New Populus VI: Lab 37 (=); Cons 33 (-1); LD 10 (=); UKIP 13 (+2); Oth 7 (-1) Tables to follow
So the budget bounce lasted exactly.. two days ? At least, the flounce bounce lasted a week !
Flounce Bounce...ah, those were the days. In fact last weeks crossovergasm now seems just like a distant PB Hodges memory.
It's probably a taste of things to come, though. The two things that happen as the election approaches are that the government does popular budgetary things that they've been saving up, and UKIP gets squeezed. The budget bounce was a fairly minor warm-up to that, and even there they got the lead down to 2%. There should be room for a fair bit more movement where that came from.
And there's the turning on the opposition that usually happens between conference season and the GE. It's a brave punter who would back Labour carrying a polling lead the whole way from now into the next GE.
That's probably right. The argument that the stability of the lead, and especially the Labour share, mean things are quite settled and we shouldn't expect a big swing against the opposition is correct. But the inverse of that is that when we _do_ see the lead shrink, that proves that it's possible for Con to get the lead that low, and there are some voters who are up for grabs.
We should probably think of the temporary high water marks for Con as the low end of expectations for the general election, especially with the UKIP-curious voters. Saying you'll vote now in a good news cycle is a good sign that you'll vote Con in 2015 whatever the news cycle.
"The trouble with figures like that is that they don't take account of qualitative changes which are part of living standards - for example, even an ordinary family can today afford a car which is far superior to anything a similar family might have owned twenty years ago, they have better choice of food in the shops, hotels and restaurants are better, and so on. Technological innovation continues, and the marketplace does deliver."
In my experience the great leap forward in living standards for the very ordinary people started in the very late fifties and ran for about a decade. It was in that period that the biggest advances were made, when carpets replaced linoleum, domestic appliances such a refrigerators and washing machines became affordable and the norm likewise telephones. Working class families also were able to take foreign holidays for the first time, started eating out and their diet became more adventuresome and varied. Since then progress has continued but in a more evolutionary fashion - having better washing machines, for example, rather than having one at all.
Why that great leap forward occurred when it did and whether any particular group of policies was responsible is a matter for debate, my own theory is the late fifties was when the UK finally shook off the effects of the command economy which had been introduced for the war and extended by the Atlee administration.
I remember the Thorpe scandal very well. What a hoot it was. "Bunnies can and will go to France" etc. The upper classes showing the disadvantages of a private education - how we all sympathised ... not.
On plain cigarette packets .... some defender of the tobacco companies claimed that there were 80,000 people working in designing and promoting cigarette packs and horrors - they'd all lose their jobs. My wife remarked that they could all get jobs as care workers, looking after the victims of cigarette smoking.
Was this 80,000 figure just plucked out of the air (a la Clegg) or is it realistic?
Plus points for the good ole days People had more self- respect. Nearly everyone who could, worked or was a full time housewife which was harder than it is now. Hardly anyone was unemployed and certainly did not expect to live off state charity for long if they were. Kids had more freedom . Allowed to roam and develop individually (not be told what they should do by either the media ,parents or peer pressure so much). Little organised activity by pushy parents , People had more of a sense of real humour (not the sneering type which is passed for a lot if humour today). Granted this could mean sensitivities being tested in a way not possible today but people were emotionally tougher then as a whole PEOPLE COULD USE A MAP AND NOT RELY ON BRAIN DEAD TECHNOLOGY LIKE SATNAV innit!!
bad points People were racist ,homophobic and sexist (although the sexism did coincide with more chivalry in certain people). My dad who is not a thug used freely terms that would get him arrested today People were poorer in general and it was more important to be born into good/well off parenting.
Ethnically, well, it speaks for itself; there may be as many as 75 million people living here (according to one supermarket's analysis of food sales) in which case you have 45 million white British and 30 million something else, with the latter fawned over by politicians and the formerly routinely dismissed and belittled. Schools in which 55 languages are spoken are a problem, not an achievement.
It's a bit rich for Nick to fret about a loss of social solidarity when all three of the above are the consequence of the left's own prejudices, neuroses and policies in government.
I googled for:
"75 million people UK" and found no reference to your supermarket story
and for "school uk 55 languages" and the only story I found was about City of Leeds school, where there were more than 50 nationalities, and half the kids did not speak English as a first language, which is not quite the same thing. I went to a school where fewer than half the pupils spoke English as a first language. It achieved pretty decent results - with 80 people in a year, getting four people into Oxbridge isn't a bad result, considering how poor many pupil's English skills were when they joined the school.
To be fair, I do recall reading about the supermarket story - I think it was Tescos - and was basically a throw-away comment by one of the management suggesting that the amount of basic produce that was purchased made them think the official population stats were inaccurate
edit: I typed "Tesco" and "population" into google and this was the first result...
Many observers think the UK’s population is much bigger. A leading figure at Tesco recently told one of my parliamentary colleagues that they estimate the population of the UK to be closer to 80 million, based on the volume of certain staples they sell. Tesco are probably a world leader in understanding their consumer market, so it would be foolish to disregard their opinion.
Plus points for the good ole days People had more self- respect. Nearly everyone who could, worked or was a full time housewife which was harder than it is now. Hardly anyone was unemployed and certainly did not expect to live off state charity for long if they were. Kids had more freedom . Allowed to roam and develop individually (not be told what they should do by either the media ,parents or peer pressure so much). Little organised activity by pushy parents , People had more of a sense of real humour (not the sneering type which is passed for a lot if humour today). Granted this could mean sensitivities being tested in a way not possible today but people were emotionally tougher then as a whole PEOPLE COULD USE A MAP AND NOT RELY ON BRAIN DEAD TECHNOLOGY LIKE SATNAV innit!!
bad points People were racist ,homophobic and sexist (although the sexism did coincide with more chivalry in certain people). My dad who is not a thug used freely terms that would get him arrested today People were poorer in general and it was more important to be born into good/well off parenting.
People seem to have less freedom to decide for themselves what is and isn't offensive now.
George Orwell reference started this conversation, 1984 style thought crimes aren't t far off in my opinion
... Better Together's decision to base the campaign almost entirely on fears of losing the pound has become a real millstone. The problem with the whole pound scare is that no-one really believes it, and that forces reasonable people to start saying unreasonable things in order to defend it. It has undermined the moral basis of the Union, which is supposed to be a partnership between nations, without offering anything attractive as an alternative. This has been a pretty dismal week for the whole Unionist campaign and there is little sign of the "sunshine" solutions promised by the Scottish Liberal Democrat leader, Willie Rennie.
Were it not for a sympathetic press, the Better Together campaign would be in deep trouble. And there are still six months to go before Scotland goes to the polls.
I thought that prize ass Macwhiter was all for the Euro and against the millstone of the BoE Pound.
What Mr Macwhirter is saying is not about what he believes but what the various actors - SNP, Indy side Coalition, voters, etc. - believe.
I don't know if "Macwhiter" is deliberate (and what it is supposed to mean if it is) but [edit] 'prize ass' is an unkind way to describe one of the few columnists in the Scottish press who is neither a politician nor a hack who regurgitates the latest press release (almost inevitably from Better Together, given the media's allegiance), but tries to assess the situation for himself and his readers. He is most certainly not a pro-indy supporter by history and instinct, but a devomaxer/federalist. And this not only further obviates your criticism but also means that he needs to be taken very seriously by anyone hoping to save the Union on such a basis, which - to my increasing amazement - is now looking like just about everyone on the No side, even if they could agree within each party never mind between themselves.
Plus points for the good ole days People had more self- respect. Nearly everyone who could, worked or was a full time housewife which was harder than it is now. Hardly anyone was unemployed and certainly did not expect to live off state charity for long if they were. Kids had more freedom . Allowed to roam and develop individually (not be told what they should do by either the media ,parents or peer pressure so much). Little organised activity by pushy parents , People had more of a sense of real humour (not the sneering type which is passed for a lot if humour today). Granted this could mean sensitivities being tested in a way not possible today but people were emotionally tougher then as a whole PEOPLE COULD USE A MAP AND NOT RELY ON BRAIN DEAD TECHNOLOGY LIKE SATNAV innit!!
bad points People were racist ,homophobic and sexist (although the sexism did coincide with more chivalry in certain people). My dad who is not a thug used freely terms that would get him arrested today People were poorer in general and it was more important to be born into good/well off parenting.
People seem to have less freedom to decide for themselves what is and isn't offensive now.
George Orwell reference started this conversation, 1984 style thought crimes aren't t far off in my opinion
Certain phrases come and go, dropping out of circulation so gradually you don't remember when you stopped hearing them.
"Nice one Cyril"; "Is this a post or what?"; "What are you like?"; but also "It's a free country", "I'm entitled to my opinion".
Nobody says either of the last two any more because they aren't really true. Furthermore, the spectrum of subjects on which liberals feel entitled to censor others' views is widening all the time. To be unpersuaded of the evidence and proposed solutions to climate change, for example, gets you equated with a Holocaust denier. Figures in the climate catastrophist movement have called for people who disagree with them to be censored, silenced and even judicially killed (http://joannenova.com.au/2012/12/death-threats-anyone-austrian-prof-global-warming-deniers-should-be-sentenced-to-death/).
Freedom is lost not in big chunks but by dribs and drabs.
One massively important point that I overlooked comparing the past to now (and seemingly overlooked by anyone else on here ) is that people are far more obese than they were. Maybe this health problem is balanced by the fact that people smoke far less these days but its a huge problem
bad points People were racist ,homophobic and sexist (although the sexism did coincide with more chivalry in certain people). My dad who is not a thug used freely terms that would get him arrested today People were poorer in general and it was more important to be born into good/well off parenting.
That's one of the drawbacks of today. People shouldn't actually *be* arrested today for what they say or post.
Bet365 have one of the most bonkers offers I've ever seen. Half your stake refunded on E/W bets on the National up to £125.
It is free money if you want it, half your outgoings, double your stake, whatever... it is a cracking offer though.
It is actual money NOT free bets that are credited to your account also.
Please NB that "To qualify for this offer, you must be an existing bet365 account holder and have opened your account before 23:59 on Wednesday 2nd April 2014.". NB also that the offer expires midday Saturday.
"That's one of the drawbacks of today. People shouldn't actually *be* arrested today for what they say or post."
That's one of the advantages of being old, you can almost say what you want, and was always thus. The young expect to be embarrassed by their grandparents.
Off this afternoon to a good pub near Lime Street, Sky sports, but good beer and old codgers. You can use old terminology and not worry about someone taking offence on behalf of someone else. Or words that have changed their meaning.
Maybe this health problem is balanced by the fact that people smoke far less these days but its a huge problem
And the fact that they die far less of cancer, strokes and road accidents...
Most of the budgetary issues that the UK faces are the result of people living a long time (and thus receiving pensions from the state for a considerable period), and requiring expensive medical care over multiple decades.
If we could find some way of encouraging older (say 65+) people to do more dangerous, fun activities, we could go a long way to solving our current budget issues. To put it in context, a one third reduction in post-65 lifespan, would cut annual pension payments by £50bn, and NHS costs by £30bn, with commensurate increases in the rate of GDP growth as money was put to productive use.
The simplest way I can see to achieve this must be a relaxation on drug - tobacco at least, and potentially on more potent substances - prohibitions for the over 65s.
Best of all, surely, is that the old dears would be much happier too. To quote the doctor from Paradise Postponed "who wants to spend another five years of life in an old people's home in Weston-Super-Mare?".
A leading figure at Tesco recently told one of my parliamentary colleagues that they estimate the population of the UK to be closer to 80 million, based on the volume of certain staples they sell. Tesco are probably a world leader in understanding their consumer market, so it would be foolish to disregard their opinion.
It is certainly much easier to evade the Census than it to is to evade buying food! I have one way or another managed to avoid filling in the forms for each of the past 4 Censuses. And that wasn't trying very hard....
If we could find some way of encouraging older (say 65+) people to do more dangerous, fun activities, we could go a long way to solving our current budget issues.
Ah, so THAT'S why Steve Webb was encouraging them to buy Lamborghinis with their pension pots.
Don't knock it. Their rolling sports news programme is required wind-down viewing for me when I get in late of an evening.
It carries interesting sound bites from all types of sporting moving and shakers - stuff you don't get anywhere else. In fact, they undersell it, I think (highly unusual for sky!)
Sport was certainly more honest if less skilful in the old days . Any premier league team would beat an old first division team from 40 years ago quite easily but the first division team would be disgusted (as I am ) with the diving, injury feigning or (if not totally feigning ) injury milking. As for trying to get the ref to book opposing players, well they would be incandescent with the prima donnas of today
A leading figure at Tesco recently told one of my parliamentary colleagues that they estimate the population of the UK to be closer to 80 million, based on the volume of certain staples they sell. Tesco are probably a world leader in understanding their consumer market, so it would be foolish to disregard their opinion.
It is certainly much easier to evade the Census than it to is to evade buying food! I have one way or another managed to avoid filling in the forms for each of the past 4 Censuses. And that wasn't trying very hard....
Of course, it does suggest that the UK economy must be a *lot* bigger than people thing. These 20 million additional people are not claiming benefit (this, we would have noticed), nor attending school (for the same reasons), and therefore must be deriving income from somewhere.
It can't be from the formal sector, or we'd have seen the number of employed people (and tax receipts) rise much more sharply than we have. So, it must be in the informal sector, which - on these numbers - has to be employing two-thirds as many people as the formal sector.
If we assume these 20 million people working in the informal economy are two-thirds as productive as regular workers (which is probably a reasonable guess), then the British economy is 50% larger than we thought!
Don't knock it. Their rolling sports news programme is required wind-down viewing for me when I get in late of an evening.
It carries interesting sound bites from all types of sporting moving and shakers - stuff you don't get anywhere else. In fact, they undersell it, I think (highly unusual for sky!)
and very diverse as well ,always at least one lady presenting at any time . I am sure they are really interested in Mr Journeyman's impending move from Rochdale to Bradford as much as any man!!
"Best of all, surely, is that the old dears would be much happier too"
Yes! Let's have a sort of bus pass that exempts pensioners from all tobacco and alcohol duty. Our booze and fags would be a third of the price of anyone else's. I could then make a few bob flogging off surplus requirements on the black market thereby encouraging younger people to smoke and drink so increasing the effect. Everyone is a winner.
Maybe the smoking ban could be amended to enable pubs to have old peoples rooms in which TV, music and mobile phones would be banned but smoking, eating crisps and pork pies and talking to other people and their dogs made compulsory. Have to make them pensioners only otherwise they would be packed out.
If we could find some way of encouraging older (say 65+) people to do more dangerous, fun activities, we could go a long way to solving our current budget issues.
Why not encourage your dad to give up silver-surfing and start kite-surfing... ;-)
Any premier league team would beat an old first division team from 40 years ago quite easily but the first division team would be disgusted (as I am ) with the diving, injury feigning or (if not totally feigning ) injury milking. As for trying to get the ref to book opposing players, well they would be incandescent with the prima donnas of today
The Premier league team would be down to about 5 players - they wouldn't survive the brute force of the game of 40 years ago.
Of course, the first division team would have had 6 men sent off, so you would be watching 5-a-side on a full sized pitch!
Off topic, but something that could play into the electoral calculus at some point.
UK front month gas prices have dropped v sharply in recent weeks (according to BBG). Indeed, since the high in December 2013, they've collapsed more than a third.
I dont know if this feeds into the price for the consumer at any point, but it might be something to bear in mind given the sensitivity of this topic with the electorate.
A couple of days ago I was in a community meeting when a woman came in. She appeared to be in her thirties, and asked if she could join us. She chatted with us for a while before her phone rang. She left the room, leaving her bags behind. When I nipped out half an hour later, she was sat on the floor by the toilets talking loudly into her phone. When the meeting ended a while later her bags were still in the room, so the group chair went to find her.
I've just found out today that she was found asleep on a sofa elsewhere, and that she is homeless. I had no idea: there was no visual clues;she was competitively well dressed (especially compared to scruffy old me), and at worst I would have said she seemed distracted.
I've always thought we should employ 0ver 65s for asbestos-stripping. It's dangerous for young 'uns for if you keep the levels low enough to avoid overt asbestosis, the mesotheliomas that develop take between thirty and forty years to become obvious. By then ...
I've always thought we should employ 0ver 65s for asbestos-stripping. It's dangerous for young 'uns for if you keep the levels low enough to avoid overt asbestosis, the mesotheliomas that develop take between thirty and forty years to become obvious. By then ...
"Best of all, surely, is that the old dears would be much happier too"
Yes! Let's have a sort of bus pass that exempts pensioners from all tobacco and alcohol duty. Our booze and fags would be a third of the price of anyone else's. I could then make a few bob flogging off surplus requirements on the black market thereby encouraging younger people to smoke and drink so increasing the effect. Everyone is a winner.
Maybe the smoking ban could be amended to enable pubs to have old peoples rooms in which TV, music and mobile phones would be banned but smoking, eating crisps and pork pies and talking to other people and their dogs made compulsory. Have to make them pensioners only otherwise they would be packed out.
Oooh... I like your "old people's rooms for pubs" idea...
Asbestos can cause asbestosis and mesiothelioma. You can avoid asbestosis reasonably easily (keep levels low) but mesiolthelioma can occur at lower, chronic levels. Let the oldies do it, they'll be dead by the time the cancer develops anyway. Saves money on unnecessary precautions.
And as been said earlier, encourage smoking - reduce the pension burden.
Off topic, but something that could play into the electoral calculus at some point.
UK front month gas prices have dropped v sharply in recent weeks (according to BBG). Indeed, since the high in December 2013, they've collapsed more than a third.
I dont know if this feeds into the price for the consumer at any point, but it might be something to bear in mind given the sensitivity of this topic with the electorate.
Isn't most of the gas used by generating companies and retail distributors bought on long-term oil linked contracts?
A couple of days ago I was in a community meeting when a woman came in. She appeared to be in her thirties, and asked if she could join us. She chatted with us for a while before her phone rang. She left the room, leaving her bags behind. When I nipped out half an hour later, she was sat on the floor by the toilets talking loudly into her phone. When the meeting ended a while later her bags were still in the room, so the group chair went to find her.
I've just found out today that she was found asleep on a sofa elsewhere, and that she is homeless. I had no idea: there was no visual clues;she was competitively well dressed (especially compared to scruffy old me), and at worst I would have said she seemed distracted.
It's unutterably sad.
A very, very sad story. Made sadder by the fact that she had a phone and at least one person who would call her but nowhere to sleep.
Benefits Britain 1949 was a realy interesting series. It really was a safety net rather than a hammock. The single mum was feeling a bit hard done by, but even she saw the merit, and the 1949 Labour exchange and housing officers were allowed to be quite heavy at times.
But the government then was committed to full employment, as they were till the mid 70s.
Very different to now.
If there were jobs for all about, interest rates would be put up very sharpish.
Regarding Maria Miller: leaving aside the expenses issue, it seems to me that she has been one of the least impressive of the current Conservative cabinet ministers. There are several other women whom Dave could promote and who are, I think, more talented, for example Esther McVey, Anna Soubry, Elizabeth Truss, Amber Rudd
McVey?! Thick as pigshit. Would have to be minded even more than IDS.
I think Margot James is the best newcomer I've seen. Of those already higher up, no idea what Theresa Villiers has done to get stuck in the less senior positions.
Comments
We should probably think of the temporary high water marks for Con as the low end of expectations for the general election, especially with the UKIP-curious voters. Saying you'll vote now in a good news cycle is a good sign that you'll vote Con in 2015 whatever the news cycle.
In my experience the great leap forward in living standards for the very ordinary people started in the very late fifties and ran for about a decade. It was in that period that the biggest advances were made, when carpets replaced linoleum, domestic appliances such a refrigerators and washing machines became affordable and the norm likewise telephones. Working class families also were able to take foreign holidays for the first time, started eating out and their diet became more adventuresome and varied. Since then progress has continued but in a more evolutionary fashion - having better washing machines, for example, rather than having one at all.
Why that great leap forward occurred when it did and whether any particular group of policies was responsible is a matter for debate, my own theory is the late fifties was when the UK finally shook off the effects of the command economy which had been introduced for the war and extended by the Atlee administration.
I remember the Thorpe scandal very well. What a hoot it was. "Bunnies can and will go to France" etc. The upper classes showing the disadvantages of a private education - how we all sympathised ... not.
On plain cigarette packets .... some defender of the tobacco companies claimed that there were 80,000 people working in designing and promoting cigarette packs and horrors - they'd all lose their jobs. My wife remarked that they could all get jobs as care workers, looking after the victims of cigarette smoking.
Was this 80,000 figure just plucked out of the air (a la Clegg) or is it realistic?
.
People had more self- respect. Nearly everyone who could, worked or was a full time housewife which was harder than it is now. Hardly anyone was unemployed and certainly did not expect to live off state charity for long if they were.
Kids had more freedom . Allowed to roam and develop individually (not be told what they should do by either the media ,parents or peer pressure so much). Little organised activity by pushy parents ,
People had more of a sense of real humour (not the sneering type which is passed for a lot if humour today). Granted this could mean sensitivities being tested in a way not possible today but people were emotionally tougher then as a whole
PEOPLE COULD USE A MAP AND NOT RELY ON BRAIN DEAD TECHNOLOGY LIKE SATNAV innit!!
bad points
People were racist ,homophobic and sexist (although the sexism did coincide with more chivalry in certain people). My dad who is not a thug used freely terms that would get him arrested today
People were poorer in general and it was more important to be born into good/well off parenting.
edit: I typed "Tesco" and "population" into google and this was the first result...
Many observers think the UK’s population is much bigger. A leading figure at Tesco recently told one of my parliamentary colleagues that they estimate the population of the UK to be closer to 80 million, based on the volume of certain staples they sell. Tesco are probably a world leader in understanding their consumer market, so it would be foolish to disregard their opinion.
http://cornerstone-group.org.uk/2008/02/25/how-many-people-live-in-britain-–-by-greg-hands-mp/
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/comment/city-eye-facts-on-a-plate-our-population-is-at-least-77-million-395428.html
This is a piece of analysis it would be quite easy for a supermarket to do and that would be more accurate the larger its share. Here's one where they speak 41 languages
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-529768/The-primary-school-pupils-speak-41-different-languages.html
Here's one where they speak 47 languages
http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/10931051.How_does_a_school_cope_when_its_pupils_speak_47_different_languages_/
Here's a district where across all its schools they speak 140 languages
http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/9554958.140_languages_spoken_by_pupils_in_district_bring_classroom_challenges/
So for 55 read 47, if you like, but either way it's a disgrace.
George Orwell reference started this conversation, 1984 style thought crimes aren't t far off in my opinion
I don't know if "Macwhiter" is deliberate (and what it is supposed to mean if it is) but [edit] 'prize ass' is an unkind way to describe one of the few columnists in the Scottish press who is neither a politician nor a hack who regurgitates the latest press release (almost inevitably from Better Together, given the media's allegiance), but tries to assess the situation for himself and his readers. He is most certainly not a pro-indy supporter by history and instinct, but a devomaxer/federalist. And this not only further obviates your criticism but also means that he needs to be taken very seriously by anyone hoping to save the Union on such a basis, which - to my increasing amazement - is now looking like just about everyone on the No side, even if they could agree within each party never mind between themselves.
"Nice one Cyril"; "Is this a post or what?"; "What are you like?"; but also "It's a free country", "I'm entitled to my opinion".
Nobody says either of the last two any more because they aren't really true. Furthermore, the spectrum of subjects on which liberals feel entitled to censor others' views is widening all the time. To be unpersuaded of the evidence and proposed solutions to climate change, for example, gets you equated with a Holocaust denier. Figures in the climate catastrophist movement have called for people who disagree with them to be censored, silenced and even judicially killed (http://joannenova.com.au/2012/12/death-threats-anyone-austrian-prof-global-warming-deniers-should-be-sentenced-to-death/).
Freedom is lost not in big chunks but by dribs and drabs.
That's one of the advantages of being old, you can almost say what you want, and was always thus. The young expect to be embarrassed by their grandparents.
Off this afternoon to a good pub near Lime Street, Sky sports, but good beer and old codgers. You can use old terminology and not worry about someone taking offence on behalf of someone else. Or words that have changed their meaning.
If we could find some way of encouraging older (say 65+) people to do more dangerous, fun activities, we could go a long way to solving our current budget issues. To put it in context, a one third reduction in post-65 lifespan, would cut annual pension payments by £50bn, and NHS costs by £30bn, with commensurate increases in the rate of GDP growth as money was put to productive use.
The simplest way I can see to achieve this must be a relaxation on drug - tobacco at least, and potentially on more potent substances - prohibitions for the over 65s.
Best of all, surely, is that the old dears would be much happier too. To quote the doctor from Paradise Postponed "who wants to spend another five years of life in an old people's home in Weston-Super-Mare?".
Don't knock it. Their rolling sports news programme is required wind-down viewing for me when I get in late of an evening.
It carries interesting sound bites from all types of sporting moving and shakers - stuff you don't get anywhere else. In fact, they undersell it, I think (highly unusual for sky!)
It can't be from the formal sector, or we'd have seen the number of employed people (and tax receipts) rise much more sharply than we have. So, it must be in the informal sector, which - on these numbers - has to be employing two-thirds as many people as the formal sector.
If we assume these 20 million people working in the informal economy are two-thirds as productive as regular workers (which is probably a reasonable guess), then the British economy is 50% larger than we thought!
Yes! Let's have a sort of bus pass that exempts pensioners from all tobacco and alcohol duty. Our booze and fags would be a third of the price of anyone else's. I could then make a few bob flogging off surplus requirements on the black market thereby encouraging younger people to smoke and drink so increasing the effect. Everyone is a winner.
Maybe the smoking ban could be amended to enable pubs to have old peoples rooms in which TV, music and mobile phones would be banned but smoking, eating crisps and pork pies and talking to other people and their dogs made compulsory. Have to make them pensioners only otherwise they would be packed out.
Of course, the first division team would have had 6 men sent off, so you would be watching 5-a-side on a full sized pitch!
I wasn't going to mention Kirsty Gallagher et al.
But Sky Sports is good even if it is a bit repetitive.
UK front month gas prices have dropped v sharply in recent weeks (according to BBG). Indeed, since the high in December 2013, they've collapsed more than a third.
I dont know if this feeds into the price for the consumer at any point, but it might be something to bear in mind given the sensitivity of this topic with the electorate.
A couple of days ago I was in a community meeting when a woman came in. She appeared to be in her thirties, and asked if she could join us. She chatted with us for a while before her phone rang. She left the room, leaving her bags behind. When I nipped out half an hour later, she was sat on the floor by the toilets talking loudly into her phone. When the meeting ended a while later her bags were still in the room, so the group chair went to find her.
I've just found out today that she was found asleep on a sofa elsewhere, and that she is homeless. I had no idea: there was no visual clues;she was competitively well dressed (especially compared to scruffy old me), and at worst I would have said she seemed distracted.
It's unutterably sad.
I've always thought we should employ 0ver 65s for asbestos-stripping. It's dangerous for young 'uns for if you keep the levels low enough to avoid overt asbestosis, the mesotheliomas that develop take between thirty and forty years to become obvious. By then ...
Asbestos can cause asbestosis and mesiothelioma. You can avoid asbestosis reasonably easily (keep levels low) but mesiolthelioma can occur at lower, chronic levels. Let the oldies do it, they'll be dead by the time the cancer develops anyway. Saves money on unnecessary precautions.
And as been said earlier, encourage smoking - reduce the pension burden.
But the government then was committed to full employment, as they were till the mid 70s.
Very different to now.
If there were jobs for all about, interest rates would be put up very sharpish.
I think Margot James is the best newcomer I've seen. Of those already higher up, no idea what Theresa Villiers has done to get stuck in the less senior positions.