Video showing David Coote appearing to be snorting a white powder released
The video that was already out clearly was after a kind of white line that was not on a pitch anyway.
I couldn't care less what Coote does in his time off recreationally.
I care that he is a dodgy referee who has held a grudge against a club he referees on regularly ... and has had dodgy calls in that light such as not thinking that taking out Van Dijk that ended his season in a horrific challenge is even a booking.
He has brought the game into disrepute with his on and off the pitch football related behaviour, no need to bring drugs into the conversation.
Apparently Sky and the FA do
The FA should care that he has brought the game into disrepute.
On topic, Badenoch needs to get to where Theresa May was.
She can tolerate 35-40% of voters disliking her but she needs to up the positives from the low 20s to the mid 40s - converting all those don't knows.
It's do'able; it means she needs to tell better stories about herself and connect with the public.
Agreed, she's an unknown to most at the moment.
But, given the don't knows will be a disparate, mostly grumpy bunch, it would take a very skilled politician to move them all into the positive camp - by default as she becomes more known she will make as many enemies as friends. To escape this she will need political skills that she hasn't yet shown.
She also has zero policies and wants to do this airy fairy 'finding ourselves' renewal campaign that seems to mean diddly squat so far.
Being LOTO starts immediately you get into the job. Jenrick was ready, Kemi clearly wasn't.
She needs to get on the front foot fast.
Nah, Jenrick would just be spitting bile and oozing snake oil.
Badenoch is just a bit, well not very good at PMQs yet. Jenrick wasn't very good at humanity.
None of that is an argument, just a collection of your own facile value judgements and opinions.
What is PB if it not a series of our own "facile value judgements and opinions"? One of our posters, someone who posts under the name of @Luckyguy1983, still highly rates Liz Truss, if you can believe that.
It is different when you are dressing those opinions up as judgements as to whether someone would be competent or successful. There are many reasons why I rate Liz Truss, but I don't pretend that my opinion is widely shared, or that the Tories should reinstate her.
Even the Supreme Court can't wreck the Constitution to overrule term limits.
Why not?
If they can rule that the law doesn't apply to the President, why would the Constitution?
Polls show the public wouldn’t support a change allowing more than two terms for President . The constitution wasn’t clear on immunity but is crystal clear on term limits . I have many concerns about the next 4 years but this isn’t one of them .
It’s only clear that someone can’t be elected more than twice. It’s silent on other methods of becoming President.
Streeting orders review of costs to NHS of the assisted dying bill
(Streeting opposes the bill)
Utterly insane!
Is he also reviewing what are the costs of keeping people alive against their clearly expressed wishes FFS!?
It is reported he is asking where he has to cut in the NHS budget to pay the cost
He is anti the bill, and his intervention has caused concerns with supporters of the bill who detect a change in mps opinions not only on this, but Starmer's refusal today to provide more time for discussion across the house which is very divided
Even the Supreme Court can't wreck the Constitution to overrule term limits.
Why not?
If they can rule that the law doesn't apply to the President, why would the Constitution?
Polls show the public wouldn’t support a change allowing more than two terms for President . The constitution wasn’t clear on immunity but is crystal clear on term limits . I have many concerns about the next 4 years but this isn’t one of them .
It’s only clear that someone can’t be elected more than twice. It’s silent on other methods of becoming President.
Even the Supreme Court can't wreck the Constitution to overrule term limits.
Why not?
If they can rule that the law doesn't apply to the President, why would the Constitution?
Vance could be President for 12 years if Trump keels over day 1.
I can't see Vance winning to be honest provided the Dems have a half decent candidate. He is much less charismatic than Trump if more articulate and white working class and black and hispanic male turnout wouldn't be as high for him.
To win he would need Trump's tariffs to be a roaring success, increasing manufacturing jobs with no increase in prices and also immigration to have fallen dramatically and immigrants not reacting to deportation of family members by voting Dem. Plus not seen swing voters hit by spending cuts. All of which are big ifs
Even the Supreme Court can't wreck the Constitution to overrule term limits.
Why not?
If they can rule that the law doesn't apply to the President, why would the Constitution?
Polls show the public wouldn’t support a change allowing more than two terms for President . The constitution wasn’t clear on immunity but is crystal clear on term limits . I have many concerns about the next 4 years but this isn’t one of them .
It’s only clear that someone can’t be elected more than twice. It’s silent on other methods of becoming President.
Video showing David Coote appearing to be snorting a white powder released
The video that was already out clearly was after a kind of white line that was not on a pitch anyway.
I couldn't care less what Coote does in his time off recreationally.
I care that he is a dodgy referee who has held a grudge against a club he referees on regularly ... and has had dodgy calls in that light such as not thinking that taking out Van Dijk that ended his season in a horrific challenge is even a booking.
He has brought the game into disrepute with his on and off the pitch football related behaviour, no need to bring drugs into the conversation.
Apparently Sky and the FA do
The FA should care that he has brought the game into disrepute.
That report and both the FA and UEFA statements say he is suspended (rightly) because of his inappropriate comments video and not because of the drugs video by which time he was already suspended.
He has blown his career up in spectacular fashion, if the Darwin Awards did P45s he should be eligible for one for the original video not for drugs. Especially since he not only brought the game into disrepute, he not only showed shockingly poor judgement, but he also did so while making derogatory remarks referencing Klopp's nationality.
Streeting orders review of costs to NHS of the assisted dying bill
(Streeting opposes the bill)
Utterly insane!
Is he also reviewing what are the costs of keeping people alive against their clearly expressed wishes FFS!?
I wouldn't want the decision on Euthanasia to be based significantly on financial issues in either direction. It is more important than that in terms of how our society morally evolves.
- I can’t believe it, but I did end up voting for Donald Trump. I made that decision when I saw JD Vance’s interview with The New York Times. He is the future of the Republican Party. I’m more voting for Vance than I am for Trump.
- I shocked myself and voted for Trump. No one tell my family. I was so impressed by JD Vance, the way he carried himself and how normal he appeared. I think I became radicalized on the men and women’s sports issue. The ad that said, “Kamala represents they/them. Trump represents you,” that was so compelling. While Trump is deranged, he represented normalcy somehow to me.
They are gonna just love Trump's "normalcy".
Let's see how they are feeling in four years time.
I do not know whether the voters will like it in four years time, but I don't think there is any doubt at all that those who voted Trump knew precisely what they were voting for. It could not have been made clearer. They voted for isolationism, protectionism, strong man theory of government, rejection of climate science in its entirety and border control. They voted for someone who places a question mark over the values of democracy as we have known it. The 52% knew exactly what they were doing.
The problem is how you "pay tax" from a fixed asset such as land without selling it. The NFU are pointing out that smaller farms will have no option than to sell up.
She's says inheritance up to £1m is protected and the farmer immediately shakes his head.
So I am left thing that he, like most of them, seem to have no idea about the actual detail.
Edit: Also - he doesn't look too old. Start giving parcels of the land to your sons now and live 7 years.
Agricultural Property Relief on IHT only went to 100% in 1992, and only came in in 1975, so the 100% relief rate is something that has only existed for just over 3 decades. If the family has had the land 375 years then the farm must have paid Estate duties at many points in its history, at varying rates.
In any case, why should farms be treated differently to any other capital intensive business when it comes to IHT?
If the land is sold to pay IHT then it will still be farmed, just by different people. Indeed it might give tenant farmers the start they need to buy the land off the Lord of the Manor.
No it will be farmed by mega corporations with little interest in the land or food production to meet national needs.
The chances of a student fresh out of agricultural college being able to buy a farm and its land worth more than £1 million are less than zero. Tenant farmers won't have over a million pounds in capital either
Streeting orders review of costs to NHS of the assisted dying bill
(Streeting opposes the bill)
Utterly insane!
Is he also reviewing what are the costs of keeping people alive against their clearly expressed wishes FFS!?
I wouldn't want the decision on Euthanasia to be based significantly influenced by financial issues in either direction. It is more important than that in terms of how our society morally evolves.
Even the Supreme Court can't wreck the Constitution to overrule term limits.
Why not?
If they can rule that the law doesn't apply to the President, why would the Constitution?
Polls show the public wouldn’t support a change allowing more than two terms for President . The constitution wasn’t clear on immunity but is crystal clear on term limits . I have many concerns about the next 4 years but this isn’t one of them .
It’s only clear that someone can’t be elected more than twice. It’s silent on other methods of becoming President.
Video showing David Coote appearing to be snorting a white powder released
The video that was already out clearly was after a kind of white line that was not on a pitch anyway.
I couldn't care less what Coote does in his time off recreationally.
I care that he is a dodgy referee who has held a grudge against a club he referees on regularly ... and has had dodgy calls in that light such as not thinking that taking out Van Dijk that ended his season in a horrific challenge is even a booking.
He has brought the game into disrepute with his on and off the pitch football related behaviour, no need to bring drugs into the conversation.
Apparently Sky and the FA do
The FA should care that he has brought the game into disrepute.
That report and both the FA and UEFA statements say he is suspended (rightly) because of his inappropriate comments video and not because of the drugs video by which time he was already suspended.
He has blown his career up in spectacular fashion, if the Darwin Awards did P45s he should be eligible for one for the original video not for drugs. Especially since he not only brought the game into disrepute, he not only showed shockingly poor judgement, but he also did so while making derogatory remarks referencing Klopp's nationality.
Surely his shockingly poor judgement is related to his apparant drug habit.
The Guardian melt down over Trump, with other fellow lefties, is predictable but rather than berating Trump shouldn't their question be why and why they were so out of touch with public opinion
Were they “so out if touch” ?
Is it a “meltdown” ?
I think you’re resorting to hyperbole about a publication I suspect you don’t regularly read.
I read the Guardian daily
I'm so sorry.
It’s immensely good fun.
I remember being about 12, when I asked my father about an opinion piece, there.
In it the writer lambasted the ghastly oiks with East End accents and too much money overrunning his beloved public school. Upstarts empowered by Thatcher etc.
I asked “Shouldn’t he be happy that poor people are getting rich?”
Why would leftwing snobs want poor people to become rich? They might even, horror of horrors, start voting Conservative
Rich people have stopped voting Tory... the Lib Dems on the other hand....
Which says all you need to know about the lib dems, just like when people like you claimed the rich always voted tory
It's been pointed out that Kemi has to resolve a pincer movement. Down south the Tories now have to compete against a resurgent Lib Dem party who are targeting Tory seats with centralist policies
Elsewhere the tories need to fight Farage / Reform who are attacking from the Right.
If the Tories focus on addressing Reform they lose votes to the Lib Dems, swing towards the centre and they lose voters to Reform... And I don't think the Tories can successfully fight both battles at the same time in a way that doesn't scare a lot of the other potential voters away.
Already the Tories are up to 29% on the latest poll, the LDs down to 11% and Labour down to 27% as Reform squeeze their 2024 vote to reach 19% without taking any 2024 Tory voters https://x.com/LukeTryl/status/1856249257214239046
Streeting orders review of costs to NHS of the assisted dying bill
(Streeting opposes the bill)
Utterly insane!
Is he also reviewing what are the costs of keeping people alive against their clearly expressed wishes FFS!?
It is reported he is asking where he has to cut in the NHS budget to pay the cost
He is anti the bill, and his intervention has caused concerns with supporters of the bill who detect a change in mps opinions not only on this, but Starmer's refusal today to provide more time for discussion across the house which is very divided
His intervention is mad. How about cutting the treatments that would have been given to people but now won't, as they're dead?
Of all the reasons to oppose the bill that has to be the weakest.
The Guardian melt down over Trump, with other fellow lefties, is predictable but rather than berating Trump shouldn't their question be why and why they were so out of touch with public opinion
Were they “so out if touch” ?
Is it a “meltdown” ?
I think you’re resorting to hyperbole about a publication I suspect you don’t regularly read.
I read the Guardian daily
I'm so sorry.
It’s immensely good fun.
I remember being about 12, when I asked my father about an opinion piece, there.
In it the writer lambasted the ghastly oiks with East End accents and too much money overrunning his beloved public school. Upstarts empowered by Thatcher etc.
I asked “Shouldn’t he be happy that poor people are getting rich?”
Why would leftwing snobs want poor people to become rich? They might even, horror of horrors, start voting Conservative
Rich people have stopped voting Tory... the Lib Dems on the other hand....
Which says all you need to know about the lib dems, just like when people like you claimed the rich always voted tory
It's been pointed out that Kemi has to resolve a pincer movement. Down south the Tories now have to compete against a resurgent Lib Dem party who are targeting Tory seats with centralist policies
Elsewhere the tories need to fight Farage / Reform who are attacking from the Right.
If the Tories focus on addressing Reform they lose votes to the Lib Dems, swing towards the centre and they lose voters to Reform... And I don't think the Tories can successfully fight both battles at the same time in a way that doesn't scare a lot of the other potential voters away.
Already the Tories are up to 29% on the latest poll, the LDs down to 11% and Labour down to 27% as Reform squeeze their 2024 vote without taking any 2024 Tory voters https://x.com/LukeTryl/status/1856249257214239046
Curious, why do you keep posting polls, do you think they matter five years out?
The problem is how you "pay tax" from a fixed asset such as land without selling it. The NFU are pointing out that smaller farms will have no option than to sell up.
She's says inheritance up to £1m is protected and the farmer immediately shakes his head.
So I am left thing that he, like most of them, seem to have no idea about the actual detail.
Edit: Also - he doesn't look too old. Start giving parcels of the land to your sons now and live 7 years.
He's shaking his head at what he is hearing. That he has been lied to.
No. Not shaking head at lies, just knowing that she and her government believe they are crusaders going after tax relief, like modern day Robin Hood - without a clue what is tax relief and what isn’t.
My dad’s been talking to lots of people, my brothers also full of advice how we get round inheritance changes - like I become the owner of lots more family property stuff. He says if there wasn’t APR before we have to do it like he wanted to anyway, and without it we now do it his way, but that’s not my economic point, the big point is the government are stupid and haven’t thought it through that they getting lots of flack over this, worrying and hurting people, but not even getting the billions of money they told themselves and everyone in public now thinks they are getting! They see themselves ans robbing rich to give poor, but its fantasy. And that is definition of government done crap. Insurance and accountants are the winners making money, so their supporting the demo’s against it, in for other peoples interests not their own, is good.
And Normally I don’t like misleading headlines in papers, but I’m loving the ones saying Labour government will be milking farms for billions IHT, as voters will be left thinking farming community have paid their share “all in it together”. When banner says toot for farmers, people will toot their horns. British are about fair play. But let’s be clear on messaging, those tooting horns need to know it’s not merely an entrepreneurial v socialism fight, as too many on right argue it, the voters need to know APR and BPR are important about national food security too, and British Heritage and way of life is worth protecting with APR and BPR too - though I expect PB Pirates like Barty and Lucky laughing at me as I argue that, as they are unpatriotic dipsticks interested solely in consumerism
It's entirely about entrepreneurialism vs socialism.
Changes in voluntary taxation cause changes in behaviour shocker.
If you get to choose when and how you pay it, and how you structure it, don't be surprised when people structure it so they pay less.
If I'm still in the UK next year I will be paying at most half of what I would have paid pre the capital gains bump, for example.*
Meanwhile the socialists just eagerly look on at us like cash cows and assume we "have to" pay up on what we were planning to pay before, but at a much higher percentage rate.
Shame it doesn't work in real life.
*My financial advisor has suggested that Reeves' budget is a shitshow and an exit tax is incoming to shore up lost revenues, so the smart thing to do would be to leave before it happens.
Wrong. AVP wasn’t simply about entrepreneurship was it? - that’s not the argument to keep it, that stupid Daily Telegraph Daily Mail mindset too easily plays into Labours hands, can’t you see?
Besides, your argument also expect us to believe this Labour government are ardent socialists out to crush every bit of entrepreneurialism in UK and only Truss and LuckyGuy can save us from it? You should edit the Telegraph. Maybe you do.
No. This is a government believing it’s doing long overdue crack down on unnecessary tax reliefs in unbalanced and bankrupt country, but without clue how myopic its actions are and damage they are causing where things are not unnecessary tax reliefs.
It’s about government sums not adding up on this just like that with all reeves recent money grabbing schemes - not only the opposite of what was promised for votes they clearly said wouldn’t touch APR - they won’t even bring in anything like the money headlines claimed - like ending nomdom status costs the UK money not gains any etc. ends up the biggest problem with the budget as budget that’s not balanced, the budget gamble was on growth, but UK and world economy ain’t getting any interesting economic growth for six or seven years at least, says every forecast, maybe there’s too much covid debt around holding everything back, like economic long Covid media economic editors will dub it in a few years time I predict, and likely with volatility in energy there’s more inflation wobbles too to cost everyone in power lots of votes as voters get even poorer than 2019 in 2029. People didn’t put Labour in, they decided to put Cons out (humane out of misery wrung neck sort of thing) What goes round comes around.
This is about food security every bit like investing in Brit volt for our batteries, rather relying on batteries imported from China is a clear threat to UK security.
It’s also about protecting not privilege, not heritage. It’s missing the point that growing populations need food, not simply for survival but happiness, and there’s route to health and happiness through the APR.
Best of luck with that.
And best of luck to you, framing it merely as taking away tax relief on rich and privileged folk, being a damaging attack on UK entrepreneurship, so missing everything the APR is really there for, as protection.
APR is protection for UK farming, where all sorts of people want to do farming these days, as a happy way of life, it’s not about money, or chasing money, because happiness isn’t about money. Where families have done it for a hundred years, they want to keep doing it for reasons other than entrepreneurship, making money, chasing more money, all the lovely money coming in, because quite simply all that lovely money isn’t coming in! profits are not there, not in producers anyway, maybe in those selling it to public, or those in middle taking it from producer and giving it to those who sell to consumer just as the sellers want it - an it that is thankfully now being looked at very suspiciously.
Yet, without making money, or a desire to grow and take over the world, the desire is definitely there to keep going. Heck - that desire is so strong and so relatable you could sell six series of much watched and most therapeutic TV show in the world based on it. With people rooting for the good guys, the farmers, to win.
No. APR was never tax relief, a mere pawn, taken en passant in entrepreneurialism vs socialism game of thrones as you claim. I think you can’t see it. You clearly don’t understand, that when newspapers and MPs think they are helping, by saying don’t take this money away, a lot of people around the country, feeling very hard up themselves and looking around at the underfunded state of things, are easily replying “why the hell not?”
Because it’s not tax relief. It’s keeping an industry alive. And the industry is important because…
The Guardian melt down over Trump, with other fellow lefties, is predictable but rather than berating Trump shouldn't their question be why and why they were so out of touch with public opinion
Were they “so out if touch” ?
Is it a “meltdown” ?
I think you’re resorting to hyperbole about a publication I suspect you don’t regularly read.
I read the Guardian daily
I'm so sorry.
It’s immensely good fun.
I remember being about 12, when I asked my father about an opinion piece, there.
In it the writer lambasted the ghastly oiks with East End accents and too much money overrunning his beloved public school. Upstarts empowered by Thatcher etc.
I asked “Shouldn’t he be happy that poor people are getting rich?”
Why would leftwing snobs want poor people to become rich? They might even, horror of horrors, start voting Conservative
Rich people have stopped voting Tory... the Lib Dems on the other hand....
Which says all you need to know about the lib dems, just like when people like you claimed the rich always voted tory
It's been pointed out that Kemi has to resolve a pincer movement. Down south the Tories now have to compete against a resurgent Lib Dem party who are targeting Tory seats with centralist policies
Elsewhere the tories need to fight Farage / Reform who are attacking from the Right.
If the Tories focus on addressing Reform they lose votes to the Lib Dems, swing towards the centre and they lose voters to Reform... And I don't think the Tories can successfully fight both battles at the same time in a way that doesn't scare a lot of the other potential voters away.
Already the Tories are up to 29% on the latest poll, the LDs down to 11% and Labour down to 27% as Reform squeeze their 2024 vote without taking any 2024 Tory voters https://x.com/LukeTryl/status/1856249257214239046
Curious, why do you keep posting polls, do you think they matter five years out?
Yes because of course Labour supporters on here would never post a poll showing Labour ahead when we Tories were in government?
Video showing David Coote appearing to be snorting a white powder released
The video that was already out clearly was after a kind of white line that was not on a pitch anyway.
I couldn't care less what Coote does in his time off recreationally.
I care that he is a dodgy referee who has held a grudge against a club he referees on regularly ... and has had dodgy calls in that light such as not thinking that taking out Van Dijk that ended his season in a horrific challenge is even a booking.
He has brought the game into disrepute with his on and off the pitch football related behaviour, no need to bring drugs into the conversation.
Apparently Sky and the FA do
The FA should care that he has brought the game into disrepute.
That report and both the FA and UEFA statements say he is suspended (rightly) because of his inappropriate comments video and not because of the drugs video by which time he was already suspended.
He has blown his career up in spectacular fashion, if the Darwin Awards did P45s he should be eligible for one for the original video not for drugs. Especially since he not only brought the game into disrepute, he not only showed shockingly poor judgement, but he also did so while making derogatory remarks referencing Klopp's nationality.
Surely his shockingly poor judgement is related to his apparant drug habit.
Are you suggesting he was on drugs when he allowed Van Dijk to have his season ended without a booking being issued?
Breaking: President-elect Donald Trump has named former Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard as his pick for Director of National Intelligence.
Crikey. They might as well make Julian Assange director of the CIA.
No more secrets from the Russians then.
Don't give them ideas.
(Actually, the interesting thing here isn't so much that Trump is surrounding himself with all of America's Worst People, but it's all so blatant and balls-out-on-the-table shameless.)
Even the Supreme Court can't wreck the Constitution to overrule term limits.
Why not?
If they can rule that the law doesn't apply to the President, why would the Constitution?
Vance could be President for 12 years if Trump keels over day 1.
10 years is the maximum.
Is it not 8 years? Trump keels over on day one. Vance is president, not elected, for 4 years less a day. Under amendment 22 he can then be elected another once only, making 8 years less a day. and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of President more than once.
Even the Supreme Court can't wreck the Constitution to overrule term limits.
Why not?
If they can rule that the law doesn't apply to the President, why would the Constitution?
Polls show the public wouldn’t support a change allowing more than two terms for President . The constitution wasn’t clear on immunity but is crystal clear on term limits . I have many concerns about the next 4 years but this isn’t one of them .
It’s only clear that someone can’t be elected more than twice. It’s silent on other methods of becoming President.
The Guardian melt down over Trump, with other fellow lefties, is predictable but rather than berating Trump shouldn't their question be why and why they were so out of touch with public opinion
Were they “so out if touch” ?
Is it a “meltdown” ?
I think you’re resorting to hyperbole about a publication I suspect you don’t regularly read.
I read the Guardian daily
I'm so sorry.
It’s immensely good fun.
I remember being about 12, when I asked my father about an opinion piece, there.
In it the writer lambasted the ghastly oiks with East End accents and too much money overrunning his beloved public school. Upstarts empowered by Thatcher etc.
I asked “Shouldn’t he be happy that poor people are getting rich?”
Why would leftwing snobs want poor people to become rich? They might even, horror of horrors, start voting Conservative
Rich people have stopped voting Tory... the Lib Dems on the other hand....
Which says all you need to know about the lib dems, just like when people like you claimed the rich always voted tory
It's been pointed out that Kemi has to resolve a pincer movement. Down south the Tories now have to compete against a resurgent Lib Dem party who are targeting Tory seats with centralist policies
Elsewhere the tories need to fight Farage / Reform who are attacking from the Right.
If the Tories focus on addressing Reform they lose votes to the Lib Dems, swing towards the centre and they lose voters to Reform... And I don't think the Tories can successfully fight both battles at the same time in a way that doesn't scare a lot of the other potential voters away.
Already the Tories are up to 29% on the latest poll, the LDs down to 11% and Labour down to 27% as Reform squeeze their 2024 vote to reach 19% without taking any 2024 Tory voters https://x.com/LukeTryl/status/1856249257214239046
I would be cautious in quoting one poll - far better to see the trend over the next few months especially as Trump has turned everything on its head and predicting politics is very uncertain
(Actually, the interesting thing here isn't so much that Trump is surrounding himself with all of America's Worst People, but it's all so blatant and balls-out-on-the-table shameless.)
Did you miss his ENTIRE first term, and recent campaign?
Streeting orders review of costs to NHS of the assisted dying bill
(Streeting opposes the bill)
Utterly insane!
Is he also reviewing what are the costs of keeping people alive against their clearly expressed wishes FFS!?
It is reported he is asking where he has to cut in the NHS budget to pay the cost
He is anti the bill, and his intervention has caused concerns with supporters of the bill who detect a change in mps opinions not only on this, but Starmer's refusal today to provide more time for discussion across the house which is very divided
His intervention is mad. How about cutting the treatments that would have been given to people but now won't, as they're dead?
Of all the reasons to oppose the bill that has to be the weakest.
He is the health secretary and mps will listen to him, but he clearly opposes the bill and is in the opposite corner to yourself
Even the Supreme Court can't wreck the Constitution to overrule term limits.
Why not?
If they can rule that the law doesn't apply to the President, why would the Constitution?
Vance could be President for 12 years if Trump keels over day 1.
10 years is the maximum.
Is it not 8 years? Trump keels over on day one. Vance is president, not elected, for 4 years less a day. Under amendment 22 he can then be elected another once only, making 8 years less a day. and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of President more than once.
Trump keels just after midday on the second anniversary of becoming POTUS.
Vance becomes POTUS serving 2 years (less a few minutes) of Trump's term and is eligible to be elected twice as well.
The Guardian melt down over Trump, with other fellow lefties, is predictable but rather than berating Trump shouldn't their question be why and why they were so out of touch with public opinion
Were they “so out if touch” ?
Is it a “meltdown” ?
I think you’re resorting to hyperbole about a publication I suspect you don’t regularly read.
I read the Guardian daily
I'm so sorry.
It’s immensely good fun.
I remember being about 12, when I asked my father about an opinion piece, there.
In it the writer lambasted the ghastly oiks with East End accents and too much money overrunning his beloved public school. Upstarts empowered by Thatcher etc.
I asked “Shouldn’t he be happy that poor people are getting rich?”
Why would leftwing snobs want poor people to become rich? They might even, horror of horrors, start voting Conservative
Rich people have stopped voting Tory... the Lib Dems on the other hand....
Which says all you need to know about the lib dems, just like when people like you claimed the rich always voted tory
It's been pointed out that Kemi has to resolve a pincer movement. Down south the Tories now have to compete against a resurgent Lib Dem party who are targeting Tory seats with centralist policies
Elsewhere the tories need to fight Farage / Reform who are attacking from the Right.
If the Tories focus on addressing Reform they lose votes to the Lib Dems, swing towards the centre and they lose voters to Reform... And I don't think the Tories can successfully fight both battles at the same time in a way that doesn't scare a lot of the other potential voters away.
Already the Tories are up to 29% on the latest poll, the LDs down to 11% and Labour down to 27% as Reform squeeze their 2024 vote without taking any 2024 Tory voters https://x.com/LukeTryl/status/1856249257214239046
Curious, why do you keep posting polls, do you think they matter five years out?
Gaetz is still under an ethics investigation in the House and was subject to a DOJ investigation into allegations of an inappropriate relationship with a minor and a possible violation of sex trafficking laws.
Even the Supreme Court can't wreck the Constitution to overrule term limits.
Why not?
If they can rule that the law doesn't apply to the President, why would the Constitution?
Vance could be President for 12 years if Trump keels over day 1.
10 years is the maximum.
Is it not 8 years? Trump keels over on day one. Vance is president, not elected, for 4 years less a day. Under amendment 22 he can then be elected another once only, making 8 years less a day. and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of President more than once.
10 years would be possible if Trump keeled over on 2 years plus 1 day.
Streeting orders review of costs to NHS of the assisted dying bill
(Streeting opposes the bill)
Utterly insane!
Is he also reviewing what are the costs of keeping people alive against their clearly expressed wishes FFS!?
It is reported he is asking where he has to cut in the NHS budget to pay the cost
He is anti the bill, and his intervention has caused concerns with supporters of the bill who detect a change in mps opinions not only on this, but Starmer's refusal today to provide more time for discussion across the house which is very divided
His intervention is mad. How about cutting the treatments that would have been given to people but now won't, as they're dead?
Of all the reasons to oppose the bill that has to be the weakest.
He is the health secretary and mps will listen to him, but he clearly opposes the bill and is in the opposite corner to yourself
If he thinks that keeping people alive against their wishes has absolutely no cost to the NHS he has no business being Health Secretary.
There are reasons to oppose the bill but this one is completely nuts.
@foxy is right that this is not a debate that should be had. My side should not be arguing (and are not arguing) that we should legalise assisted dying because it will save the NHS money. He should not argue the inverse.
Even the Supreme Court can't wreck the Constitution to overrule term limits.
Why not?
If they can rule that the law doesn't apply to the President, why would the Constitution?
Polls show the public wouldn’t support a change allowing more than two terms for President . The constitution wasn’t clear on immunity but is crystal clear on term limits . I have many concerns about the next 4 years but this isn’t one of them .
It’s only clear that someone can’t be elected more than twice. It’s silent on other methods of becoming President.
The 22nd doesn’t say he’s ineligible to be president. Only that he’s ineligible to be elected president.
So Trump could run as neither President nor VP in 2028 and he is President until then anyway
I am fairly sure that the big issue will be arranging the succession and that the rigmarole of setting Trump up for a third term won't arise. There isn't any doubt that the big idea is the permanent subversion (as we boring old fashioned liberals would see it) of a great nation's great constitutional democratic life. This is not done by the old dictator hanging on, but by careful succession planning. We can only hope it goes dramatically awry. Some of the characters in the heart of it may also have at least largish egos and be cpable of acting in their own self interest.
Some absolutely mad picks by Trump. His first Presidency was a joke, but at least the cabinet was full of competent people, now he's picking a team of loyalists that are every bit as clownish and compromised as he is.
From that report, it looks like Homebase was bought and stuffed up by the new owners, possibly more than once.
Wesfarmers had bought Homebase in 2016 and immediately sacked Homebase's senior management team.
It admitted making a number of "self-induced" blunders, such as underestimating winter demand for a range of items from heaters to cleaning and storage, and dropping popular kitchen and bathroom ranges.
Capitalism is too important to be left to capitalists.
If a company is badly managed it goes bust.
So frigging what?
Goodbye to Homebase, hello to better managed firms who can better serve their customers and not take bad decisions that bankrupt the firm.
Is Wickes still around? 15 years or so ago I worked for a firm which supplied them, Homebase, Focus/Do-it-all (didn't they all get rolled into Homebase?) and B&Q amoungst others.
B&Q were scum to deal with, utterly ruthless. Also ripped off their customers - some products we packaged for them were half the price packaged differently in Wickes.
Wickes were best - good to deal with as a supplier. Homebase we fairly incompetent, and not very competitively priced, I'm amazed they lasted as long as they did.
Some absolutely mad picks by Trump. His first Presidency was a joke, but at least the cabinet was full of competent people, now he's picking a team of loyalists that are every bit as clownish and compromised as he is.
The problem is how you "pay tax" from a fixed asset such as land without selling it. The NFU are pointing out that smaller farms will have no option than to sell up.
She's says inheritance up to £1m is protected and the farmer immediately shakes his head.
So I am left thing that he, like most of them, seem to have no idea about the actual detail.
Edit: Also - he doesn't look too old. Start giving parcels of the land to your sons now and live 7 years.
Agricultural Property Relief on IHT only went to 100% in 1992, and only came in in 1975, so the 100% relief rate is something that has only existed for just over 3 decades. If the family has had the land 375 years then the farm must have paid Estate duties at many points in its history, at varying rates.
In any case, why should farms be treated differently to any other capital intensive business when it comes to IHT?
If the land is sold to pay IHT then it will still be farmed, just by different people. Indeed it might give tenant farmers the start they need to buy the land off the Lord of the Manor.
No it will be farmed by mega corporations with little interest in the land or food production to meet national needs.
The chances of a student fresh out of agricultural college being able to buy a farm and its land worth more than £1 million are less than zero. Tenant farmers won't have over a million pounds in capital either
Spot on HY. It’s not mere tax relief as Fox claims, it’s protecting vital UK industry.
Besides farming for £1M is bit of a joke figure. XX acre farm with house, farm buildings, infrastructure will be many millions in every instance of farming going on, no one is free of the tax raid ministers trotting out the tax raid trying to spin.
From that report, it looks like Homebase was bought and stuffed up by the new owners, possibly more than once.
Wesfarmers had bought Homebase in 2016 and immediately sacked Homebase's senior management team.
It admitted making a number of "self-induced" blunders, such as underestimating winter demand for a range of items from heaters to cleaning and storage, and dropping popular kitchen and bathroom ranges.
Capitalism is too important to be left to capitalists.
If a company is badly managed it goes bust.
So frigging what?
Goodbye to Homebase, hello to better managed firms who can better serve their customers and not take bad decisions that bankrupt the firm.
Is Wickes still around? 15 years or so ago I worked for a firm which supplied them, Homebase, Focus/Do-it-all (didn't they all get rolled into Homebase?) and B&Q amoungst others.
B&Q were scum to deal with, utterly ruthless. Also ripped off their customers - some products we packaged for them were half the price packaged differently in Wickes.
Wickes were best - good to deal with as a supplier. Homebase we fairly incompetent, and not very competitively priced, I'm amazed they lasted as long as they did.
Wickes is very much still around, got a new kitchen from them last year.
Bloody nightmare to get it installed, as they kept sending the wrong bits, but it's very nice now it's in.
From that report, it looks like Homebase was bought and stuffed up by the new owners, possibly more than once.
Wesfarmers had bought Homebase in 2016 and immediately sacked Homebase's senior management team.
It admitted making a number of "self-induced" blunders, such as underestimating winter demand for a range of items from heaters to cleaning and storage, and dropping popular kitchen and bathroom ranges.
Capitalism is too important to be left to capitalists.
If a company is badly managed it goes bust.
So frigging what?
Goodbye to Homebase, hello to better managed firms who can better serve their customers and not take bad decisions that bankrupt the firm.
Is Wickes still around? 15 years or so ago I worked for a firm which supplied them, Homebase, Focus/Do-it-all (didn't they all get rolled into Homebase?) and B&Q amoungst others.
B&Q were scum to deal with, utterly ruthless. Also ripped off their customers - some products we packaged for them were half the price packaged differently in Wickes.
Wickes were best - good to deal with as a supplier. Homebase we fairly incompetent, and not very competitively priced, I'm amazed they lasted as long as they did.
There's still a Wickes in Ilford South, just down the road from the site of Homebase (ie. near Goodmayes Elizabeth Line).
Early reaction from GOP members on Trump selecting Matt Gaetz for AG.
Rep. Don Bacon: “I’ve got no good comment.”
I have the advantage of having no idea who any of Trump's appointees are, but it is clear that they are triggerering some and it looks as if your issues with Brexit have been doubled up now with Trump
Trump has no care for the law, or who he upsets, and there can be no predictability of how this pans out but certainly it looks as if you are going to be facing 4 years at least of this
The problem is how you "pay tax" from a fixed asset such as land without selling it. The NFU are pointing out that smaller farms will have no option than to sell up.
She's says inheritance up to £1m is protected and the farmer immediately shakes his head.
So I am left thing that he, like most of them, seem to have no idea about the actual detail.
Edit: Also - he doesn't look too old. Start giving parcels of the land to your sons now and live 7 years.
He's shaking his head at what he is hearing. That he has been lied to.
No. Not shaking head at lies, just knowing that she and her government believe they are crusaders going after tax relief, like modern day Robin Hood - without a clue what is tax relief and what isn’t.
My dad’s been talking to lots of people, my brothers also full of advice how we get round inheritance changes - like I become the owner of lots more family property stuff. He says if there wasn’t APR before we have to do it like he wanted to anyway, and without it we now do it his way, but that’s not my economic point, the big point is the government are stupid and haven’t thought it through that they getting lots of flack over this, worrying and hurting people, but not even getting the billions of money they told themselves and everyone in public now thinks they are getting! They see themselves ans robbing rich to give poor, but its fantasy. And that is definition of government done crap. Insurance and accountants are the winners making money, so their supporting the demo’s against it, in for other peoples interests not their own, is good.
And Normally I don’t like misleading headlines in papers, but I’m loving the ones saying Labour government will be milking farms for billions IHT, as voters will be left thinking farming community have paid their share “all in it together”. When banner says toot for farmers, people will toot their horns. British are about fair play. But let’s be clear on messaging, those tooting horns need to know it’s not merely an entrepreneurial v socialism fight, as too many on right argue it, the voters need to know APR and BPR are important about national food security too, and British Heritage and way of life is worth protecting with APR and BPR too - though I expect PB Pirates like Barty and Lucky laughing at me as I argue that, as they are unpatriotic dipsticks interested solely in consumerism
It's entirely about entrepreneurialism vs socialism.
Changes in voluntary taxation cause changes in behaviour shocker.
If you get to choose when and how you pay it, and how you structure it, don't be surprised when people structure it so they pay less.
If I'm still in the UK next year I will be paying at most half of what I would have paid pre the capital gains bump, for example.*
Meanwhile the socialists just eagerly look on at us like cash cows and assume we "have to" pay up on what we were planning to pay before, but at a much higher percentage rate.
Shame it doesn't work in real life.
*My financial advisor has suggested that Reeves' budget is a shitshow and an exit tax is incoming to shore up lost revenues, so the smart thing to do would be to leave before it happens.
Wrong. AVP wasn’t simply about entrepreneurship was it? - that’s not the argument to keep it, that stupid Daily Telegraph Daily Mail mindset too easily plays into Labours hands, can’t you see?
Besides, your argument also expect us to believe this Labour government are ardent socialists out to crush every bit of entrepreneurialism in UK and only Truss and LuckyGuy can save us from it? You should edit the Telegraph. Maybe you do.
No. This is a government believing it’s doing long overdue crack down on unnecessary tax reliefs in unbalanced and bankrupt country, but without clue how myopic its actions are and damage they are causing where things are not unnecessary tax reliefs.
It’s about government sums not adding up on this just like that with all reeves recent money grabbing schemes - not only the opposite of what was promised for votes they clearly said wouldn’t touch APR - they won’t even bring in anything like the money headlines claimed - like ending nomdom status costs the UK money not gains any etc. ends up the biggest problem with the budget as budget that’s not balanced, the budget gamble was on growth, but UK and world economy ain’t getting any interesting economic growth for six or seven years at least, says every forecast, maybe there’s too much covid debt around holding everything back, like economic long Covid media economic editors will dub it in a few years time I predict, and likely with volatility in energy there’s more inflation wobbles too to cost everyone in power lots of votes as voters get even poorer than 2019 in 2029. People didn’t put Labour in, they decided to put Cons out (humane out of misery wrung neck sort of thing) What goes round comes around.
This is about food security every bit like investing in Brit volt for our batteries, rather relying on batteries imported from China is a clear threat to UK security.
It’s also about protecting not privilege, not heritage. It’s missing the point that growing populations need food, not simply for survival but happiness, and there’s route to health and happiness through the APR.
Best of luck with that.
And best of luck to you, framing it merely as taking away tax relief on rich and privileged folk, being a damaging attack on UK entrepreneurship, so missing everything the APR is really there for, as protection.
APR is protection for UK farming, where all sorts of people want to do farming these days, as a happy way of life, it’s not about money, or chasing money, because happiness isn’t about money. Where families have done it for a hundred years, they want to keep doing it for reasons other than entrepreneurship, making money, chasing more money, all the lovely money coming in, because quite simply all that lovely money isn’t coming in! profits are not there, not in producers anyway, maybe in those selling it to public, or those in middle taking it from producer and giving it to those who sell to consumer just as the sellers want it - an it that is thankfully now being looked at very suspiciously.
Yet, without making money, or a desire to grow and take over the world, the desire is definitely there to keep going. Heck - that desire is so strong and so relatable you could sell six series of much watched and most therapeutic TV show in the world based on it. With people rooting for the good guys, the farmers, to win.
No. APR was never tax relief, a mere pawn, taken en passant in entrepreneurialism vs socialism game of thrones as you claim. I think you can’t see it. You clearly don’t understand, that when newspapers and MPs think they are helping, by saying don’t take this money away, a lot of people around the country, feeling very hard up themselves and looking around at the underfunded state of things, are easily replying “why the hell not?”
Because it’s not tax relief. It’s keeping an industry alive. And the industry is important because…
Oh, I get you. Don't entirely disagree, either.
My point was simply that these things bring with them all manner of unintended consequences.
The biggest tax swizz - I mean relief - we have at the moment is the personal allowance on primary residences, which allows some to chalk up seven figure gains at 0% while others are expected to put their hand in their pocket, which leads to all manner of other little misallocations - like Dyson buying up vast tracts of farmland to name an egregious example. Why not flat rate CGT and IHT at 10% across the board, for example? End the misallocation.
I'm not sure I agree with your point that agricultural relief is about food security. The land will be there irrespective of who owns it, and Stalinist upheavals and five year plans aside, food will continue to be produced irrespective of who owns it.
Which is why I do think it's a simple argument about socialism vs capitalism, as it is redistributing land from those who own it to new owners while taking a decent rake for the exchequer, and bugger the consequences.
But Reeves has this mad idea that people won't change their behaviour or restructure, which is what I would be looking to do if I owned farmland right now.
Early reaction from GOP members on Trump selecting Matt Gaetz for AG.
Rep. Don Bacon: “I’ve got no good comment.”
I have the advantage of having no idea who any of Trump's appointees are, but it is clear that they are triggerering some and it looks as if your issues with Brexit have been doubled up now with Trump
Trump has no care for the law, or who he upsets, and there can be no predictability of how this pans out but certainly it looks as if you are going to be facing 4 years at least of this
I’m sensing a sort of schadenfreude from you about Trump in the last few days. I assume you’re not going on the complete journey some on here have taken, but still it does seem a little out of character.
- I can’t believe it, but I did end up voting for Donald Trump. I made that decision when I saw JD Vance’s interview with The New York Times. He is the future of the Republican Party. I’m more voting for Vance than I am for Trump.
- I shocked myself and voted for Trump. No one tell my family. I was so impressed by JD Vance, the way he carried himself and how normal he appeared. I think I became radicalized on the men and women’s sports issue. The ad that said, “Kamala represents they/them. Trump represents you,” that was so compelling. While Trump is deranged, he represented normalcy somehow to me.
They are gonna just love Trump's "normalcy".
Let's see how they are feeling in four years time.
I do not know whether the voters will like it in four years time, but I don't think there is any doubt at all that those who voted Trump knew precisely what they were voting for. It could not have been made clearer. They voted for isolationism, protectionism, strong man theory of government, rejection of climate science in its entirety and border control. They voted for someone who places a question mark over the values of democracy as we have known it. The 52% knew exactly what they were doing.
Not the first time 52% have voted to massively damage their own country, tbf.
Early reaction from GOP members on Trump selecting Matt Gaetz for AG.
Rep. Don Bacon: “I’ve got no good comment.”
I have the advantage of having no idea who any of Trump's appointees are, but it is clear that they are triggerering some and it looks as if your issues with Brexit have been doubled up now with Trump
Trump has no care for the law, or who he upsets, and there can be no predictability of how this pans out but certainly it looks as if you are going to be facing 4 years at least of this
I’m sensing a sort of schadenfreude from you about Trump in the last few days. I assume you’re not going on the complete journey some on here have taken, but still it does seem a little out of character.
Not really
Just adjusting to the reality of Trump's win and what comes next if that is even predictable
Streeting orders review of costs to NHS of the assisted dying bill
(Streeting opposes the bill)
Utterly insane!
Is he also reviewing what are the costs of keeping people alive against their clearly expressed wishes FFS!?
It is reported he is asking where he has to cut in the NHS budget to pay the cost
He is anti the bill, and his intervention has caused concerns with supporters of the bill who detect a change in mps opinions not only on this, but Starmer's refusal today to provide more time for discussion across the house which is very divided
His intervention is mad. How about cutting the treatments that would have been given to people but now won't, as they're dead?
Of all the reasons to oppose the bill that has to be the weakest.
No it is not mad at all.
The Bill seeks to impose a legal duty on the NHS. That will have resourcing and cost implications and any responsible Secretary of State should assess that and make MPs aware of it.
Why are the Bill's supporters so afraid of scrutiny?
From that report, it looks like Homebase was bought and stuffed up by the new owners, possibly more than once.
Wesfarmers had bought Homebase in 2016 and immediately sacked Homebase's senior management team.
It admitted making a number of "self-induced" blunders, such as underestimating winter demand for a range of items from heaters to cleaning and storage, and dropping popular kitchen and bathroom ranges.
Capitalism is too important to be left to capitalists.
If a company is badly managed it goes bust.
So frigging what?
Goodbye to Homebase, hello to better managed firms who can better serve their customers and not take bad decisions that bankrupt the firm.
Is Wickes still around? 15 years or so ago I worked for a firm which supplied them, Homebase, Focus/Do-it-all (didn't they all get rolled into Homebase?) and B&Q amoungst others.
B&Q were scum to deal with, utterly ruthless. Also ripped off their customers - some products we packaged for them were half the price packaged differently in Wickes.
Wickes were best - good to deal with as a supplier. Homebase we fairly incompetent, and not very competitively priced, I'm amazed they lasted as long as they did.
Wickes is very much still around, got a new kitchen from them last year.
Bloody nightmare to get it installed, as they kept sending the wrong bits, but it's very nice now it's in.
I have a trade account at B&Q which just about makes them competitive with Wickes, although I prefer the latter.
Its the small stuff that is horrendously overpriced - buying a box of X from Amazon wins every time.
Our Homebase closed years ago. If I ever found myself in there I always wondered how they were still going, as it was usually like the Marie Celeste.
It says something for the surreal timeline we’re living that the reaction to Trump appointing an actual Putin supporter (not an equivocator, or an isolationist or appeaser, but a full fat Putinist - oh and Assad apologist to boot) to the top national intelligence role in our most powerful geopolitical ally is greeted in some quarters by “ooh, liberal tears, cry harder”.
Of all the reasons to attack Gaetz, his sartorial sense is surely way down the pecking order?
Personally I dislike white shirts and never wear them unless I have to (which is almost never).
I'd much rather wear a blue, or pink, or other coloured shirt with my suit than a white one.
Trump's proposed cabinet picks are so far even more unhinged than I had feared.
Which is saying something.
There's nothing for Alex Jones so far...
Federal Communications Commission or Food and Drug Administration.
(Hey, maybe there is some 5D chess going on here. If Federal agencies are all run by America's Worst People, everyone will be happy when Elon and Vivek close them down. And on the sixth day, they will close themselves down.)
Isn't his problem that he'd be running against Obama?
His problem is he'd be running against the US constitution.
He definitely can't repeal that clause and everyone swears an oath to uphold it.
So the US Secret Service would simply remove him and SCOTUS would have to rule him ineligible, even if it's stuffed with conservatives.
How do you enforce against him if he does it, given that SCOTUS have ruled that he cannot be prosecuted for acts carried out in his official role, and that criminal acts carried out in that context are protected by Presidential immunity?
How do you enforce against the Sun if it rises in the west?
The problem is how you "pay tax" from a fixed asset such as land without selling it. The NFU are pointing out that smaller farms will have no option than to sell up.
She's says inheritance up to £1m is protected and the farmer immediately shakes his head.
So I am left thing that he, like most of them, seem to have no idea about the actual detail.
Edit: Also - he doesn't look too old. Start giving parcels of the land to your sons now and live 7 years.
Agricultural Property Relief on IHT only went to 100% in 1992, and only came in in 1975, so the 100% relief rate is something that has only existed for just over 3 decades. If the family has had the land 375 years then the farm must have paid Estate duties at many points in its history, at varying rates.
In any case, why should farms be treated differently to any other capital intensive business when it comes to IHT?
If the land is sold to pay IHT then it will still be farmed, just by different people. Indeed it might give tenant farmers the start they need to buy the land off the Lord of the Manor.
No it will be farmed by mega corporations with little interest in the land or food production to meet national needs.
The chances of a student fresh out of agricultural college being able to buy a farm and its land worth more than £1 million are less than zero. Tenant farmers won't have over a million pounds in capital either
Spot on HY. It’s not mere tax relief as Fox claims, it’s protecting vital UK industry.
Besides farming for £1M is bit of a joke figure. XX acre farm with house, farm buildings, infrastructure will be many millions in every instance of farming going on, no one is free of the tax raid ministers trotting out the tax raid trying to spin.
The idea that farms that aren't passed on tax-free within families are somehow going to no longer produce food is hilarious.
It reminds me of the that way buy-to-let homes that are no longer profitable for BTL owners are going to magically disappear from the housing stock.
From that report, it looks like Homebase was bought and stuffed up by the new owners, possibly more than once.
Wesfarmers had bought Homebase in 2016 and immediately sacked Homebase's senior management team.
It admitted making a number of "self-induced" blunders, such as underestimating winter demand for a range of items from heaters to cleaning and storage, and dropping popular kitchen and bathroom ranges.
Capitalism is too important to be left to capitalists.
If a company is badly managed it goes bust.
So frigging what?
Goodbye to Homebase, hello to better managed firms who can better serve their customers and not take bad decisions that bankrupt the firm.
Is Wickes still around? 15 years or so ago I worked for a firm which supplied them, Homebase, Focus/Do-it-all (didn't they all get rolled into Homebase?) and B&Q amoungst others.
B&Q were scum to deal with, utterly ruthless. Also ripped off their customers - some products we packaged for them were half the price packaged differently in Wickes.
Wickes were best - good to deal with as a supplier. Homebase we fairly incompetent, and not very competitively priced, I'm amazed they lasted as long as they did.
Wickes is very much still around, got a new kitchen from them last year.
Bloody nightmare to get it installed, as they kept sending the wrong bits, but it's very nice now it's in.
I have a trade account at B&Q which just about makes them competitive with Wickes, although I prefer the latter.
Its the small stuff that is horrendously overpriced - buying a box of X from Amazon wins every time.
Our Homebase closed years ago. If I ever found myself in there I always wondered how they were still going, as it was usually like the Marie Celeste.
Screwfix is excellent and are part of the same group but seem to have much better stock choices and prices
The problem is how you "pay tax" from a fixed asset such as land without selling it. The NFU are pointing out that smaller farms will have no option than to sell up.
She's says inheritance up to £1m is protected and the farmer immediately shakes his head.
So I am left thing that he, like most of them, seem to have no idea about the actual detail.
Edit: Also - he doesn't look too old. Start giving parcels of the land to your sons now and live 7 years.
Agricultural Property Relief on IHT only went to 100% in 1992, and only came in in 1975, so the 100% relief rate is something that has only existed for just over 3 decades. If the family has had the land 375 years then the farm must have paid Estate duties at many points in its history, at varying rates.
In any case, why should farms be treated differently to any other capital intensive business when it comes to IHT?
If the land is sold to pay IHT then it will still be farmed, just by different people. Indeed it might give tenant farmers the start they need to buy the land off the Lord of the Manor.
No it will be farmed by mega corporations with little interest in the land or food production to meet national needs.
The chances of a student fresh out of agricultural college being able to buy a farm and its land worth more than £1 million are less than zero. Tenant farmers won't have over a million pounds in capital either
Spot on HY. It’s not mere tax relief as Fox claims, it’s protecting vital UK industry.
Besides farming for £1M is bit of a joke figure. XX acre farm with house, farm buildings, infrastructure will be many millions in every instance of farming going on, no one is free of the tax raid ministers trotting out the tax raid trying to spin.
The idea that farms that aren't passed on tax-free within families are somehow going to no longer produce food is hilarious.
It reminds me of the that way buy-to-let homes that are no longer profitable for BTL owners are going to magically disappear from the housing stock.
Not necessarily. Depends on who they're sold to and what happens then.
Streeting orders review of costs to NHS of the assisted dying bill
(Streeting opposes the bill)
Utterly insane!
Is he also reviewing what are the costs of keeping people alive against their clearly expressed wishes FFS!?
It is reported he is asking where he has to cut in the NHS budget to pay the cost
He is anti the bill, and his intervention has caused concerns with supporters of the bill who detect a change in mps opinions not only on this, but Starmer's refusal today to provide more time for discussion across the house which is very divided
His intervention is mad. How about cutting the treatments that would have been given to people but now won't, as they're dead?
Of all the reasons to oppose the bill that has to be the weakest.
No it is not mad at all.
The Bill seeks to impose a legal duty on the NHS. That will have resourcing and cost implications and any responsible Secretary of State should assess that and make MPs aware of it.
Why are the Bill's supporters so afraid of scrutiny?
I'm not afraid of scrutiny - but if a resourcing implication is done then it should be a completely balanced implication covering cost savings and not just costs, swings and roundabouts.
Except then opponents of the bill would decry a report saying it should be legalised as it would save the NHS money. For good reason.
But to pretend there is only one side to the cost debate is not scrutiny, its dishonesty.
Breaking: President-elect Donald Trump has named former Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard as his pick for Director of National Intelligence.
Crikey. They might as well make Julian Assange director of the CIA.
No more secrets from the Russians then.
Don't give them ideas.
(Actually, the interesting thing here isn't so much that Trump is surrounding himself with all of America's Worst People, but it's all so blatant and balls-out-on-the-table shameless.)
No-one can say that they didn't know what they were voting for. It was all signaled in plain words of one syllable hour after hour. There is no doubt at all that the people of the USA have chosen this with their eyes open. In that sense so far the election and aftermath has been unusually honest.
The problem is how you "pay tax" from a fixed asset such as land without selling it. The NFU are pointing out that smaller farms will have no option than to sell up.
She's says inheritance up to £1m is protected and the farmer immediately shakes his head.
So I am left thing that he, like most of them, seem to have no idea about the actual detail.
Edit: Also - he doesn't look too old. Start giving parcels of the land to your sons now and live 7 years.
Agricultural Property Relief on IHT only went to 100% in 1992, and only came in in 1975, so the 100% relief rate is something that has only existed for just over 3 decades. If the family has had the land 375 years then the farm must have paid Estate duties at many points in its history, at varying rates.
In any case, why should farms be treated differently to any other capital intensive business when it comes to IHT?
If the land is sold to pay IHT then it will still be farmed, just by different people. Indeed it might give tenant farmers the start they need to buy the land off the Lord of the Manor.
No it will be farmed by mega corporations with little interest in the land or food production to meet national needs.
The chances of a student fresh out of agricultural college being able to buy a farm and its land worth more than £1 million are less than zero. Tenant farmers won't have over a million pounds in capital either
Spot on HY. It’s not mere tax relief as Fox claims, it’s protecting vital UK industry.
Besides farming for £1M is bit of a joke figure. XX acre farm with house, farm buildings, infrastructure will be many millions in every instance of farming going on, no one is free of the tax raid ministers trotting out the tax raid trying to spin.
The idea that farms that aren't passed on tax-free within families are somehow going to no longer produce food is hilarious.
It reminds me of the that way buy-to-let homes that are no longer profitable for BTL owners are going to magically disappear from the housing stock.
Not necessarily. Depends on who they're sold to and what happens then.
From that report, it looks like Homebase was bought and stuffed up by the new owners, possibly more than once.
Wesfarmers had bought Homebase in 2016 and immediately sacked Homebase's senior management team.
It admitted making a number of "self-induced" blunders, such as underestimating winter demand for a range of items from heaters to cleaning and storage, and dropping popular kitchen and bathroom ranges.
Capitalism is too important to be left to capitalists.
If a company is badly managed it goes bust.
So frigging what?
Goodbye to Homebase, hello to better managed firms who can better serve their customers and not take bad decisions that bankrupt the firm.
Is Wickes still around? 15 years or so ago I worked for a firm which supplied them, Homebase, Focus/Do-it-all (didn't they all get rolled into Homebase?) and B&Q amoungst others.
B&Q were scum to deal with, utterly ruthless. Also ripped off their customers - some products we packaged for them were half the price packaged differently in Wickes.
Wickes were best - good to deal with as a supplier. Homebase we fairly incompetent, and not very competitively priced, I'm amazed they lasted as long as they did.
Wickes is very much still around, got a new kitchen from them last year.
Bloody nightmare to get it installed, as they kept sending the wrong bits, but it's very nice now it's in.
I have a trade account at B&Q which just about makes them competitive with Wickes, although I prefer the latter.
Not wanting to cause trouble, but do you have the 10% trade discount at Wickes?
And the further 10% (ie 9%) you can get by using the correct reloadable prepaid card, if eligible?
From that report, it looks like Homebase was bought and stuffed up by the new owners, possibly more than once.
Wesfarmers had bought Homebase in 2016 and immediately sacked Homebase's senior management team.
It admitted making a number of "self-induced" blunders, such as underestimating winter demand for a range of items from heaters to cleaning and storage, and dropping popular kitchen and bathroom ranges.
Capitalism is too important to be left to capitalists.
If a company is badly managed it goes bust.
So frigging what?
Goodbye to Homebase, hello to better managed firms who can better serve their customers and not take bad decisions that bankrupt the firm.
Is Wickes still around? 15 years or so ago I worked for a firm which supplied them, Homebase, Focus/Do-it-all (didn't they all get rolled into Homebase?) and B&Q amoungst others.
B&Q were scum to deal with, utterly ruthless. Also ripped off their customers - some products we packaged for them were half the price packaged differently in Wickes.
Wickes were best - good to deal with as a supplier. Homebase we fairly incompetent, and not very competitively priced, I'm amazed they lasted as long as they did.
Wickes is very much still around, got a new kitchen from them last year.
Bloody nightmare to get it installed, as they kept sending the wrong bits, but it's very nice now it's in.
I have a trade account at B&Q which just about makes them competitive with Wickes, although I prefer the latter.
Its the small stuff that is horrendously overpriced - buying a box of X from Amazon wins every time.
Our Homebase closed years ago. If I ever found myself in there I always wondered how they were still going, as it was usually like the Marie Celeste.
Screwfix is excellent and are part of the same group but seem to have much better stock choices and prices
It depends on the item. They must have two pricing departments despite being the same group - that or a random number generator.
NEW: Donald Trump picks Matt Gaetz as Attorney General.
Satire .... please.
Satire has lost its edge... it's been outflanked by reality.
When setting up The Establishment club, Peter Cook said he based his plans on "those wonderful Berlin cabarets which did so much to stop the rise of Hitler and prevent the outbreak of the Second World War."
Isn't his problem that he'd be running against Obama?
His problem is he'd be running against the US constitution.
He definitely can't repeal that clause and everyone swears an oath to uphold it.
So the US Secret Service would simply remove him and SCOTUS would have to rule him ineligible, even if it's stuffed with conservatives.
How do you enforce against him if he does it, given that SCOTUS have ruled that he cannot be prosecuted for acts carried out in his official role, and that criminal acts carried out in that context are protected by Presidential immunity?
How do you enforce against the Sun if it rises in the west?
Indeed. I have no idea what will happen, but for the moment assessing what might happen in USA is more like thinking about the future of Russia or China than thinking about the future of a large boring liberal democracy with a stable government, rule of law, multi party elections, international obligations and proper separation of powers. This is why USA people are scared. Add to that that the international protocols about climate change will be scrapped as the USA renders them beyond realistic implementation and the EU doesn't have a defence policy and the rest of us can be troubled too.
Looking forward to seeing Trump supporters in here trying to sanewash Trumps cabinet picks .
Truly astonishing that the highest law officer in the land will be someone still under investigation themselves but when you have a convicted felon as President I suppose it’s not that much of a stretch !
Trump's victory leaves Brexit Britain "looking friendless in the post-western world. Squirming and cavilling around Britain’s biggest strategic blunder in a hundred years is not a sustainable path." @rafaelbehr on why Starmer needs to face reality
From that report, it looks like Homebase was bought and stuffed up by the new owners, possibly more than once.
Wesfarmers had bought Homebase in 2016 and immediately sacked Homebase's senior management team.
It admitted making a number of "self-induced" blunders, such as underestimating winter demand for a range of items from heaters to cleaning and storage, and dropping popular kitchen and bathroom ranges.
Capitalism is too important to be left to capitalists.
If a company is badly managed it goes bust.
So frigging what?
Goodbye to Homebase, hello to better managed firms who can better serve their customers and not take bad decisions that bankrupt the firm.
Is Wickes still around? 15 years or so ago I worked for a firm which supplied them, Homebase, Focus/Do-it-all (didn't they all get rolled into Homebase?) and B&Q amoungst others.
B&Q were scum to deal with, utterly ruthless. Also ripped off their customers - some products we packaged for them were half the price packaged differently in Wickes.
Wickes were best - good to deal with as a supplier. Homebase we fairly incompetent, and not very competitively priced, I'm amazed they lasted as long as they did.
Wickes is very much still around, got a new kitchen from them last year.
Bloody nightmare to get it installed, as they kept sending the wrong bits, but it's very nice now it's in.
I have a trade account at B&Q which just about makes them competitive with Wickes, although I prefer the latter.
Not wanting to cause trouble, but do you have the 10% trade discount at Wickes?
And the further 10% (ie 9%) you can get by using the correct reloadable prepaid card, if eligible?
I haven't, as they weren't giving them away like confetti like they were at B&Q.
To be fair I was buying stuff for a charitable exercise, so it was vaguely justifiable at the time.
Might give it a go if I find another project...sounds like it might be worthwhile.
It says something for the surreal timeline we’re living that the reaction to Trump appointing an actual Putin supporter (not an equivocator, or an isolationist or appeaser, but a full fat Putinist - oh and Assad apologist to boot) to the top national intelligence role in our most powerful geopolitical ally is greeted in some quarters by “ooh, liberal tears, cry harder”.
Is the Republican Senate really going to confirm Tulsi Gabbard?
Surely she's been nominated solely to shift the Overton window and make all the other appointments look less insane?
Looking forward to seeing Trump supporters in here trying to sanewash Trumps cabinet picks .
Truly astonishing that the highest law officer in the land will be someone still under investigation themselves but when you have a convicted felon as President I suppose it’s not that much of a stretch !
It doesn't look like either will be facing much of a stretch tbh.
It says something for the surreal timeline we’re living that the reaction to Trump appointing an actual Putin supporter (not an equivocator, or an isolationist or appeaser, but a full fat Putinist - oh and Assad apologist to boot) to the top national intelligence role in our most powerful geopolitical ally is greeted in some quarters by “ooh, liberal tears, cry harder”.
Is the Republican Senate really going to confirm Tulsi Gabbard?
Surely she's been nominated solely to shift the Overton window and make all the other appointments look less insane?
Trump's victory leaves Brexit Britain "looking friendless in the post-western world. Squirming and cavilling around Britain’s biggest strategic blunder in a hundred years is not a sustainable path." @rafaelbehr on why Starmer needs to face reality
NATO is useful, though mainly for America. Without America we need to be working with likeminded willing allies, like Poland, but not tying ourselves to a single point of failure where a future EuroTrump (or past Merkel) could dominate European thinking and cause national security issues there.
Hope it's wrong, but I'm hearing through the grapevine about this bonkers plan: Trump would adjourn both Houses of Congress under Article II, section 3, and then recess-appoint his Cabinet.
The problem is how you "pay tax" from a fixed asset such as land without selling it. The NFU are pointing out that smaller farms will have no option than to sell up.
She's says inheritance up to £1m is protected and the farmer immediately shakes his head.
So I am left thing that he, like most of them, seem to have no idea about the actual detail.
Edit: Also - he doesn't look too old. Start giving parcels of the land to your sons now and live 7 years.
Agricultural Property Relief on IHT only went to 100% in 1992, and only came in in 1975, so the 100% relief rate is something that has only existed for just over 3 decades. If the family has had the land 375 years then the farm must have paid Estate duties at many points in its history, at varying rates.
In any case, why should farms be treated differently to any other capital intensive business when it comes to IHT?
If the land is sold to pay IHT then it will still be farmed, just by different people. Indeed it might give tenant farmers the start they need to buy the land off the Lord of the Manor.
No it will be farmed by mega corporations with little interest in the land or food production to meet national needs.
The chances of a student fresh out of agricultural college being able to buy a farm and its land worth more than £1 million are less than zero. Tenant farmers won't have over a million pounds in capital either
Spot on HY. It’s not mere tax relief as Fox claims, it’s protecting vital UK industry.
Besides farming for £1M is bit of a joke figure. XX acre farm with house, farm buildings, infrastructure will be many millions in every instance of farming going on, no one is free of the tax raid ministers trotting out the tax raid trying to spin.
The idea that farms that aren't passed on tax-free within families are somehow going to no longer produce food is hilarious.
It reminds me of the that way buy-to-let homes that are no longer profitable for BTL owners are going to magically disappear from the housing stock.
Not necessarily. Depends on who they're sold to and what happens then.
If they're sold to farmers, fine.
If they're sold to developers...
Ho ho. If the farmland is capable of being developed (e.g. turned into housing estates) do you think any farming family (of 375 years standing or not) is going to turn down the payoff that would lead to?
Isn't his problem that he'd be running against Obama?
His problem is he'd be running against the US constitution.
He definitely can't repeal that clause and everyone swears an oath to uphold it.
So the US Secret Service would simply remove him and SCOTUS would have to rule him ineligible, even if it's stuffed with conservatives.
How do you enforce against him if he does it, given that SCOTUS have ruled that he cannot be prosecuted for acts carried out in his official role, and that criminal acts carried out in that context are protected by Presidential immunity?
How do you enforce against the Sun if it rises in the west?
Indeed. I have no idea what will happen, but for the moment assessing what might happen in USA is more like thinking about the future of Russia or China than thinking about the future of a large boring liberal democracy with a stable government, rule of law, multi party elections, international obligations and proper separation of powers. This is why USA people are scared. Add to that that the international protocols about climate change will be scrapped as the USA renders them beyond realistic implementation and the EU doesn't have a defence policy and the rest of us can be troubled too.
That rather looks like you missed my point.
As for "international protocols about climate change", get back to me when China and India come on board - only then will I worry about what the US is doing (much less the UK).
Looking forward to seeing Trump supporters in here trying to sanewash Trumps cabinet picks .
Truly astonishing that the highest law officer in the land will be someone still under investigation themselves but when you have a convicted felon as President I suppose it’s not that much of a stretch !
It doesn't look like either will be facing much of a stretch tbh.
Clearly the UK and others in the 5 eyes need to seriously think about what they’re going to do now that the future US administration is including Russian assets in top positions .
The worst case scenario for the Trump 2.0 presidency is rapidly becoming reality. Europe may have to treat the US not as an ex-friend, but as an enemy. I can't see any level of intel sharing surviving Gabbard's appointment.
Very likely NATO, AUKUS and five-eyes are all effectively dead.
“He’s smart — clever guy,” Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, said of Gaetz, adding: “I usually support presidential picks to be in their cabinet. I’ve done that for both sides. That’s my disposition.”
Gaetz is still under an ethics investigation in the House and was subject to a DOJ investigation into allegations of an inappropriate relationship with a minor and a possible violation of sex trafficking laws.
Sounds on brand at least.
I said we’d get a clue about what a second term would be like from his appointments. I didn’t actually think he surprise on the downside.
New: Dog-free zones should be created to help make the outdoors "anti-racist"...
Welsh Government has been advised in rural racism report
i don't know about Wales but I should think in England there are about 8 million votes which could be swayed by this great wheeze. Personally I don't mind either way.
Comments
(Streeting opposes the bill)
Is he also reviewing what are the costs of keeping people alive against their clearly expressed wishes FFS!?
https://www.skysports.com/share/13253817
https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-12/#:~:text=Constitution of the United States,-Twelfth Amendment&text=But no person constitutionally ineligible,President of the United States.
He is anti the bill, and his intervention has caused concerns with supporters of the bill who detect a change in mps opinions not only on this, but Starmer's refusal today to provide more time for discussion across the house which is very divided
To win he would need Trump's tariffs to be a roaring success, increasing manufacturing jobs with no increase in prices and also immigration to have fallen dramatically and immigrants not reacting to deportation of family members by voting Dem. Plus not seen swing voters hit by spending cuts. All of which are big ifs
Breaking: President-elect Donald Trump has named former Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard as his pick for Director of National Intelligence.
He has blown his career up in spectacular fashion, if the Darwin Awards did P45s he should be eligible for one for the original video not for drugs. Especially since he not only brought the game into disrepute, he not only showed shockingly poor judgement, but he also did so while making derogatory remarks referencing Klopp's nationality.
The chances of a student fresh out of agricultural college being able to buy a farm and its land worth more than £1 million are less than zero. Tenant farmers won't have over a million pounds in capital either
Lord Protector does not.
No more secrets from the Russians then. Might be time for a rethink of 5-eyes.
https://x.com/LukeTryl/status/1856249257214239046
Of all the reasons to oppose the bill that has to be the weakest.
APR is protection for UK farming, where all sorts of people want to do farming these days, as a happy way of life, it’s not about money, or chasing money, because happiness isn’t about money. Where families have done it for a hundred years, they want to keep doing it for reasons other than entrepreneurship, making money, chasing more money, all the lovely money coming in, because quite simply all that lovely money isn’t coming in! profits are not there, not in producers anyway, maybe in those selling it to public, or those in middle taking it from producer and giving it to those who sell to consumer just as the sellers want it - an it that is thankfully now being looked at very suspiciously.
Yet, without making money, or a desire to grow and take over the world, the desire is definitely there to keep going. Heck - that desire is so strong and so relatable you could sell six series of much watched and most therapeutic TV show in the world based on it. With people rooting for the good guys, the farmers, to win.
No. APR was never tax relief, a mere pawn, taken en passant in entrepreneurialism vs socialism game of thrones as you claim. I think you can’t see it. You clearly don’t understand, that when newspapers and MPs think they are helping, by saying don’t take this money away, a lot of people around the country, feeling very hard up themselves and looking around at the underfunded state of things, are easily replying “why the hell not?”
Because it’s not tax relief. It’s keeping an industry alive. And the industry is important because…
(Actually, the interesting thing here isn't so much that Trump is surrounding himself with all of America's Worst People, but it's all so blatant and balls-out-on-the-table shameless.)
and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of President more than once.
NEW: Donald Trump picks Matt Gaetz as Attorney General.
Vance becomes POTUS serving 2 years (less a few minutes) of Trump's term and is eligible to be elected twice as well.
https://www.cnbc.com/2024/11/13/trump-taps-rep-matt-gaetz-as-attorney-general.html
Gaetz is still under an ethics investigation in the House and was subject to a DOJ investigation into allegations of an inappropriate relationship with a minor and a possible violation of sex trafficking laws.
Early reaction from GOP members on Trump selecting Matt Gaetz for AG.
Rep. Don Bacon: “I’ve got no good comment.”
There are reasons to oppose the bill but this one is completely nuts.
@foxy is right that this is not a debate that should be had. My side should not be arguing (and are not arguing) that we should legalise assisted dying because it will save the NHS money. He should not argue the inverse.
https://x.com/dieworkwear/status/1590496781955395584?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q
(And yes, Trump and his team were terrible 2016-20. This is Trump saying "I'm back, and it's no more Mr Nice Guy...")
B&Q were scum to deal with, utterly ruthless. Also ripped off their customers - some products we packaged for them were half the price packaged differently in Wickes.
Wickes were best - good to deal with as a supplier. Homebase we fairly incompetent, and not very competitively priced, I'm amazed they lasted as long as they did.
Besides farming for £1M is bit of a joke figure. XX acre farm with house, farm buildings, infrastructure will be many millions in every instance of farming going on, no one is free of the tax raid ministers trotting out the tax raid trying to spin.
Bloody nightmare to get it installed, as they kept sending the wrong bits, but it's very nice now it's in.
Trump has no care for the law, or who he upsets, and there can be no predictability of how this pans out but certainly it looks as if you are going to be facing 4 years at least of this
Personally I dislike white shirts and never wear them unless I have to (which is almost never).
I'd much rather wear a blue, or pink, or other coloured shirt with my suit than a white one.
Which is saying something.
My point was simply that these things bring with them all manner of unintended consequences.
The biggest tax swizz - I mean relief - we have at the moment is the personal allowance on primary residences, which allows some to chalk up seven figure gains at 0% while others are expected to put their hand in their pocket, which leads to all manner of other little misallocations - like Dyson buying up vast tracts of farmland to name an egregious example. Why not flat rate CGT and IHT at 10% across the board, for example? End the misallocation.
I'm not sure I agree with your point that agricultural relief is about food security. The land will be there irrespective of who owns it, and Stalinist upheavals and five year plans aside, food will continue to be produced irrespective of who owns it.
Which is why I do think it's a simple argument about socialism vs capitalism, as it is redistributing land from those who own it to new owners while taking a decent rake for the exchequer, and bugger the consequences.
But Reeves has this mad idea that people won't change their behaviour or restructure, which is what I would be looking to do if I owned farmland right now.
Just adjusting to the reality of Trump's win and what comes next if that is even predictable
The Bill seeks to impose a legal duty on the NHS. That will have resourcing and cost implications and any responsible Secretary of State should assess that and make MPs aware of it.
Why are the Bill's supporters so afraid of scrutiny?
Its the small stuff that is horrendously overpriced - buying a box of X from Amazon wins every time.
Our Homebase closed years ago. If I ever found myself in there I always wondered how they were still going, as it was usually like the Marie Celeste.
(Hey, maybe there is some 5D chess going on here. If Federal agencies are all run by America's Worst People, everyone will be happy when Elon and Vivek close them down. And on the sixth day, they will close themselves down.)
It reminds me of the that way buy-to-let homes that are no longer profitable for BTL owners are going to magically disappear from the housing stock.
If they're sold to farmers, fine.
If they're sold to developers...
Except then opponents of the bill would decry a report saying it should be legalised as it would save the NHS money. For good reason.
But to pretend there is only one side to the cost debate is not scrutiny, its dishonesty.
And the further 10% (ie 9%) you can get by using the correct reloadable prepaid card, if eligible?
Phillips P. OBrien
@PhillipsPOBrien
Good lord, an outright Putin apologist is named to be head of US national intelligence
https://x.com/PhillipsPOBrien/status/1856793309533864348
Truly astonishing that the highest law officer in the land will be someone still under investigation themselves but when you have a convicted felon as President I suppose it’s not that much of a stretch !
Trump's victory leaves Brexit Britain "looking friendless in the post-western world. Squirming and cavilling around Britain’s biggest strategic blunder in a hundred years is not a sustainable path."
@rafaelbehr on why Starmer needs to face reality
https://x.com/NickCohen4/status/1856754012223135955
To be fair I was buying stuff for a charitable exercise, so it was vaguely justifiable at the time.
Might give it a go if I find another project...sounds like it might be worthwhile.
Surely she's been nominated solely to shift the Overton window and make all the other appointments look less insane?
The EU is useless for national defence.
NATO is useful, though mainly for America. Without America we need to be working with likeminded willing allies, like Poland, but not tying ourselves to a single point of failure where a future EuroTrump (or past Merkel) could dominate European thinking and cause national security issues there.
Hope it's wrong, but I'm hearing through the grapevine about this bonkers plan: Trump would adjourn both Houses of Congress under Article II, section 3, and then recess-appoint his Cabinet.
SCOTUS has said he is bulletproof...
As for "international protocols about climate change", get back to me when China and India come on board - only then will I worry about what the US is doing (much less the UK).
Very likely NATO, AUKUS and five-eyes are all effectively dead.
New: Dog-free zones should be created to help make the outdoors "anti-racist"...
Welsh Government has been advised in rural racism report
NY Times
@RpsAgainstTrump
We warned you
I said we’d get a clue about what a second term would be like from his appointments. I didn’t actually think he surprise on the downside.
Dogs and rare ground nesting birds don't mix.