evidence that some types of active social media use (ie, posting) have a stronger link to mental health outcomes than some types of passive social media use (viewing). These results highlighted that the relationship between social media use and mental health is complex, and more research is needed to understand the mechanisms underlying these patterns to inform targeted interventions and policies.
Pause
YOU BROKE MY BRAIN.
https://www.newsweek.com/europe-stockpile-food-war-russia-1977872
People living in the European Union should stockpile emergency supplies in the event of war breaking out or another major emergency, a new report has advised.
As part of this strategy, the EU should advise households to be prepared to be self-sufficient for a minimum of 72 hours in the event of an emergency, the report says.
Massive derives from the word relating to acceleration so is technically about speed, after a fashion.
Nothing would give me greater pleasure than the schadenfreude of them finishing on fewer seats than the Tories did in July 2024.
Justice.
The problem ("problem") many people face is that before they ponder what they really want to do they think "City" and "retire by 40". Needless to say the City is fiercely competitive and demands its pound of flesh. That is not for everyone. It needs tremendous focus and sacrifice often to "make it" and sometimes people make the calculation that it ain't werf it.
Of course once the money has been made then it seems that it was the right decision, and there are plenty of people who live well-rounded lives and are also fabulously successful in the City, but there are also many who are missing something. Whether that be years with their family, or broader and eclectic interests and pursuits, or whatnot.
Take a moment to think what you would really like to do.
As an example a friend of mine (actually son of a friend of mine) went from Goldman, to Hedge Fund, and now has given it up to pursue an independent (AI-related) project as a start up in his kitchen and is loving it.
Paul Johnson, director of the IFS said the jobs tax raid will result in lower wages, reducing the amount of revenue raised from employer National Insurance contributions. Lower wages will also reduce the amount of tax collected from employee National Insurance contributions (NICs) and income tax. This means that the Government will raise only £10bn after accounting for lower pay awards and its decision to shield public sector workers.
That is quite some black hole...
Years back, my Mum used to have a draw full of tinned and dried goods in case of a pandemic. She was right! Oh, except she hadn't stocked loo roll, which was the only thing that was ever problematic during COVID...
33.37 m people work in the UK - if they earn £9100 each that's £20bn by itself...
Now it's not going to be the full £20bn but you can't tell me that 17m people are self employed, earn less than £5000 or work in the public sector..
and that is the figure you need to get the figure of £10bn rather than £20bn.
You're grasping
https://x.com/txwidiwidi/status/1851835337783357821
We could have another pandemic. We could have a solar flare knock out electricity and other infrastructure. There could be a terrorist attack that takes out electricity. Or a nuclear plant could spew radioactive waste into the sky requiring us all to shelter in place.
Having a week or two's worth of shelf safe food is very cheap insurance.
"As the OBR note, it will result in lower wages, reducing the amount raised from employer NI and reducing employee NI and income tax revenues. That takes the net revenue down to some £16bn. On top of that there will be an effective £6bn of compensation for public sector employers."
(a) Surgical procedures that sterilize, including, but not limited to, castration, vasectomy, hysterectomy, oophorectomy, orchiectomy, or penectomy;
(b) Surgical procedures that artificially construct tissue with the appearance of genitalia that differs from the individual's biological sex, including, but not limited to, metoidioplasty, phalloplasty, or vaginoplasty; or
(c) Augmentation mammoplasty or subcutaneous mastectomy
So a black hole, while massive, is also tiny.
(runs out of room)
Are you on speed?
The working out is here. The figures are from the OBR, not IFS. £25.7B reverts to £16.1B after behavioral changes (see below for how). Then deduct £5.9B for public sector.
https://x.com/HelenMiller_IFS/status/1851676675538366575
Or just buy a box of ships biscuits and some sweeties.
72 hours. Lol. Idiots.
(This doesn't alter how bad it was for those with young kids in high rise flats, but a sense of perspective is always useful)
And based on PB anecdotal - such as my house where Bobby got a vote and Kemi didn’t - the Bobby price is clearly value 😆
Tomorrow we will know who has won, because one candidate will be at home sweeping up autumn leaves, the other will be at the conference venue in discussion with party officials and new security arrangements. So candidate watch the next 24hrs and you will know the winner long before it’s announced. That betfair should surely move based on where the candidates are who they are talking to tomorrow?
Next step up, gargantuan.
We probably keep at least a week or so's food in cupboards downstairs: pasta, tined soups, beans, etc, etc. We could live off that food for quite a while. But it would not be what we wanted to eat given a choice, and might get a little boring. But we'd live.
Then there are the people who cannot live without their fresh avocados, and instead of making do, insist on having them.
I'd rapidly miss fresh fruit, though. But we'd live. In fact, it'd be just like I was a student again.
There's another question: supplies with no electricity. In other words, the things in your fridge or freezer rapidly go off...
(We keep a few months' worth of toilet paper, as it never goes out of date and it's annoying when you run out...)
In the first year 2025-6
£24bn becomes £18.3 billion due to behavioual responses (lower wages, less profits, reduction in employment).
In 5 years time the behaviour responses reduce the tax take from £25.7bn to £16.1bn.
Then additional £6 bn is as result of additional ERS NI on public sector paybillm which of course is in the spend forecast.
I would say anyone over the age of 40-45 was pretty much taught to “keep things in” though.
(Incidentally, what is the "or" doing at the end of clause b? Breasts aren't genitals.)
(And don't say in a trench at the bottom of the Atlantic...)
“Pop quiz, hotshot. There's a bomb on a bus. Once the bus goes 50 miles an hour, the bomb is armed. If it drops below 50, it blows up. What do you do? What do you do?”
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5009923#Comment_5009923
massive is having lots of mass, like a big pile of Greek maza barley
The chances of governments getting organised in 72 hours to 'assist' are close to zero, especially in an 'out of the blue' scenario.
For employers there's no real incentive like that. Oh and it's a legal requirement to allow "flexible working" unless there's a good reason not to - so employers are obliged to accept part timers if they can.
The only solution is to have serious reforms so that employees want to work full time as they're better off if they do.
The Budget did absolutely nothing to fix the situation.
We knew that the Sunak mininsters were pulling all kind of con tricks to attempt to save themselves. I've had the view that the voters were wise to at least the principle, if not the detail, and that is why they were flushed away so thoroughly.
In a board meeting on Thursday, the Independent Schools Council (ISC), the body which includes most independent schools in the UK, voted to pave the way for legal action.
Lord David Pannick KC, one of the country’s leading barristers in cases relating to government decisions, is to lead the challenge which will be brought on behalf of parents, including those with children with special educational needs and disabilities (Send).
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c98d3xr0290o
A terrible budget for business, for growth, for jobs.
You cannot tax your way to prosperity.
Oh well. I'm as well covered as sensible and dont broadcast it to the 'I'll just take yours' crowd so bring on those bombs
Democrats also have the highest level of enthusiasm in more than 24 years, according to Gallup..
https://x.com/USA_Polling/status/1852021255052103939
If that's true, then I think Harris will win.
That's back up to around Obama numbers.
Gargantuan....
Why Kamala Harris will win
https://x.com/adamboultonTABB/status/1852034941699137856
(Starts investigating)
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/may/21/sweden-distributes-be-prepared-for-war-cyber-terror-attack-leaflet-to-every-home
There are a number of options around eg 2 or 3 radar options, and several lights-with-video.
Reviews over at road.cc are a good place to start.
Ashley Neal did a Garmin Varia Review, and liked it, back in May. 10 minute video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFKToYMxXHc
But yeah- overall, the tax rises and the borrowing and the spending cuts in some areas were the minimum needed to stop critical things falling over.