For some reason, Sandpit is desperate to convince us that there are some good MAGAs.
Is Ben Shapiro part of MAGA?
I must admit I'm not an expert on all the distinctions.
Ben is the sensible adult in the room, calling out the grifters and antisemites on the right.
‘Please subscribe to my podcast calling out the grifters and antisemites.’
Why do so many of these dweebs have ridiculous voices? Shapiro and Peterson quacking away make Starmer and Reeves sound like Brian Blessed.
A weird visual too. Peterson is what I imagine a piece of pure ossified vanity would look like. There's that old saying that you shouldn't scowl because if the wind changes your face gets stuck like that. Well with him it's like when it happened, the sudden change in the wind, he was caught preening in the hallway mirror.
I see the government is continuing with it's Grand Old Duke of York approach to policy announcements.
Remind me of winter fuel allowance. A defendable policy that pissed a lot of people off and then a partial U-turn a lot later that won't win back any of the alienated voters.
As it happens my world includes farms, and lawyers and accountants who serve farms and the rural constituency. The thing about IHT is that more or less everyone who may be affected does some planning of their affairs, often very simple, but this relies on fairly long term stability in how systems will operate - rather like the pension industry relies on it.
The IHT changes as first announced had the effect that for a particular group, mostly older, it was possible that for some years planning for IHT would for them be much harder than it is for the Duke of Westminster, and in some cases impossible.
Rural accountants and lawyers for months now have been working day and night, sometimes literally, to sort the issues arising among worried farmers. Today's news renders some of this unnecessary and irrelevant. I know lawyers who have had to refuse work because of the sheer volume coming their way, and real specialists can be thin on the ground.
My excellent MP (Penrith) has lost the whip for voting against the government on this issue, only to see the government immediately change course to something more like what he wanted.
Their management of issues remains dismal. For the first time for 1000 years Labour has loads of rural seats and they have squandered the lot.
Today's climb down was something but still not enough. As the Tories, LDs and Reform have demanded, inheritance tax on family farms and family businesses should still be scrapped completely
Typical of Starmer and Reeves in pleasing absolutely no one and handing a gift to Badenoch who wants it all gone
No expert, but it doesn't look like a battleship to me.
TBF a Great War/WW2 corvette didn't look like the small sailing ship of the mid-C19 ... What is also notable is that it's to be called the Trump Class, which indicates that the first ship of the class will be named after Mr Trump (a class of warships is usually named after the first of the class, pace [edit] UK MoD and its stupid messing around of late).
Usually Presidential names get applied to Nimitz- or Ford-class nuclear aircraft carriers. But it's not cut and dry. Mr Carter got a nuke sub named after him (entirely appropriately and I imagine amicably, as he was a nuke sub engineer by trade).
No serving leader of any nation (with the possible exception of Russia) has ever named a ship after themselves. It's pretty well the ultimate in imbecilic narcissism.
I see the government is continuing with it's Grand Old Duke of York approach to policy announcements.
Remind me of winter fuel allowance. A defendable policy that pissed a lot of people off and then a partial U-turn a lot later that won't win back any of the alienated voters.
As it happens my world includes farms, and lawyers and accountants who serve farms and the rural constituency. The thing about IHT is that more or less everyone who may be affected does some planning of their affairs, often very simple, but this relies on fairly long term stability in how systems will operate - rather like the pension industry relies on it.
The IHT changes as first announced had the effect that for a particular group, mostly older, it was possible that for some years planning for IHT would for them be much harder than it is for the Duke of Westminster, and in some cases impossible.
Rural accountants and lawyers for months now have been working day and night, sometimes literally, to sort the issues arising among worried farmers. Today's news renders some of this unnecessary and irrelevant. I know lawyers who have had to refuse work because of the sheer volume coming their way, and real specialists can be thin on the ground.
My excellent MP (Penrith) has lost the whip for voting against the government on this issue, only to see the government immediately change course to something more like what he wanted.
Their management of issues remains dismal. For the first time for 1000 years Labour has loads of rural seats and they have squandered the lot.
Today's climb down was something but still not enough. As the Tories, LDs and Reform have demanded, inheritance tax on family farms and family businesses should still be scrapped completely
Typical of Starmer and Reeves in pleasing absolutely no one and handing a gift to Badenoch who wants it all gone
Delaying the IHT until any *sale* would have done the job - close the tax loophole - without affecting family farms.
No expert, but it doesn't look like a battleship to me.
TBF a Great War/WW2 corvette didn't look like the small sailing ship of the mid-C19 ... What is also notable is that it's to be called the Trump Class, which indicates that the first ship of the class will be named after Mr Trump (a class of warships is usually named after the first of the class, pace [edit] UK MoD and its stupid messing around of late).
Usually Presidential names get applied to Nimitz- or Ford-class nuclear aircraft carriers. But it's not cut and dry. Mr Carter got a nuke sub named after him (entirely appropriately and I imagine amicably, as he was a nuke sub engineer by trade).
No serving leader of any nation (with the possible exception of Russia) has ever named a ship after themselves. It's pretty well the ultimate in imbecilic narcissism.
No expert, but it doesn't look like a battleship to me.
TBF a Great War/WW2 corvette didn't look like the small sailing ship of the mid-C19 ... What is also notable is that it's to be called the Trump Class, which indicates that the first ship of the class will be named after Mr Trump (a class of warships is usually named after the first of the class, pace [edit] UK MoD and its stupid messing around of late).
Usually Presidential names get applied to Nimitz- or Ford-class nuclear aircraft carriers. But it's not cut and dry. Mr Carter got a nuke sub named after him (entirely appropriately and I imagine amicably, as he was a nuke sub engineer by trade).
No serving leader of any nation (with the possible exception of Russia) has ever named a ship after themselves. It's pretty well the ultimate in imbecilic narcissism.
FPT: Andy_JS raised an important question about TV news. Decades ago, the wife of a friend asked me how a person could be well informed. (She wanted, I guessed later, to be a good citizen.)
I came up with this answer for national politics: Don't watch TV news*. Instead, read the best newspaper you can. Read another publication that is consistently critical of that newspaper, for balance. At that time, and in that place -- central Pennsylvania -- you could have done fairly well by reading the NYT and the National Review, or Commentary, regularly.
Now, it is more complex. But I would start by telling a person who asked that question not to rely on (anti) social media for facts.
(*I recall reading, at the time, that the 20 minutes or so given to the news on the national TV news programs -- would fit in a part of the NYT front page. About a third of a page, if I recall correctly.)
There is a story about Bob Crow’s dad telling him to read the Morning Star and the FT (and disbelieve the latter). I try to do similar (FT and LRB plus private eye - and I don’t treat any as gospel). In my view if you don’t pay the news you consume (either directly or via licence fee / tax) don’t be surprised if it entirely serves someone else’s interest and / or is complete rot.
YouGov had a Reform 25% in late November. There's a clear sign of a small Tory recovery mirrored by Reform declining in the opinion poll average graph on Wikipedia.
The unknown is whether this trend will be reinforced by campaigning for the May elections, or if that will interrupt it.
Also, given the personal ambitions of many of those involved, what are the chances Kemi gets ditched after losing lots of councillors in May anyway?
Barring immense change during the next few months, the story of election night is almost written already, as significant Reform and Green gains are surely nailed on. The competition is for who gets seen as the biggest loser, and there Labour already has a very good head start.
Part of the question will be timing. The first results often create the story.
I think Wales is still in doubt though. If Reform do come further off the boil then the big story might be a Plaid victory in Wales, rather than Reform doing very well there.
Sunderland voting in a Reform council will be the first news story. Then will come some London boroughs.
Picking up on Wales, and the conversation yesterday, I see that on 20mh default speed limits in towns we have:
- Con current policy is to reverse, despite their noisy demands back in 2020/21 that timid Labour were not implementing it quicky enough. - Ref UK committed to reverse. - Evidence of the benefits is firming up in reduced casualties, safety and reduced insurance premiums, with annother year of data due before the Senedd elections next May.
One to watch.
(Checking, the position in England is that 20mph limits now cover areas where just under 20 million people live. TBH that is a lot higher than I thought it was.) -
I had the opportunity recently to spend at least half an hour in total driving through 20mph speed limits in Wales and so, in true PB.com fashion, I am now an expert.
What surprised me most, given the vitriol in online discussions about them, is how well-observed they were. My experience in the past of driving through 20mph speed limits in England and Scotland is that a lot of drivers will speed past anyone obeying the speed limit.
That was exactly my experience of driving in Wales soon after the limit was introduced. I have the impression that the vitriol has died down now, and some may even be acknowledging that lives have been saved and things are generally pleasanter but I don't follow Welsh politics much so I wouldn't really know if the hostility to Labour on this issue has abated at all.
I am a convert to the 20, after being opposed to it in the start. The roads in towns are so much safer. You can also pull out easily from side roads.
Most newer cars also have a limiter which means you don't have to keep monitoring your speed.
I was chatting to a chap from South Wales the other week. He says he loves driving at exactly 20 mph and watching the queue build up behind him. And if they get too close, he'll slow to 18...
There are a few who do this, but it in itself is dangerous causing anger and tailgating, even unsafe overtaking
The speed in these 20mph zones is not enforced until you reach 27mph
As far as the present position is, most councils are or have reviewed and reinstated some of the 30mph which have generally been accepted
Public Service announcement!
That is patently untrue. The 27mph prosecution trigger is a myth.
I hate the 20mph default, it is not easy to adhere to without the limiter deployed, but if it has saved the life of just one child (and the stats are compelling) it is worth its weight in Go Safe fines.
Team Nigel and the Tories are indulging in a Labour style hostage to fortune culture for demanding the return to a default 30mph limit. If there was any non-right wing media left they would be all over the change of speed limit on news of the first avoidable fatality.
You own article confirms the 10% plus 4 remains the trigger ie 26mph with no plans to change
I am content with the reviews and changes and it shouldn't be an issue going forward
You said it was enforced at 27 though !
It is commonly expected 20 - 26 is the margin
For clarification I drive to town on former 30mph roads and certainly a speed between 24 and 26 seems quite the norm
I do believe many roads at 20mph are correct, especially round schools and hospitals where 26mph is too high
Hang on, you've just said that it's correct to drive at 25/6mph in 20 mph limits. But the next moment you say that it's Ok to have 20mph limits around schools etc, where of course people will drive at 25/6 ... that's an argument for having 15mph limits instead [edit] around the schools..
No serving leader of any nation (with the possible exception of Russia) has ever named a ship after themselves. It's pretty well the ultimate in imbecilic narcissism.
HMS Queen Elizabeth so I agree.
There is a US Navy proscription against naming ships after living people (although Vinson and Stennis got passes) so this new whatever-it-is is the 'Trump Class' and the lead ship will be USS Defiant. If it ever gets built.
YouGov had a Reform 25% in late November. There's a clear sign of a small Tory recovery mirrored by Reform declining in the opinion poll average graph on Wikipedia.
The unknown is whether this trend will be reinforced by campaigning for the May elections, or if that will interrupt it.
Also, given the personal ambitions of many of those involved, what are the chances Kemi gets ditched after losing lots of councillors in May anyway?
Barring immense change during the next few months, the story of election night is almost written already, as significant Reform and Green gains are surely nailed on. The competition is for who gets seen as the biggest loser, and there Labour already has a very good head start.
Part of the question will be timing. The first results often create the story.
I think Wales is still in doubt though. If Reform do come further off the boil then the big story might be a Plaid victory in Wales, rather than Reform doing very well there.
Sunderland voting in a Reform council will be the first news story. Then will come some London boroughs.
Picking up on Wales, and the conversation yesterday, I see that on 20mh default speed limits in towns we have:
- Con current policy is to reverse, despite their noisy demands back in 2020/21 that timid Labour were not implementing it quicky enough. - Ref UK committed to reverse. - Evidence of the benefits is firming up in reduced casualties, safety and reduced insurance premiums, with annother year of data due before the Senedd elections next May.
One to watch.
(Checking, the position in England is that 20mph limits now cover areas where just under 20 million people live. TBH that is a lot higher than I thought it was.) -
I had the opportunity recently to spend at least half an hour in total driving through 20mph speed limits in Wales and so, in true PB.com fashion, I am now an expert.
What surprised me most, given the vitriol in online discussions about them, is how well-observed they were. My experience in the past of driving through 20mph speed limits in England and Scotland is that a lot of drivers will speed past anyone obeying the speed limit.
That was exactly my experience of driving in Wales soon after the limit was introduced. I have the impression that the vitriol has died down now, and some may even be acknowledging that lives have been saved and things are generally pleasanter but I don't follow Welsh politics much so I wouldn't really know if the hostility to Labour on this issue has abated at all.
I am a convert to the 20, after being opposed to it in the start. The roads in towns are so much safer. You can also pull out easily from side roads.
Most newer cars also have a limiter which means you don't have to keep monitoring your speed.
I was chatting to a chap from South Wales the other week. He says he loves driving at exactly 20 mph and watching the queue build up behind him. And if they get too close, he'll slow to 18...
There are a few who do this, but it in itself is dangerous causing anger and tailgating, even unsafe overtaking
The speed in these 20mph zones is not enforced until you reach 27mph
As far as the present position is, most councils are or have reviewed and reinstated some of the 30mph which have generally been accepted
Public Service announcement!
That is patently untrue. The 27mph prosecution trigger is a myth.
I hate the 20mph default, it is not easy to adhere to without the limiter deployed, but if it has saved the life of just one child (and the stats are compelling) it is worth its weight in Go Safe fines.
Team Nigel and the Tories are indulging in a Labour style hostage to fortune culture for demanding the return to a default 30mph limit. If there was any non-right wing media left they would be all over the change of speed limit on news of the first avoidable fatality.
You own article confirms the 10% plus 4 remains the trigger ie 26mph with no plans to change
I am content with the reviews and changes and it shouldn't be an issue going forward
You said it was enforced at 27 though !
It is commonly expected 20 - 26 is the margin
For clarification I drive to town on former 30mph roads and certainly a speed between 24 and 26 seems quite the norm
I do believe many roads at 20mph are correct, especially round schools and hospitals where 26mph is too high
Hang on, you've just said that it's correct to drive at 25/6mph in 20 mph limits. But the next moment you say that it's Ok to have 20mph limits around schools etc, where of course people will drive at 25/6 ... that's an argument for having 15mph limits instead [edit] around the schools..
No - The problem relates to previous 30mph zones which are the ones Go Safe monitor and the 26mph rule applies
The limits around schools and hospitals already existed
The 26mph trigger no longer applies. Prosecution is for 10% plus 2mph.
That's what I was told at the most recent of my numerous speed awareness courses.
In Wales ?
No, Gloucestershire, but I assume it is a UK wide approach.
Ultimately this stuff is only relevant to those who routinely break the law. It's pretty simple - drive at or below the speed limit and you'll be fine. Your speedo already has a tolerance included so there are no excuses.
Based on this polling I wouldn’t be surprised the Tories ahead of Reform at some point in quarter one of 2026, if present trends hold, not consistently but on an outlier basis.
Word missing there?
On the substantive point, am I right in thinking as well that Farage is at the same time the oldest and the least experienced of the four major party leaders? He's not likely to be improving now as he ages and he's never been in cabinet.
No, Starmer is about 18 months older than Farage.
Blair and Cameron had never been in government before they became PM.
Fair enough on the first point.
Cameron and Blair had both been Leaders of the Opposition. Farage hasn't even done that.
Indeed he quite often skives off Parliament. I think he finds it boring because its not all about him.
This has recently set me wondering if Nigel Farage might bail soon. He is rarely in the Commons or in Clacton, and does not even seem to have much to say about Streeting or Lammy advocating customs unions with the EU, an issue you'd think would be mother's milk to him. Is he still interested in politics? (That said, maybe he is just under the weather as there are some nasty bugs doing the rounds.)
I wonder if the 'I can't really remember what happened 50 years ago but I definitely did not say those racist and antisemitic things' row has put his gas at a peep. The one time I saw Farage address the issue directly he seemed uncharacteristically shifty and evasive.
28 witnesses, including Jewish students, and written communications amongst teachers, is quite a lot to dismiss as "lies, all lies". Tice is that crass imo; Farage is not.
It's also quite awkward with respect to Farage's position on Israel, and the portrayal of Muslims as The Mortal Enemy of Western Civilisation.
Witnesses at the time (as in recording in diaries, letters etc) or witnesses ‘recalling’ events of 50 years ago. Very big difference, as all good historians know.
28 witnesses seems pretty corroborative to me. The man’s a bully, and a spiv, and has been so since his earliest years.
I haven’t cared enough to look at what he did at school in detail, but isn’t prancing around with your arm in the air attention seeking rather than bullying?
Farage is deeply unpleasant man who is probably a racist. Spending 5 minutes reading a guardian article to confirm those views isn’t a good use of my time
So why did you venture in with your first comment about it being attention seeking not bullying then?
Because it was an interesting discussion.
Not all of the conversations on here are entirely fact based and it’s a better board for it
Ok but hang on.
Post 1: You counter the 'bully' allegations with "wasn't it just attention seeking?"
Post2: You say you don't care enough to read the details to see if it was indeed just attention seeking.
Post3: Whilst still not caring to check if it was just attention seeking you say it's nevertheless interesting.
Really rather odd. But, look, you're not in the dock, and it is Christmas, so that's probably enough on the matter. I note your overall 'deeply unpleasant and probably a racist' assessment of the bloke we're talking about. Big tick for that.
Not at all. Very easy to reconcile.
I’m aware he behaved badly at school but haven’t checked into details. The only thing that has stuck in my mind is him walking around making nazi salutes. Which to my mind is more childishly trying to shock people/seek attention. But it may be he did other stuff which was more targeted at specific individuals (which for me is the threshold of bullying).
But whether he’s a spiv and a bully or a spiv and an attention seeker won’t materially change how I view him in the round, so would rather do more uplifting things with my time
YouGov had a Reform 25% in late November. There's a clear sign of a small Tory recovery mirrored by Reform declining in the opinion poll average graph on Wikipedia.
The unknown is whether this trend will be reinforced by campaigning for the May elections, or if that will interrupt it.
Also, given the personal ambitions of many of those involved, what are the chances Kemi gets ditched after losing lots of councillors in May anyway?
Barring immense change during the next few months, the story of election night is almost written already, as significant Reform and Green gains are surely nailed on. The competition is for who gets seen as the biggest loser, and there Labour already has a very good head start.
Part of the question will be timing. The first results often create the story.
I think Wales is still in doubt though. If Reform do come further off the boil then the big story might be a Plaid victory in Wales, rather than Reform doing very well there.
Sunderland voting in a Reform council will be the first news story. Then will come some London boroughs.
Picking up on Wales, and the conversation yesterday, I see that on 20mh default speed limits in towns we have:
- Con current policy is to reverse, despite their noisy demands back in 2020/21 that timid Labour were not implementing it quicky enough. - Ref UK committed to reverse. - Evidence of the benefits is firming up in reduced casualties, safety and reduced insurance premiums, with annother year of data due before the Senedd elections next May.
One to watch.
(Checking, the position in England is that 20mph limits now cover areas where just under 20 million people live. TBH that is a lot higher than I thought it was.) -
I had the opportunity recently to spend at least half an hour in total driving through 20mph speed limits in Wales and so, in true PB.com fashion, I am now an expert.
What surprised me most, given the vitriol in online discussions about them, is how well-observed they were. My experience in the past of driving through 20mph speed limits in England and Scotland is that a lot of drivers will speed past anyone obeying the speed limit.
That was exactly my experience of driving in Wales soon after the limit was introduced. I have the impression that the vitriol has died down now, and some may even be acknowledging that lives have been saved and things are generally pleasanter but I don't follow Welsh politics much so I wouldn't really know if the hostility to Labour on this issue has abated at all.
I am a convert to the 20, after being opposed to it in the start. The roads in towns are so much safer. You can also pull out easily from side roads.
Most newer cars also have a limiter which means you don't have to keep monitoring your speed.
I was chatting to a chap from South Wales the other week. He says he loves driving at exactly 20 mph and watching the queue build up behind him. And if they get too close, he'll slow to 18...
There are a few who do this, but it in itself is dangerous causing anger and tailgating, even unsafe overtaking
The speed in these 20mph zones is not enforced until you reach 27mph
As far as the present position is, most councils are or have reviewed and reinstated some of the 30mph which have generally been accepted
Public Service announcement!
That is patently untrue. The 27mph prosecution trigger is a myth.
I hate the 20mph default, it is not easy to adhere to without the limiter deployed, but if it has saved the life of just one child (and the stats are compelling) it is worth its weight in Go Safe fines.
Team Nigel and the Tories are indulging in a Labour style hostage to fortune culture for demanding the return to a default 30mph limit. If there was any non-right wing media left they would be all over the change of speed limit on news of the first avoidable fatality.
You own article confirms the 10% plus 4 remains the trigger ie 26mph with no plans to change
I am content with the reviews and changes and it shouldn't be an issue going forward
You said it was enforced at 27 though !
It is commonly expected 20 - 26 is the margin
For clarification I drive to town on former 30mph roads and certainly a speed between 24 and 26 seems quite the norm
I do believe many roads at 20mph are correct, especially round schools and hospitals where 26mph is too high
Hang on, you've just said that it's correct to drive at 25/6mph in 20 mph limits. But the next moment you say that it's Ok to have 20mph limits around schools etc, where of course people will drive at 25/6 ... that's an argument for having 15mph limits instead [edit] around the schools..
No - The problem relates to previous 30mph zones which are the ones Go Safe monitor and the 26mph rule applies
The limits around schools and hospitals already existed
The 26mph trigger no longer applies. Prosecution is for 10% plus 2mph.
That's what I was told at the most recent of my numerous speed awareness courses.
In Wales ?
No, Gloucestershire, but I assume it is a UK wide approach.
Ultimately this stuff is only relevant to those who routinely break the law. It's pretty simple - drive at or below the speed limit and you'll be fine. Your speedo already has a tolerance included so there are no excuses.
No expert, but it doesn't look like a battleship to me.
TBF a Great War/WW2 corvette didn't look like the small sailing ship of the mid-C19 ... What is also notable is that it's to be called the Trump Class, which indicates that the first ship of the class will be named after Mr Trump (a class of warships is usually named after the first of the class, pace [edit] UK MoD and its stupid messing around of late).
Usually Presidential names get applied to Nimitz- or Ford-class nuclear aircraft carriers. But it's not cut and dry. Mr Carter got a nuke sub named after him (entirely appropriately and I imagine amicably, as he was a nuke sub engineer by trade).
No serving leader of any nation (with the possible exception of Russia) has ever named a ship after themselves. It's pretty well the ultimate in imbecilic narcissism.
Do HMS Queen Elizabeth and the Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carriers count?
YouGov had a Reform 25% in late November. There's a clear sign of a small Tory recovery mirrored by Reform declining in the opinion poll average graph on Wikipedia.
The unknown is whether this trend will be reinforced by campaigning for the May elections, or if that will interrupt it.
Also, given the personal ambitions of many of those involved, what are the chances Kemi gets ditched after losing lots of councillors in May anyway?
Barring immense change during the next few months, the story of election night is almost written already, as significant Reform and Green gains are surely nailed on. The competition is for who gets seen as the biggest loser, and there Labour already has a very good head start.
Part of the question will be timing. The first results often create the story.
I think Wales is still in doubt though. If Reform do come further off the boil then the big story might be a Plaid victory in Wales, rather than Reform doing very well there.
Sunderland voting in a Reform council will be the first news story. Then will come some London boroughs.
Picking up on Wales, and the conversation yesterday, I see that on 20mh default speed limits in towns we have:
- Con current policy is to reverse, despite their noisy demands back in 2020/21 that timid Labour were not implementing it quicky enough. - Ref UK committed to reverse. - Evidence of the benefits is firming up in reduced casualties, safety and reduced insurance premiums, with annother year of data due before the Senedd elections next May.
One to watch.
(Checking, the position in England is that 20mph limits now cover areas where just under 20 million people live. TBH that is a lot higher than I thought it was.) -
I had the opportunity recently to spend at least half an hour in total driving through 20mph speed limits in Wales and so, in true PB.com fashion, I am now an expert.
What surprised me most, given the vitriol in online discussions about them, is how well-observed they were. My experience in the past of driving through 20mph speed limits in England and Scotland is that a lot of drivers will speed past anyone obeying the speed limit.
That was exactly my experience of driving in Wales soon after the limit was introduced. I have the impression that the vitriol has died down now, and some may even be acknowledging that lives have been saved and things are generally pleasanter but I don't follow Welsh politics much so I wouldn't really know if the hostility to Labour on this issue has abated at all.
I am a convert to the 20, after being opposed to it in the start. The roads in towns are so much safer. You can also pull out easily from side roads.
Most newer cars also have a limiter which means you don't have to keep monitoring your speed.
I was chatting to a chap from South Wales the other week. He says he loves driving at exactly 20 mph and watching the queue build up behind him. And if they get too close, he'll slow to 18...
There are a few who do this, but it in itself is dangerous causing anger and tailgating, even unsafe overtaking
The speed in these 20mph zones is not enforced until you reach 27mph
As far as the present position is, most councils are or have reviewed and reinstated some of the 30mph which have generally been accepted
Public Service announcement!
That is patently untrue. The 27mph prosecution trigger is a myth.
I hate the 20mph default, it is not easy to adhere to without the limiter deployed, but if it has saved the life of just one child (and the stats are compelling) it is worth its weight in Go Safe fines.
Team Nigel and the Tories are indulging in a Labour style hostage to fortune culture for demanding the return to a default 30mph limit. If there was any non-right wing media left they would be all over the change of speed limit on news of the first avoidable fatality.
No expert, but it doesn't look like a battleship to me.
TBF a Great War/WW2 corvette didn't look like the small sailing ship of the mid-C19 ... What is also notable is that it's to be called the Trump Class, which indicates that the first ship of the class will be named after Mr Trump (a class of warships is usually named after the first of the class, pace [edit] UK MoD and its stupid messing around of late).
Usually Presidential names get applied to Nimitz- or Ford-class nuclear aircraft carriers. But it's not cut and dry. Mr Carter got a nuke sub named after him (entirely appropriately and I imagine amicably, as he was a nuke sub engineer by trade).
No serving leader of any nation (with the possible exception of Russia) has ever named a ship after themselves. It's pretty well the ultimate in imbecilic narcissism.
I see the government is continuing with it's Grand Old Duke of York approach to policy announcements.
Remind me of winter fuel allowance. A defendable policy that pissed a lot of people off and then a partial U-turn a lot later that won't win back any of the alienated voters.
As it happens my world includes farms, and lawyers and accountants who serve farms and the rural constituency. The thing about IHT is that more or less everyone who may be affected does some planning of their affairs, often very simple, but this relies on fairly long term stability in how systems will operate - rather like the pension industry relies on it.
The IHT changes as first announced had the effect that for a particular group, mostly older, it was possible that for some years planning for IHT would for them be much harder than it is for the Duke of Westminster, and in some cases impossible.
Rural accountants and lawyers for months now have been working day and night, sometimes literally, to sort the issues arising among worried farmers. Today's news renders some of this unnecessary and irrelevant. I know lawyers who have had to refuse work because of the sheer volume coming their way, and real specialists can be thin on the ground.
My excellent MP (Penrith) has lost the whip for voting against the government on this issue, only to see the government immediately change course to something more like what he wanted.
Their management of issues remains dismal. For the first time for 1000 years Labour has loads of rural seats and they have squandered the lot.
Today's climb down was something but still not enough. As the Tories, LDs and Reform have demanded, inheritance tax on family farms and family businesses should still be scrapped completely
Typical of Starmer and Reeves in pleasing absolutely no one and handing a gift to Badenoch who wants it all gone
Indeed, Labour also waging class war still on those with property worth over £2 million with the mansion tax surcharge and family farms and family businesses worth more than that still liable for inheritance tax.
YouGov had a Reform 25% in late November. There's a clear sign of a small Tory recovery mirrored by Reform declining in the opinion poll average graph on Wikipedia.
The unknown is whether this trend will be reinforced by campaigning for the May elections, or if that will interrupt it.
Also, given the personal ambitions of many of those involved, what are the chances Kemi gets ditched after losing lots of councillors in May anyway?
Barring immense change during the next few months, the story of election night is almost written already, as significant Reform and Green gains are surely nailed on. The competition is for who gets seen as the biggest loser, and there Labour already has a very good head start.
Part of the question will be timing. The first results often create the story.
I think Wales is still in doubt though. If Reform do come further off the boil then the big story might be a Plaid victory in Wales, rather than Reform doing very well there.
Sunderland voting in a Reform council will be the first news story. Then will come some London boroughs.
Picking up on Wales, and the conversation yesterday, I see that on 20mh default speed limits in towns we have:
- Con current policy is to reverse, despite their noisy demands back in 2020/21 that timid Labour were not implementing it quicky enough. - Ref UK committed to reverse. - Evidence of the benefits is firming up in reduced casualties, safety and reduced insurance premiums, with annother year of data due before the Senedd elections next May.
One to watch.
(Checking, the position in England is that 20mph limits now cover areas where just under 20 million people live. TBH that is a lot higher than I thought it was.) -
I had the opportunity recently to spend at least half an hour in total driving through 20mph speed limits in Wales and so, in true PB.com fashion, I am now an expert.
What surprised me most, given the vitriol in online discussions about them, is how well-observed they were. My experience in the past of driving through 20mph speed limits in England and Scotland is that a lot of drivers will speed past anyone obeying the speed limit.
That was exactly my experience of driving in Wales soon after the limit was introduced. I have the impression that the vitriol has died down now, and some may even be acknowledging that lives have been saved and things are generally pleasanter but I don't follow Welsh politics much so I wouldn't really know if the hostility to Labour on this issue has abated at all.
I am a convert to the 20, after being opposed to it in the start. The roads in towns are so much safer. You can also pull out easily from side roads.
Most newer cars also have a limiter which means you don't have to keep monitoring your speed.
I was chatting to a chap from South Wales the other week. He says he loves driving at exactly 20 mph and watching the queue build up behind him. And if they get too close, he'll slow to 18...
There are a few who do this, but it in itself is dangerous causing anger and tailgating, even unsafe overtaking
The speed in these 20mph zones is not enforced until you reach 27mph
As far as the present position is, most councils are or have reviewed and reinstated some of the 30mph which have generally been accepted
Public Service announcement!
That is patently untrue. The 27mph prosecution trigger is a myth.
I hate the 20mph default, it is not easy to adhere to without the limiter deployed, but if it has saved the life of just one child (and the stats are compelling) it is worth its weight in Go Safe fines.
Team Nigel and the Tories are indulging in a Labour style hostage to fortune culture for demanding the return to a default 30mph limit. If there was any non-right wing media left they would be all over the change of speed limit on news of the first avoidable fatality.
You own article confirms the 10% plus 4 remains the trigger ie 26mph with no plans to change
I am content with the reviews and changes and it shouldn't be an issue going forward
You said it was enforced at 27 though !
It is commonly expected 20 - 26 is the margin
For clarification I drive to town on former 30mph roads and certainly a speed between 24 and 26 seems quite the norm
I do believe many roads at 20mph are correct, especially round schools and hospitals where 26mph is too high
Hang on, you've just said that it's correct to drive at 25/6mph in 20 mph limits. But the next moment you say that it's Ok to have 20mph limits around schools etc, where of course people will drive at 25/6 ... that's an argument for having 15mph limits instead [edit] around the schools..
No - The problem relates to previous 30mph zones which are the ones Go Safe monitor and the 26mph rule applies
The limits around schools and hospitals already existed
The 26mph trigger no longer applies. Prosecution is for 10% plus 2mph.
That's what I was told at the most recent of my numerous speed awareness courses.
In Wales ?
No, Gloucestershire, but I assume it is a UK wide approach.
Ultimately this stuff is only relevant to those who routinely break the law. It's pretty simple - drive at or below the speed limit and you'll be fine. Your speedo already has a tolerance included so there are no excuses.
No expert, but it doesn't look like a battleship to me.
TBF a Great War/WW2 corvette didn't look like the small sailing ship of the mid-C19 ... What is also notable is that it's to be called the Trump Class, which indicates that the first ship of the class will be named after Mr Trump (a class of warships is usually named after the first of the class, pace [edit] UK MoD and its stupid messing around of late).
Usually Presidential names get applied to Nimitz- or Ford-class nuclear aircraft carriers. But it's not cut and dry. Mr Carter got a nuke sub named after him (entirely appropriately and I imagine amicably, as he was a nuke sub engineer by trade).
No serving leader of any nation (with the possible exception of Russia) has ever named a ship after themselves. It's pretty well the ultimate in imbecilic narcissism.
Do HMS Queen Elizabeth and the Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carriers count?
It's named after the first Elizabeth. Both have boring names - I want Dwarf and Dainty, to confuse the enemy.
No serving leader of any nation (with the possible exception of Russia) has ever named a ship after themselves. It's pretty well the ultimate in imbecilic narcissism.
HMS Queen Elizabeth so I agree.
There is a US Navy proscription against naming ships after living people (although Vinson and Stennis got passes) so this new whatever-it-is is the 'Trump Class' and the lead ship will be USS Defiant. If it ever gets built.
Hopefully, by the time it’s built, Trump will have popped his clogs.
No serving leader of any nation (with the possible exception of Russia) has ever named a ship after themselves. It's pretty well the ultimate in imbecilic narcissism.
HMS Queen Elizabeth so I agree.
There is a US Navy proscription against naming ships after living people (although Vinson and Stennis got passes) so this new whatever-it-is is the 'Trump Class' and the lead ship will be USS Defiant. If it ever gets built.
Aircraft carriers named after Ronald Reagan and George H W Bush while still alive. In fact Bush was actively involved in the ceremonials. Of course, he had a distinguished wartime record serving as a naval pilot flying from carriers. Donald Trump not quite so renowned for his martial endeavours.
YouGov had a Reform 25% in late November. There's a clear sign of a small Tory recovery mirrored by Reform declining in the opinion poll average graph on Wikipedia.
The unknown is whether this trend will be reinforced by campaigning for the May elections, or if that will interrupt it.
Also, given the personal ambitions of many of those involved, what are the chances Kemi gets ditched after losing lots of councillors in May anyway?
Barring immense change during the next few months, the story of election night is almost written already, as significant Reform and Green gains are surely nailed on. The competition is for who gets seen as the biggest loser, and there Labour already has a very good head start.
Part of the question will be timing. The first results often create the story.
I think Wales is still in doubt though. If Reform do come further off the boil then the big story might be a Plaid victory in Wales, rather than Reform doing very well there.
Sunderland voting in a Reform council will be the first news story. Then will come some London boroughs.
Picking up on Wales, and the conversation yesterday, I see that on 20mh default speed limits in towns we have:
- Con current policy is to reverse, despite their noisy demands back in 2020/21 that timid Labour were not implementing it quicky enough. - Ref UK committed to reverse. - Evidence of the benefits is firming up in reduced casualties, safety and reduced insurance premiums, with annother year of data due before the Senedd elections next May.
One to watch.
(Checking, the position in England is that 20mph limits now cover areas where just under 20 million people live. TBH that is a lot higher than I thought it was.) -
I had the opportunity recently to spend at least half an hour in total driving through 20mph speed limits in Wales and so, in true PB.com fashion, I am now an expert.
What surprised me most, given the vitriol in online discussions about them, is how well-observed they were. My experience in the past of driving through 20mph speed limits in England and Scotland is that a lot of drivers will speed past anyone obeying the speed limit.
That was exactly my experience of driving in Wales soon after the limit was introduced. I have the impression that the vitriol has died down now, and some may even be acknowledging that lives have been saved and things are generally pleasanter but I don't follow Welsh politics much so I wouldn't really know if the hostility to Labour on this issue has abated at all.
I am a convert to the 20, after being opposed to it in the start. The roads in towns are so much safer. You can also pull out easily from side roads.
Most newer cars also have a limiter which means you don't have to keep monitoring your speed.
I was chatting to a chap from South Wales the other week. He says he loves driving at exactly 20 mph and watching the queue build up behind him. And if they get too close, he'll slow to 18...
There are a few who do this, but it in itself is dangerous causing anger and tailgating, even unsafe overtaking
The speed in these 20mph zones is not enforced until you reach 27mph
As far as the present position is, most councils are or have reviewed and reinstated some of the 30mph which have generally been accepted
Public Service announcement!
That is patently untrue. The 27mph prosecution trigger is a myth.
I hate the 20mph default, it is not easy to adhere to without the limiter deployed, but if it has saved the life of just one child (and the stats are compelling) it is worth its weight in Go Safe fines.
Team Nigel and the Tories are indulging in a Labour style hostage to fortune culture for demanding the return to a default 30mph limit. If there was any non-right wing media left they would be all over the change of speed limit on news of the first avoidable fatality.
You own article confirms the 10% plus 4 remains the trigger ie 26mph with no plans to change
I am content with the reviews and changes and it shouldn't be an issue going forward
You said it was enforced at 27 though !
It is commonly expected 20 - 26 is the margin
For clarification I drive to town on former 30mph roads and certainly a speed between 24 and 26 seems quite the norm
I do believe many roads at 20mph are correct, especially round schools and hospitals where 26mph is too high
Hang on, you've just said that it's correct to drive at 25/6mph in 20 mph limits. But the next moment you say that it's Ok to have 20mph limits around schools etc, where of course people will drive at 25/6 ... that's an argument for having 15mph limits instead [edit] around the schools..
No - The problem relates to previous 30mph zones which are the ones Go Safe monitor and the 26mph rule applies
The limits around schools and hospitals already existed
The 26mph trigger no longer applies. Prosecution is for 10% plus 2mph.
That's what I was told at the most recent of my numerous speed awareness courses.
In Wales ?
No, Gloucestershire, but I assume it is a UK wide approach.
Ultimately this stuff is only relevant to those who routinely break the law. It's pretty simple - drive at or below the speed limit and you'll be fine. Your speedo already has a tolerance included so there are no excuses.
YouGov had a Reform 25% in late November. There's a clear sign of a small Tory recovery mirrored by Reform declining in the opinion poll average graph on Wikipedia.
The unknown is whether this trend will be reinforced by campaigning for the May elections, or if that will interrupt it.
Also, given the personal ambitions of many of those involved, what are the chances Kemi gets ditched after losing lots of councillors in May anyway?
Barring immense change during the next few months, the story of election night is almost written already, as significant Reform and Green gains are surely nailed on. The competition is for who gets seen as the biggest loser, and there Labour already has a very good head start.
Part of the question will be timing. The first results often create the story.
I think Wales is still in doubt though. If Reform do come further off the boil then the big story might be a Plaid victory in Wales, rather than Reform doing very well there.
Sunderland voting in a Reform council will be the first news story. Then will come some London boroughs.
Picking up on Wales, and the conversation yesterday, I see that on 20mh default speed limits in towns we have:
- Con current policy is to reverse, despite their noisy demands back in 2020/21 that timid Labour were not implementing it quicky enough. - Ref UK committed to reverse. - Evidence of the benefits is firming up in reduced casualties, safety and reduced insurance premiums, with annother year of data due before the Senedd elections next May.
One to watch.
(Checking, the position in England is that 20mph limits now cover areas where just under 20 million people live. TBH that is a lot higher than I thought it was.) -
I had the opportunity recently to spend at least half an hour in total driving through 20mph speed limits in Wales and so, in true PB.com fashion, I am now an expert.
What surprised me most, given the vitriol in online discussions about them, is how well-observed they were. My experience in the past of driving through 20mph speed limits in England and Scotland is that a lot of drivers will speed past anyone obeying the speed limit.
That was exactly my experience of driving in Wales soon after the limit was introduced. I have the impression that the vitriol has died down now, and some may even be acknowledging that lives have been saved and things are generally pleasanter but I don't follow Welsh politics much so I wouldn't really know if the hostility to Labour on this issue has abated at all.
I am a convert to the 20, after being opposed to it in the start. The roads in towns are so much safer. You can also pull out easily from side roads.
Most newer cars also have a limiter which means you don't have to keep monitoring your speed.
I was chatting to a chap from South Wales the other week. He says he loves driving at exactly 20 mph and watching the queue build up behind him. And if they get too close, he'll slow to 18...
There are a few who do this, but it in itself is dangerous causing anger and tailgating, even unsafe overtaking
The speed in these 20mph zones is not enforced until you reach 27mph
As far as the present position is, most councils are or have reviewed and reinstated some of the 30mph which have generally been accepted
Public Service announcement!
That is patently untrue. The 27mph prosecution trigger is a myth.
I hate the 20mph default, it is not easy to adhere to without the limiter deployed, but if it has saved the life of just one child (and the stats are compelling) it is worth its weight in Go Safe fines.
Team Nigel and the Tories are indulging in a Labour style hostage to fortune culture for demanding the return to a default 30mph limit. If there was any non-right wing media left they would be all over the change of speed limit on news of the first avoidable fatality.
Based on this polling I wouldn’t be surprised the Tories ahead of Reform at some point in quarter one of 2026, if present trends hold, not consistently but on an outlier basis.
Word missing there?
On the substantive point, am I right in thinking as well that Farage is at the same time the oldest and the least experienced of the four major party leaders? He's not likely to be improving now as he ages and he's never been in cabinet.
No, Starmer is about 18 months older than Farage.
Blair and Cameron had never been in government before they became PM.
Fair enough on the first point.
Cameron and Blair had both been Leaders of the Opposition. Farage hasn't even done that.
Indeed he quite often skives off Parliament. I think he finds it boring because its not all about him.
This has recently set me wondering if Nigel Farage might bail soon. He is rarely in the Commons or in Clacton, and does not even seem to have much to say about Streeting or Lammy advocating customs unions with the EU, an issue you'd think would be mother's milk to him. Is he still interested in politics? (That said, maybe he is just under the weather as there are some nasty bugs doing the rounds.)
I wonder if the 'I can't really remember what happened 50 years ago but I definitely did not say those racist and antisemitic things' row has put his gas at a peep. The one time I saw Farage address the issue directly he seemed uncharacteristically shifty and evasive.
28 witnesses, including Jewish students, and written communications amongst teachers, is quite a lot to dismiss as "lies, all lies". Tice is that crass imo; Farage is not.
It's also quite awkward with respect to Farage's position on Israel, and the portrayal of Muslims as The Mortal Enemy of Western Civilisation.
Witnesses at the time (as in recording in diaries, letters etc) or witnesses ‘recalling’ events of 50 years ago. Very big difference, as all good historians know.
28 witnesses seems pretty corroborative to me. The man’s a bully, and a spiv, and has been so since his earliest years.
Peoples memories are not like data in a computer, or a written log. We recreate them when we recall them. We know that he is an odious piece of shit now, so it’s entirely possible some are inadvertently ‘recalling’ things that didn’t happen, or were no quite as they think. That’s why contemporaneous accounts are far more reliable. An approach taken by James Holland in recent books, and one that I thin improves on older histories (such as those by Lyn Macdonald of the first war, which relied on testimony from 60 or 70 years ago).
You’re missing the point, perhaps disingenuously. The question is whether Farage was a horrible piece of shit, not his precise choreography on a grassy knoll.
The unilateral answer is yes, and the common sense conclusion is that he remains one.
No expert, but it doesn't look like a battleship to me.
TBF a Great War/WW2 corvette didn't look like the small sailing ship of the mid-C19 ... What is also notable is that it's to be called the Trump Class, which indicates that the first ship of the class will be named after Mr Trump (a class of warships is usually named after the first of the class, pace [edit] UK MoD and its stupid messing around of late).
Usually Presidential names get applied to Nimitz- or Ford-class nuclear aircraft carriers. But it's not cut and dry. Mr Carter got a nuke sub named after him (entirely appropriately and I imagine amicably, as he was a nuke sub engineer by trade).
No serving leader of any nation (with the possible exception of Russia) has ever named a ship after themselves. It's pretty well the ultimate in imbecilic narcissism.
Do HMS Queen Elizabeth and the Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carriers count?
It's named after the first Elizabeth. Both have boring names - I want Dwarf and Dainty, to confuse the enemy.
The Cunard liner Queen Elizabeth 2 has a 2 in the sense of being second Cunard big ship named for a Queen E rather than the II roman numeral for a regnal name. There was some sort of muddle at the time but that's how it's usually been stated. Saved Her Maj from honouring herself, anyway.
Based on this polling I wouldn’t be surprised the Tories ahead of Reform at some point in quarter one of 2026, if present trends hold, not consistently but on an outlier basis.
Word missing there?
On the substantive point, am I right in thinking as well that Farage is at the same time the oldest and the least experienced of the four major party leaders? He's not likely to be improving now as he ages and he's never been in cabinet.
No, Starmer is about 18 months older than Farage.
Blair and Cameron had never been in government before they became PM.
Fair enough on the first point.
Cameron and Blair had both been Leaders of the Opposition. Farage hasn't even done that.
Indeed he quite often skives off Parliament. I think he finds it boring because its not all about him.
This has recently set me wondering if Nigel Farage might bail soon. He is rarely in the Commons or in Clacton, and does not even seem to have much to say about Streeting or Lammy advocating customs unions with the EU, an issue you'd think would be mother's milk to him. Is he still interested in politics? (That said, maybe he is just under the weather as there are some nasty bugs doing the rounds.)
I wonder if the 'I can't really remember what happened 50 years ago but I definitely did not say those racist and antisemitic things' row has put his gas at a peep. The one time I saw Farage address the issue directly he seemed uncharacteristically shifty and evasive.
28 witnesses, including Jewish students, and written communications amongst teachers, is quite a lot to dismiss as "lies, all lies". Tice is that crass imo; Farage is not.
It's also quite awkward with respect to Farage's position on Israel, and the portrayal of Muslims as The Mortal Enemy of Western Civilisation.
Witnesses at the time (as in recording in diaries, letters etc) or witnesses ‘recalling’ events of 50 years ago. Very big difference, as all good historians know.
28 witnesses seems pretty corroborative to me. The man’s a bully, and a spiv, and has been so since his earliest years.
I haven’t cared enough to look at what he did at school in detail, but isn’t prancing around with your arm in the air attention seeking rather than bullying?
Farage is deeply unpleasant man who is probably a racist. Spending 5 minutes reading a guardian article to confirm those views isn’t a good use of my time
So why did you venture in with your first comment about it being attention seeking not bullying then?
Because it was an interesting discussion.
Not all of the conversations on here are entirely fact based and it’s a better board for it
Ok but hang on.
Post 1: You counter the 'bully' allegations with "wasn't it just attention seeking?"
Post2: You say you don't care enough to read the details to see if it was indeed just attention seeking.
Post3: Whilst still not caring to check if it was just attention seeking you say it's nevertheless interesting.
Really rather odd. But, look, you're not in the dock, and it is Christmas, so that's probably enough on the matter. I note your overall 'deeply unpleasant and probably a racist' assessment of the bloke we're talking about. Big tick for that.
Not at all. Very easy to reconcile.
I’m aware he behaved badly at school but haven’t checked into details. The only thing that has stuck in my mind is him walking around making nazi salutes. Which to my mind is more childishly trying to shock people/seek attention. But it may be he did other stuff which was more targeted at specific individuals (which for me is the threshold of bullying).
But whether he’s a spiv and a bully or a spiv and an attention seeker won’t materially change how I view him in the round, so would rather do more uplifting things with my time
Ok, so just a snippet to give you a flavour.
He would torment a particular Jewish pupil by continually leaning in close and saying, "should have gassed you all".
With gas enunciated as "gassssssss" to mimic the sound of it hissing into the chambers at the death camps.
YouGov had a Reform 25% in late November. There's a clear sign of a small Tory recovery mirrored by Reform declining in the opinion poll average graph on Wikipedia.
The unknown is whether this trend will be reinforced by campaigning for the May elections, or if that will interrupt it.
Also, given the personal ambitions of many of those involved, what are the chances Kemi gets ditched after losing lots of councillors in May anyway?
Barring immense change during the next few months, the story of election night is almost written already, as significant Reform and Green gains are surely nailed on. The competition is for who gets seen as the biggest loser, and there Labour already has a very good head start.
Part of the question will be timing. The first results often create the story.
I think Wales is still in doubt though. If Reform do come further off the boil then the big story might be a Plaid victory in Wales, rather than Reform doing very well there.
Sunderland voting in a Reform council will be the first news story. Then will come some London boroughs.
Picking up on Wales, and the conversation yesterday, I see that on 20mh default speed limits in towns we have:
- Con current policy is to reverse, despite their noisy demands back in 2020/21 that timid Labour were not implementing it quicky enough. - Ref UK committed to reverse. - Evidence of the benefits is firming up in reduced casualties, safety and reduced insurance premiums, with annother year of data due before the Senedd elections next May.
One to watch.
(Checking, the position in England is that 20mph limits now cover areas where just under 20 million people live. TBH that is a lot higher than I thought it was.) -
I had the opportunity recently to spend at least half an hour in total driving through 20mph speed limits in Wales and so, in true PB.com fashion, I am now an expert.
What surprised me most, given the vitriol in online discussions about them, is how well-observed they were. My experience in the past of driving through 20mph speed limits in England and Scotland is that a lot of drivers will speed past anyone obeying the speed limit.
That was exactly my experience of driving in Wales soon after the limit was introduced. I have the impression that the vitriol has died down now, and some may even be acknowledging that lives have been saved and things are generally pleasanter but I don't follow Welsh politics much so I wouldn't really know if the hostility to Labour on this issue has abated at all.
I am a convert to the 20, after being opposed to it in the start. The roads in towns are so much safer. You can also pull out easily from side roads.
Most newer cars also have a limiter which means you don't have to keep monitoring your speed.
I was chatting to a chap from South Wales the other week. He says he loves driving at exactly 20 mph and watching the queue build up behind him. And if they get too close, he'll slow to 18...
There are a few who do this, but it in itself is dangerous causing anger and tailgating, even unsafe overtaking
The speed in these 20mph zones is not enforced until you reach 27mph
As far as the present position is, most councils are or have reviewed and reinstated some of the 30mph which have generally been accepted
Public Service announcement!
That is patently untrue. The 27mph prosecution trigger is a myth.
I hate the 20mph default, it is not easy to adhere to without the limiter deployed, but if it has saved the life of just one child (and the stats are compelling) it is worth its weight in Go Safe fines.
Team Nigel and the Tories are indulging in a Labour style hostage to fortune culture for demanding the return to a default 30mph limit. If there was any non-right wing media left they would be all over the change of speed limit on news of the first avoidable fatality.
You own article confirms the 10% plus 4 remains the trigger ie 26mph with no plans to change
I am content with the reviews and changes and it shouldn't be an issue going forward
You said it was enforced at 27 though !
It is commonly expected 20 - 26 is the margin
For clarification I drive to town on former 30mph roads and certainly a speed between 24 and 26 seems quite the norm
I do believe many roads at 20mph are correct, especially round schools and hospitals where 26mph is too high
Hang on, you've just said that it's correct to drive at 25/6mph in 20 mph limits. But the next moment you say that it's Ok to have 20mph limits around schools etc, where of course people will drive at 25/6 ... that's an argument for having 15mph limits instead [edit] around the schools..
No - The problem relates to previous 30mph zones which are the ones Go Safe monitor and the 26mph rule applies
The limits around schools and hospitals already existed
The 26mph trigger no longer applies. Prosecution is for 10% plus 2mph.
That's what I was told at the most recent of my numerous speed awareness courses.
In Wales ?
No, Gloucestershire, but I assume it is a UK wide approach.
Ultimately this stuff is only relevant to those who routinely break the law. It's pretty simple - drive at or below the speed limit and you'll be fine. Your speedo already has a tolerance included so there are no excuses.
This is the best Christmas present me, my family and my friends could have had. I can now safely sleep at night, that is how bad it has been. Especially for those older than me with serious health issues. Bad news for agricultural valuers of course who would have made a fortune over the arguing the toss over the values of farms. It takes my estate out of the danger zone and so we can now look forwards to building the shed which we have needed for many years.
I had expected this to become a jockeying point when the new Labour leader was selected or else it to be put off for a year, and a year and a year.
They pointed the shotgun at the whole farming industry. We stood up to them and they have blinked. But we won't forget, no we won't forget ...
That is the whole point
The farmers will not forgive or vote labour because of this
They also voted en masse for Brexit and then realised they had screwed themselves. They are the ultimate selfish opportunists who believe the world owes them a living. Of course they won't vote labour.
British farmers do appear to be cretinous, as a class. Brexit is exhibit 1.
However, if you care about land use and food quality, then you need to care about farmers.
Reeves’s problem is she actively hates much of the country, including farmers.
The amount of political capital burnt in this thing is incredible. Ultimately, the correct decision, tax should be targeted at investors and companies buying land. The vast majority of farm estates will now be exempt, providing they make use of the £5m spouse allowance
The people benefiting from this change are those sitting on a highly tax efficient asset worth many millions who quite sincerely and genuinely want to keep it that way and don't see why they should pay the same tax as say someone running a productive business.
We have to concede an extremely effective lobbying exercise by wealthy landowners but we don't really need to agree with the principle of it. It's far more egregious than WFA for example.
Those who are genuinely worried about family farming would be far better off looking at *incomes* - for instance, supermarket buying practices - and food security.
But this lobbying has been all about protecting capital investment.
It's like houses - those who have houses are treated far better than those without when it comes to IHT. No wonder the values are distorted.
IHT is theft!
Property is theft comrade.
Your family member dies, you're bereaved, and you're left with a massive bill to Haitch-MRC - how does that work?
A family member dies and you're left a massive unearned pot of gold. How is that fair?
No expert, but it doesn't look like a battleship to me.
TBF a Great War/WW2 corvette didn't look like the small sailing ship of the mid-C19 ... What is also notable is that it's to be called the Trump Class, which indicates that the first ship of the class will be named after Mr Trump (a class of warships is usually named after the first of the class, pace [edit] UK MoD and its stupid messing around of late).
Usually Presidential names get applied to Nimitz- or Ford-class nuclear aircraft carriers. But it's not cut and dry. Mr Carter got a nuke sub named after him (entirely appropriately and I imagine amicably, as he was a nuke sub engineer by trade).
No serving leader of any nation (with the possible exception of Russia) has ever named a ship after themselves. It's pretty well the ultimate in imbecilic narcissism.
Do HMS Queen Elizabeth and the Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carriers count?
It's named after the first Elizabeth. Both have boring names - I want Dwarf and Dainty, to confuse the enemy.
No serving leader of any nation (with the possible exception of Russia) has ever named a ship after themselves. It's pretty well the ultimate in imbecilic narcissism.
HMS Queen Elizabeth so I agree.
There is a US Navy proscription against naming ships after living people (although Vinson and Stennis got passes) so this new whatever-it-is is the 'Trump Class' and the lead ship will be USS Defiant. If it ever gets built.
Aircraft carriers named after Ronald Reagan and George H W Bush while still alive. In fact Bush was actively involved in the ceremonials. Of course, he had a distinguished wartime record serving as a naval pilot flying from carriers. Donald Trump not quite so renowned for his martial endeavours.
They tried to curtail the practice after the GWoT when there was some push to name ships after living Medal of Honor recipients. I think they were concerned that they'd name the ship then the namesake would get done for drunk driving or worse.
YouGov had a Reform 25% in late November. There's a clear sign of a small Tory recovery mirrored by Reform declining in the opinion poll average graph on Wikipedia.
The unknown is whether this trend will be reinforced by campaigning for the May elections, or if that will interrupt it.
Also, given the personal ambitions of many of those involved, what are the chances Kemi gets ditched after losing lots of councillors in May anyway?
Barring immense change during the next few months, the story of election night is almost written already, as significant Reform and Green gains are surely nailed on. The competition is for who gets seen as the biggest loser, and there Labour already has a very good head start.
Part of the question will be timing. The first results often create the story.
I think Wales is still in doubt though. If Reform do come further off the boil then the big story might be a Plaid victory in Wales, rather than Reform doing very well there.
Sunderland voting in a Reform council will be the first news story. Then will come some London boroughs.
Picking up on Wales, and the conversation yesterday, I see that on 20mh default speed limits in towns we have:
- Con current policy is to reverse, despite their noisy demands back in 2020/21 that timid Labour were not implementing it quicky enough. - Ref UK committed to reverse. - Evidence of the benefits is firming up in reduced casualties, safety and reduced insurance premiums, with annother year of data due before the Senedd elections next May.
One to watch.
(Checking, the position in England is that 20mph limits now cover areas where just under 20 million people live. TBH that is a lot higher than I thought it was.) -
I had the opportunity recently to spend at least half an hour in total driving through 20mph speed limits in Wales and so, in true PB.com fashion, I am now an expert.
What surprised me most, given the vitriol in online discussions about them, is how well-observed they were. My experience in the past of driving through 20mph speed limits in England and Scotland is that a lot of drivers will speed past anyone obeying the speed limit.
That was exactly my experience of driving in Wales soon after the limit was introduced. I have the impression that the vitriol has died down now, and some may even be acknowledging that lives have been saved and things are generally pleasanter but I don't follow Welsh politics much so I wouldn't really know if the hostility to Labour on this issue has abated at all.
I am a convert to the 20, after being opposed to it in the start. The roads in towns are so much safer. You can also pull out easily from side roads.
Most newer cars also have a limiter which means you don't have to keep monitoring your speed.
I was chatting to a chap from South Wales the other week. He says he loves driving at exactly 20 mph and watching the queue build up behind him. And if they get too close, he'll slow to 18...
There are a few who do this, but it in itself is dangerous causing anger and tailgating, even unsafe overtaking
The speed in these 20mph zones is not enforced until you reach 27mph
As far as the present position is, most councils are or have reviewed and reinstated some of the 30mph which have generally been accepted
Public Service announcement!
That is patently untrue. The 27mph prosecution trigger is a myth.
I hate the 20mph default, it is not easy to adhere to without the limiter deployed, but if it has saved the life of just one child (and the stats are compelling) it is worth its weight in Go Safe fines.
Team Nigel and the Tories are indulging in a Labour style hostage to fortune culture for demanding the return to a default 30mph limit. If there was any non-right wing media left they would be all over the change of speed limit on news of the first avoidable fatality.
No expert, but it doesn't look like a battleship to me.
TBF a Great War/WW2 corvette didn't look like the small sailing ship of the mid-C19 ... What is also notable is that it's to be called the Trump Class, which indicates that the first ship of the class will be named after Mr Trump (a class of warships is usually named after the first of the class, pace [edit] UK MoD and its stupid messing around of late).
Usually Presidential names get applied to Nimitz- or Ford-class nuclear aircraft carriers. But it's not cut and dry. Mr Carter got a nuke sub named after him (entirely appropriately and I imagine amicably, as he was a nuke sub engineer by trade).
No serving leader of any nation (with the possible exception of Russia) has ever named a ship after themselves. It's pretty well the ultimate in imbecilic narcissism.
Do HMS Queen Elizabeth and the Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carriers count?
It's named after the first Elizabeth. Both have boring names - I want Dwarf and Dainty, to confuse the enemy.
No expert, but it doesn't look like a battleship to me.
TBF a Great War/WW2 corvette didn't look like the small sailing ship of the mid-C19 ... What is also notable is that it's to be called the Trump Class, which indicates that the first ship of the class will be named after Mr Trump (a class of warships is usually named after the first of the class, pace [edit] UK MoD and its stupid messing around of late).
Usually Presidential names get applied to Nimitz- or Ford-class nuclear aircraft carriers. But it's not cut and dry. Mr Carter got a nuke sub named after him (entirely appropriately and I imagine amicably, as he was a nuke sub engineer by trade).
No serving leader of any nation (with the possible exception of Russia) has ever named a ship after themselves. It's pretty well the ultimate in imbecilic narcissism.
Do HMS Queen Elizabeth and the Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carriers count?
It's named after the first Elizabeth. Both have boring names - I want Dwarf and Dainty, to confuse the enemy.
No expert, but it doesn't look like a battleship to me.
TBF a Great War/WW2 corvette didn't look like the small sailing ship of the mid-C19 ... What is also notable is that it's to be called the Trump Class, which indicates that the first ship of the class will be named after Mr Trump (a class of warships is usually named after the first of the class, pace [edit] UK MoD and its stupid messing around of late).
Usually Presidential names get applied to Nimitz- or Ford-class nuclear aircraft carriers. But it's not cut and dry. Mr Carter got a nuke sub named after him (entirely appropriately and I imagine amicably, as he was a nuke sub engineer by trade).
No serving leader of any nation (with the possible exception of Russia) has ever named a ship after themselves. It's pretty well the ultimate in imbecilic narcissism.
Do HMS Queen Elizabeth and the Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carriers count?
It's named after the first Elizabeth. Both have boring names - I want Dwarf and Dainty, to confuse the enemy.
They should have been Ark Royal and Illustrious or Hermes but the MoD named them QE/PoW to make it politically difficult to cancel them. It worked!
No serving leader of any nation (with the possible exception of Russia) has ever named a ship after themselves. It's pretty well the ultimate in imbecilic narcissism.
HMS Queen Elizabeth so I agree.
There is a US Navy proscription against naming ships after living people (although Vinson and Stennis got passes) so this new whatever-it-is is the 'Trump Class' and the lead ship will be USS Defiant. If it ever gets built.
Aircraft carriers named after Ronald Reagan and George H W Bush while still alive. In fact Bush was actively involved in the ceremonials. Of course, he had a distinguished wartime record serving as a naval pilot flying from carriers. Donald Trump not quite so renowned for his martial endeavours.
But what would he have done if it hadn't been for those bone spurs? Ho Chi Minh would have had no chance.
Incidentally, are those spurs alleged to have given him any trouble later life? Difficulty walking round a golf course for example.
No serving leader of any nation (with the possible exception of Russia) has ever named a ship after themselves. It's pretty well the ultimate in imbecilic narcissism.
HMS Queen Elizabeth so I agree.
There is a US Navy proscription against naming ships after living people (although Vinson and Stennis got passes) so this new whatever-it-is is the 'Trump Class' and the lead ship will be USS Defiant. If it ever gets built.
Aircraft carriers named after Ronald Reagan and George H W Bush while still alive. In fact Bush was actively involved in the ceremonials. Of course, he had a distinguished wartime record serving as a naval pilot flying from carriers. Donald Trump not quite so renowned for his martial endeavours.
They tried to curtail the practice after the GWoT when there was some push to name ships after living Medal of Honor recipients. I think they were concerned that they'd name the ship then the namesake would get done for drunk driving or worse.
Luckily in Britain we name things after royals like Prince Andrew safe in the knowledge they will be pure as the driven snow.
No serving leader of any nation (with the possible exception of Russia) has ever named a ship after themselves. It's pretty well the ultimate in imbecilic narcissism.
HMS Queen Elizabeth so I agree.
There is a US Navy proscription against naming ships after living people (although Vinson and Stennis got passes) so this new whatever-it-is is the 'Trump Class' and the lead ship will be USS Defiant. If it ever gets built.
Aircraft carriers named after Ronald Reagan and George H W Bush while still alive. In fact Bush was actively involved in the ceremonials. Of course, he had a distinguished wartime record serving as a naval pilot flying from carriers. Donald Trump not quite so renowned for his martial endeavours.
They tried to curtail the practice after the GWoT when there was some push to name ships after living Medal of Honor recipients. I think they were concerned that they'd name the ship then the namesake would get done for drunk driving or worse.
Luckily in Britain we name things after royals like Prince Andrew safe in the knowledge they will be pure as the driven snow.
No serving leader of any nation (with the possible exception of Russia) has ever named a ship after themselves. It's pretty well the ultimate in imbecilic narcissism.
HMS Queen Elizabeth so I agree.
There is a US Navy proscription against naming ships after living people (although Vinson and Stennis got passes) so this new whatever-it-is is the 'Trump Class' and the lead ship will be USS Defiant. If it ever gets built.
Aircraft carriers named after Ronald Reagan and George H W Bush while still alive. In fact Bush was actively involved in the ceremonials. Of course, he had a distinguished wartime record serving as a naval pilot flying from carriers. Donald Trump not quite so renowned for his martial endeavours.
They tried to curtail the practice after the GWoT when there was some push to name ships after living Medal of Honor recipients. I think they were concerned that they'd name the ship then the namesake would get done for drunk driving or worse.
Luckily in Britain we name things after royals like Prince Andrew safe in the knowledge they will be pure as the driven snow.
No serving leader of any nation (with the possible exception of Russia) has ever named a ship after themselves. It's pretty well the ultimate in imbecilic narcissism.
HMS Queen Elizabeth so I agree.
There is a US Navy proscription against naming ships after living people (although Vinson and Stennis got passes) so this new whatever-it-is is the 'Trump Class' and the lead ship will be USS Defiant. If it ever gets built.
Aircraft carriers named after Ronald Reagan and George H W Bush while still alive. In fact Bush was actively involved in the ceremonials. Of course, he had a distinguished wartime record serving as a naval pilot flying from carriers. Donald Trump not quite so renowned for his martial endeavours.
They tried to curtail the practice after the GWoT when there was some push to name ships after living Medal of Honor recipients. I think they were concerned that they'd name the ship then the namesake would get done for drunk driving or worse.
Luckily in Britain we name things after royals like Prince Andrew safe in the knowledge they will be pure as the driven snow.
No serving leader of any nation (with the possible exception of Russia) has ever named a ship after themselves. It's pretty well the ultimate in imbecilic narcissism.
HMS Queen Elizabeth so I agree.
There is a US Navy proscription against naming ships after living people (although Vinson and Stennis got passes) so this new whatever-it-is is the 'Trump Class' and the lead ship will be USS Defiant. If it ever gets built.
Aircraft carriers named after Ronald Reagan and George H W Bush while still alive. In fact Bush was actively involved in the ceremonials. Of course, he had a distinguished wartime record serving as a naval pilot flying from carriers. Donald Trump not quite so renowned for his martial endeavours.
They tried to curtail the practice after the GWoT when there was some push to name ships after living Medal of Honor recipients. I think they were concerned that they'd name the ship then the namesake would get done for drunk driving or worse.
Luckily in Britain we name things after royals like Prince Andrew safe in the knowledge they will be pure as the driven snow.
No expert, but it doesn't look like a battleship to me.
TBF a Great War/WW2 corvette didn't look like the small sailing ship of the mid-C19 ... What is also notable is that it's to be called the Trump Class, which indicates that the first ship of the class will be named after Mr Trump (a class of warships is usually named after the first of the class, pace [edit] UK MoD and its stupid messing around of late).
Usually Presidential names get applied to Nimitz- or Ford-class nuclear aircraft carriers. But it's not cut and dry. Mr Carter got a nuke sub named after him (entirely appropriately and I imagine amicably, as he was a nuke sub engineer by trade).
No serving leader of any nation (with the possible exception of Russia) has ever named a ship after themselves. It's pretty well the ultimate in imbecilic narcissism.
Do HMS Queen Elizabeth and the Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carriers count?
It's named after the first Elizabeth. Both have boring names - I want Dwarf and Dainty, to confuse the enemy.
Bring back HMS Hood.
HMS Trafalgar and HMS Waterloo.
HMS Agincourt too.
HMS Hood exploded about 5 minutes into the gun battle with the Bismarck.
No serving leader of any nation (with the possible exception of Russia) has ever named a ship after themselves. It's pretty well the ultimate in imbecilic narcissism.
HMS Queen Elizabeth so I agree.
There is a US Navy proscription against naming ships after living people (although Vinson and Stennis got passes) so this new whatever-it-is is the 'Trump Class' and the lead ship will be USS Defiant. If it ever gets built.
Aircraft carriers named after Ronald Reagan and George H W Bush while still alive. In fact Bush was actively involved in the ceremonials. Of course, he had a distinguished wartime record serving as a naval pilot flying from carriers. Donald Trump not quite so renowned for his martial endeavours.
They tried to curtail the practice after the GWoT when there was some push to name ships after living Medal of Honor recipients. I think they were concerned that they'd name the ship then the namesake would get done for drunk driving or worse.
Luckily in Britain we name things after royals like Prince Andrew safe in the knowledge they will be pure as the driven snow.
"A from Balmoral", I think you mean.
Isn't that Archie, one of the ghilles?
That'll no doubt be the defence if it ever goes to court. Loads of As at Balmoral. Reasonable doubt.
No serving leader of any nation (with the possible exception of Russia) has ever named a ship after themselves. It's pretty well the ultimate in imbecilic narcissism.
HMS Queen Elizabeth so I agree.
There is a US Navy proscription against naming ships after living people (although Vinson and Stennis got passes) so this new whatever-it-is is the 'Trump Class' and the lead ship will be USS Defiant. If it ever gets built.
Aircraft carriers named after Ronald Reagan and George H W Bush while still alive. In fact Bush was actively involved in the ceremonials. Of course, he had a distinguished wartime record serving as a naval pilot flying from carriers. Donald Trump not quite so renowned for his martial endeavours.
They tried to curtail the practice after the GWoT when there was some push to name ships after living Medal of Honor recipients. I think they were concerned that they'd name the ship then the namesake would get done for drunk driving or worse.
Luckily in Britain we name things after royals like Prince Andrew safe in the knowledge they will be pure as the driven snow.
"A from Balmoral", I think you mean.
Isn't that Archie, one of the ghilles?
That'll no doubt be the defence if it ever goes to court. Loads of As at Balmoral. Reasonable doubt.
No expert, but it doesn't look like a battleship to me.
TBF a Great War/WW2 corvette didn't look like the small sailing ship of the mid-C19 ... What is also notable is that it's to be called the Trump Class, which indicates that the first ship of the class will be named after Mr Trump (a class of warships is usually named after the first of the class, pace [edit] UK MoD and its stupid messing around of late).
Usually Presidential names get applied to Nimitz- or Ford-class nuclear aircraft carriers. But it's not cut and dry. Mr Carter got a nuke sub named after him (entirely appropriately and I imagine amicably, as he was a nuke sub engineer by trade).
No serving leader of any nation (with the possible exception of Russia) has ever named a ship after themselves. It's pretty well the ultimate in imbecilic narcissism.
Do HMS Queen Elizabeth and the Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carriers count?
It's named after the first Elizabeth. Both have boring names - I want Dwarf and Dainty, to confuse the enemy.
They should have been Ark Royal and Illustrious or Hermes but the MoD named them QE/PoW to make it politically difficult to cancel them. It worked!
HMS Winter Fuel Payment and HMS National Health Service work quite well.
(Actually a little concerned they might go for the latter...)
Based on this polling I wouldn’t be surprised the Tories ahead of Reform at some point in quarter one of 2026, if present trends hold, not consistently but on an outlier basis.
Word missing there?
On the substantive point, am I right in thinking as well that Farage is at the same time the oldest and the least experienced of the four major party leaders? He's not likely to be improving now as he ages and he's never been in cabinet.
No, Starmer is about 18 months older than Farage.
Blair and Cameron had never been in government before they became PM.
Fair enough on the first point.
Cameron and Blair had both been Leaders of the Opposition. Farage hasn't even done that.
Indeed he quite often skives off Parliament. I think he finds it boring because its not all about him.
This has recently set me wondering if Nigel Farage might bail soon. He is rarely in the Commons or in Clacton, and does not even seem to have much to say about Streeting or Lammy advocating customs unions with the EU, an issue you'd think would be mother's milk to him. Is he still interested in politics? (That said, maybe he is just under the weather as there are some nasty bugs doing the rounds.)
I wonder if the 'I can't really remember what happened 50 years ago but I definitely did not say those racist and antisemitic things' row has put his gas at a peep. The one time I saw Farage address the issue directly he seemed uncharacteristically shifty and evasive.
28 witnesses, including Jewish students, and written communications amongst teachers, is quite a lot to dismiss as "lies, all lies". Tice is that crass imo; Farage is not.
It's also quite awkward with respect to Farage's position on Israel, and the portrayal of Muslims as The Mortal Enemy of Western Civilisation.
Witnesses at the time (as in recording in diaries, letters etc) or witnesses ‘recalling’ events of 50 years ago. Very big difference, as all good historians know.
28 witnesses seems pretty corroborative to me. The man’s a bully, and a spiv, and has been so since his earliest years.
I haven’t cared enough to look at what he did at school in detail, but isn’t prancing around with your arm in the air attention seeking rather than bullying?
Farage is deeply unpleasant man who is probably a racist. Spending 5 minutes reading a guardian article to confirm those views isn’t a good use of my time
So why did you venture in with your first comment about it being attention seeking not bullying then?
Because it was an interesting discussion.
Not all of the conversations on here are entirely fact based and it’s a better board for it
Ok but hang on.
Post 1: You counter the 'bully' allegations with "wasn't it just attention seeking?"
Post2: You say you don't care enough to read the details to see if it was indeed just attention seeking.
Post3: Whilst still not caring to check if it was just attention seeking you say it's nevertheless interesting.
Really rather odd. But, look, you're not in the dock, and it is Christmas, so that's probably enough on the matter. I note your overall 'deeply unpleasant and probably a racist' assessment of the bloke we're talking about. Big tick for that.
Not at all. Very easy to reconcile.
I’m aware he behaved badly at school but haven’t checked into details. The only thing that has stuck in my mind is him walking around making nazi salutes. Which to my mind is more childishly trying to shock people/seek attention. But it may be he did other stuff which was more targeted at specific individuals (which for me is the threshold of bullying).
But whether he’s a spiv and a bully or a spiv and an attention seeker won’t materially change how I view him in the round, so would rather do more uplifting things with my time
Ok, so just a snippet to give you a flavour.
He would torment a particular Jewish pupil by continually leaning in close and saying, "should have gassed you all".
With gas enunciated as "gassssssss" to mimic the sound of it hissing into the chambers at the death camps.
Knowing that has made my life slightly worse, thank you
This is the best Christmas present me, my family and my friends could have had. I can now safely sleep at night, that is how bad it has been. Especially for those older than me with serious health issues. Bad news for agricultural valuers of course who would have made a fortune over the arguing the toss over the values of farms. It takes my estate out of the danger zone and so we can now look forwards to building the shed which we have needed for many years.
I had expected this to become a jockeying point when the new Labour leader was selected or else it to be put off for a year, and a year and a year.
They pointed the shotgun at the whole farming industry. We stood up to them and they have blinked. But we won't forget, no we won't forget ...
That is the whole point
The farmers will not forgive or vote labour because of this
They also voted en masse for Brexit and then realised they had screwed themselves. They are the ultimate selfish opportunists who believe the world owes them a living. Of course they won't vote labour.
British farmers do appear to be cretinous, as a class. Brexit is exhibit 1.
However, if you care about land use and food quality, then you need to care about farmers.
Reeves’s problem is she actively hates much of the country, including farmers.
The amount of political capital burnt in this thing is incredible. Ultimately, the correct decision, tax should be targeted at investors and companies buying land. The vast majority of farm estates will now be exempt, providing they make use of the £5m spouse allowance
The people benefiting from this change are those sitting on a highly tax efficient asset worth many millions who quite sincerely and genuinely want to keep it that way and don't see why they should pay the same tax as say someone running a productive business.
We have to concede an extremely effective lobbying exercise by wealthy landowners but we don't really need to agree with the principle of it. It's far more egregious than WFA for example.
Those who are genuinely worried about family farming would be far better off looking at *incomes* - for instance, supermarket buying practices - and food security.
But this lobbying has been all about protecting capital investment.
It's like houses - those who have houses are treated far better than those without when it comes to IHT. No wonder the values are distorted.
IHT is theft!
Property is theft comrade.
Your family member dies, you're bereaved, and you're left with a massive bill to Haitch-MRC - how does that work?
A family member dies and you're left a massive unearned pot of gold. How is that fair?
Because your family member worked hard all their life and should be allowed to dispose of their savings as they see fit?
Based on this polling I wouldn’t be surprised the Tories ahead of Reform at some point in quarter one of 2026, if present trends hold, not consistently but on an outlier basis.
Word missing there?
On the substantive point, am I right in thinking as well that Farage is at the same time the oldest and the least experienced of the four major party leaders? He's not likely to be improving now as he ages and he's never been in cabinet.
No, Starmer is about 18 months older than Farage.
Blair and Cameron had never been in government before they became PM.
Fair enough on the first point.
Cameron and Blair had both been Leaders of the Opposition. Farage hasn't even done that.
Indeed he quite often skives off Parliament. I think he finds it boring because its not all about him.
This has recently set me wondering if Nigel Farage might bail soon. He is rarely in the Commons or in Clacton, and does not even seem to have much to say about Streeting or Lammy advocating customs unions with the EU, an issue you'd think would be mother's milk to him. Is he still interested in politics? (That said, maybe he is just under the weather as there are some nasty bugs doing the rounds.)
I wonder if the 'I can't really remember what happened 50 years ago but I definitely did not say those racist and antisemitic things' row has put his gas at a peep. The one time I saw Farage address the issue directly he seemed uncharacteristically shifty and evasive.
28 witnesses, including Jewish students, and written communications amongst teachers, is quite a lot to dismiss as "lies, all lies". Tice is that crass imo; Farage is not.
It's also quite awkward with respect to Farage's position on Israel, and the portrayal of Muslims as The Mortal Enemy of Western Civilisation.
Witnesses at the time (as in recording in diaries, letters etc) or witnesses ‘recalling’ events of 50 years ago. Very big difference, as all good historians know.
28 witnesses seems pretty corroborative to me. The man’s a bully, and a spiv, and has been so since his earliest years.
I haven’t cared enough to look at what he did at school in detail, but isn’t prancing around with your arm in the air attention seeking rather than bullying?
Farage is deeply unpleasant man who is probably a racist. Spending 5 minutes reading a guardian article to confirm those views isn’t a good use of my time
So why did you venture in with your first comment about it being attention seeking not bullying then?
Because it was an interesting discussion.
Not all of the conversations on here are entirely fact based and it’s a better board for it
Ok but hang on.
Post 1: You counter the 'bully' allegations with "wasn't it just attention seeking?"
Post2: You say you don't care enough to read the details to see if it was indeed just attention seeking.
Post3: Whilst still not caring to check if it was just attention seeking you say it's nevertheless interesting.
Really rather odd. But, look, you're not in the dock, and it is Christmas, so that's probably enough on the matter. I note your overall 'deeply unpleasant and probably a racist' assessment of the bloke we're talking about. Big tick for that.
Not at all. Very easy to reconcile.
I’m aware he behaved badly at school but haven’t checked into details. The only thing that has stuck in my mind is him walking around making nazi salutes. Which to my mind is more childishly trying to shock people/seek attention. But it may be he did other stuff which was more targeted at specific individuals (which for me is the threshold of bullying).
But whether he’s a spiv and a bully or a spiv and an attention seeker won’t materially change how I view him in the round, so would rather do more uplifting things with my time
Ok, so just a snippet to give you a flavour.
He would torment a particular Jewish pupil by continually leaning in close and saying, "should have gassed you all".
With gas enunciated as "gassssssss" to mimic the sound of it hissing into the chambers at the death camps.
A pedant notes that the most common Nazi gas chambers used Prussia acid crystals that produce cyanide when moist, so no gas would have been hissing into the chamber. I don’t expect Farage would have known that. But then I’m probably being disingenuous.
This is the best Christmas present me, my family and my friends could have had. I can now safely sleep at night, that is how bad it has been. Especially for those older than me with serious health issues. Bad news for agricultural valuers of course who would have made a fortune over the arguing the toss over the values of farms. It takes my estate out of the danger zone and so we can now look forwards to building the shed which we have needed for many years.
I had expected this to become a jockeying point when the new Labour leader was selected or else it to be put off for a year, and a year and a year.
They pointed the shotgun at the whole farming industry. We stood up to them and they have blinked. But we won't forget, no we won't forget ...
That is the whole point
The farmers will not forgive or vote labour because of this
They also voted en masse for Brexit and then realised they had screwed themselves. They are the ultimate selfish opportunists who believe the world owes them a living. Of course they won't vote labour.
British farmers do appear to be cretinous, as a class. Brexit is exhibit 1.
However, if you care about land use and food quality, then you need to care about farmers.
Reeves’s problem is she actively hates much of the country, including farmers.
The amount of political capital burnt in this thing is incredible. Ultimately, the correct decision, tax should be targeted at investors and companies buying land. The vast majority of farm estates will now be exempt, providing they make use of the £5m spouse allowance
The people benefiting from this change are those sitting on a highly tax efficient asset worth many millions who quite sincerely and genuinely want to keep it that way and don't see why they should pay the same tax as say someone running a productive business.
We have to concede an extremely effective lobbying exercise by wealthy landowners but we don't really need to agree with the principle of it. It's far more egregious than WFA for example.
Those who are genuinely worried about family farming would be far better off looking at *incomes* - for instance, supermarket buying practices - and food security.
But this lobbying has been all about protecting capital investment.
It's like houses - those who have houses are treated far better than those without when it comes to IHT. No wonder the values are distorted.
IHT is theft!
Property is theft comrade.
Your family member dies, you're bereaved, and you're left with a massive bill to Haitch-MRC - how does that work?
A family member dies and you're left a massive unearned pot of gold. How is that fair?
Because your family member worked hard all their life and should be allowed to dispose of their savings as they see fit?
But you can use that argument against most taxes… but we need some taxes. Why is inheritance tax particularly worse than income tax or sales tax or corporation tax?
This is the best Christmas present me, my family and my friends could have had. I can now safely sleep at night, that is how bad it has been. Especially for those older than me with serious health issues. Bad news for agricultural valuers of course who would have made a fortune over the arguing the toss over the values of farms. It takes my estate out of the danger zone and so we can now look forwards to building the shed which we have needed for many years.
I had expected this to become a jockeying point when the new Labour leader was selected or else it to be put off for a year, and a year and a year.
They pointed the shotgun at the whole farming industry. We stood up to them and they have blinked. But we won't forget, no we won't forget ...
That is the whole point
The farmers will not forgive or vote labour because of this
They also voted en masse for Brexit and then realised they had screwed themselves. They are the ultimate selfish opportunists who believe the world owes them a living. Of course they won't vote labour.
British farmers do appear to be cretinous, as a class. Brexit is exhibit 1.
However, if you care about land use and food quality, then you need to care about farmers.
Reeves’s problem is she actively hates much of the country, including farmers.
The amount of political capital burnt in this thing is incredible. Ultimately, the correct decision, tax should be targeted at investors and companies buying land. The vast majority of farm estates will now be exempt, providing they make use of the £5m spouse allowance
The people benefiting from this change are those sitting on a highly tax efficient asset worth many millions who quite sincerely and genuinely want to keep it that way and don't see why they should pay the same tax as say someone running a productive business.
We have to concede an extremely effective lobbying exercise by wealthy landowners but we don't really need to agree with the principle of it. It's far more egregious than WFA for example.
Those who are genuinely worried about family farming would be far better off looking at *incomes* - for instance, supermarket buying practices - and food security.
But this lobbying has been all about protecting capital investment.
It's like houses - those who have houses are treated far better than those without when it comes to IHT. No wonder the values are distorted.
IHT is theft!
Property is theft comrade.
Your family member dies, you're bereaved, and you're left with a massive bill to Haitch-MRC - how does that work?
A family member dies and you're left a massive unearned pot of gold. How is that fair?
Because your family member worked hard all their life and should be allowed to dispose of their savings as they see fit?
No serving leader of any nation (with the possible exception of Russia) has ever named a ship after themselves. It's pretty well the ultimate in imbecilic narcissism.
HMS Queen Elizabeth so I agree.
There is a US Navy proscription against naming ships after living people (although Vinson and Stennis got passes) so this new whatever-it-is is the 'Trump Class' and the lead ship will be USS Defiant. If it ever gets built.
It's not the QE2, and while the first Liz probably was a bit of a narcissist, she was no imbecile.
I seriously doubt the ego-class cruiser will ever be built. Its primary and likely sole mission is air defence, if it ever does get built. There's just no logic in throwing all the other kit they're talking about onto the same platform. Just makes it more expensive, more difficult to build (if they can at all) and a juicier target.
No serving leader of any nation (with the possible exception of Russia) has ever named a ship after themselves. It's pretty well the ultimate in imbecilic narcissism.
HMS Queen Elizabeth so I agree.
There is a US Navy proscription against naming ships after living people (although Vinson and Stennis got passes) so this new whatever-it-is is the 'Trump Class' and the lead ship will be USS Defiant. If it ever gets built.
Aircraft carriers named after Ronald Reagan and George H W Bush while still alive. In fact Bush was actively involved in the ceremonials. Of course, he had a distinguished wartime record serving as a naval pilot flying from carriers. Donald Trump not quite so renowned for his martial endeavours.
They tried to curtail the practice after the GWoT when there was some push to name ships after living Medal of Honor recipients. I think they were concerned that they'd name the ship then the namesake would get done for drunk driving or worse.
Luckily in Britain we name things after royals like Prince Andrew safe in the knowledge they will be pure as the driven snow.
"A from Balmoral", I think you mean.
Isn't that Archie, one of the ghilles?
That'll no doubt be the defence if it ever goes to court. Loads of As at Balmoral. Reasonable doubt.
You know, I’m starting to think Andrew might actually be a wrong un and a liar.
Based on this polling I wouldn’t be surprised the Tories ahead of Reform at some point in quarter one of 2026, if present trends hold, not consistently but on an outlier basis.
Word missing there?
On the substantive point, am I right in thinking as well that Farage is at the same time the oldest and the least experienced of the four major party leaders? He's not likely to be improving now as he ages and he's never been in cabinet.
He has considerable political experience, but very little parliamentary experience. The latter is not that much of a barrier anymore, he will have had 4-5 years of it by the time of the next election which is not that far off several modern PMs, though the odds woudl also be that he has extremely few MPs in his ranks with much parliamentary let alone governmental experience, which may be a more significant factor.
No serving leader of any nation (with the possible exception of Russia) has ever named a ship after themselves. It's pretty well the ultimate in imbecilic narcissism.
HMS Queen Elizabeth so I agree.
There is a US Navy proscription against naming ships after living people (although Vinson and Stennis got passes) so this new whatever-it-is is the 'Trump Class' and the lead ship will be USS Defiant. If it ever gets built.
Aircraft carriers named after Ronald Reagan and George H W Bush while still alive. In fact Bush was actively involved in the ceremonials. Of course, he had a distinguished wartime record serving as a naval pilot flying from carriers. Donald Trump not quite so renowned for his martial endeavours.
They tried to curtail the practice after the GWoT when there was some push to name ships after living Medal of Honor recipients. I think they were concerned that they'd name the ship then the namesake would get done for drunk driving or worse.
Luckily in Britain we name things after royals like Prince Andrew safe in the knowledge they will be pure as the driven snow.
"A from Balmoral", I think you mean.
Isn't that Archie, one of the ghilles?
That'll no doubt be the defence if it ever goes to court. Loads of As at Balmoral. Reasonable doubt.
You know, I’m starting to think Andrew might actually be a wrong un and a liar.
A scumbag of the highest order. When he's dead we'll find out a lot more, I expect.
No expert, but it doesn't look like a battleship to me.
TBF a Great War/WW2 corvette didn't look like the small sailing ship of the mid-C19 ... What is also notable is that it's to be called the Trump Class, which indicates that the first ship of the class will be named after Mr Trump (a class of warships is usually named after the first of the class, pace [edit] UK MoD and its stupid messing around of late).
Usually Presidential names get applied to Nimitz- or Ford-class nuclear aircraft carriers. But it's not cut and dry. Mr Carter got a nuke sub named after him (entirely appropriately and I imagine amicably, as he was a nuke sub engineer by trade).
No serving leader of any nation (with the possible exception of Russia) has ever named a ship after themselves. It's pretty well the ultimate in imbecilic narcissism.
Do HMS Queen Elizabeth and the Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carriers count?
It's named after the first Elizabeth. Both have boring names - I want Dwarf and Dainty, to confuse the enemy.
Bring back HMS Hood.
HMS Trafalgar and HMS Waterloo.
HMS Agincourt too.
HMS Hood exploded about 5 minutes into the gun battle with the Bismarck.
I like names like Warspite, Defiance and Vengeance. Or Temeraire, to confuse the French
Based on this polling I wouldn’t be surprised the Tories ahead of Reform at some point in quarter one of 2026, if present trends hold, not consistently but on an outlier basis.
Word missing there?
On the substantive point, am I right in thinking as well that Farage is at the same time the oldest and the least experienced of the four major party leaders? He's not likely to be improving now as he ages and he's never been in cabinet.
No, Starmer is about 18 months older than Farage.
Blair and Cameron had never been in government before they became PM.
Fair enough on the first point.
Cameron and Blair had both been Leaders of the Opposition. Farage hasn't even done that.
Indeed he quite often skives off Parliament. I think he finds it boring because its not all about him.
This has recently set me wondering if Nigel Farage might bail soon. He is rarely in the Commons or in Clacton, and does not even seem to have much to say about Streeting or Lammy advocating customs unions with the EU, an issue you'd think would be mother's milk to him. Is he still interested in politics? (That said, maybe he is just under the weather as there are some nasty bugs doing the rounds.)
I wonder if the 'I can't really remember what happened 50 years ago but I definitely did not say those racist and antisemitic things' row has put his gas at a peep. The one time I saw Farage address the issue directly he seemed uncharacteristically shifty and evasive.
28 witnesses, including Jewish students, and written communications amongst teachers, is quite a lot to dismiss as "lies, all lies". Tice is that crass imo; Farage is not.
It's also quite awkward with respect to Farage's position on Israel, and the portrayal of Muslims as The Mortal Enemy of Western Civilisation.
Witnesses at the time (as in recording in diaries, letters etc) or witnesses ‘recalling’ events of 50 years ago. Very big difference, as all good historians know.
28 witnesses seems pretty corroborative to me. The man’s a bully, and a spiv, and has been so since his earliest years.
I haven’t cared enough to look at what he did at school in detail, but isn’t prancing around with your arm in the air attention seeking rather than bullying?
Farage is deeply unpleasant man who is probably a racist. Spending 5 minutes reading a guardian article to confirm those views isn’t a good use of my time
So why did you venture in with your first comment about it being attention seeking not bullying then?
Because it was an interesting discussion.
Not all of the conversations on here are entirely fact based and it’s a better board for it
Ok but hang on.
Post 1: You counter the 'bully' allegations with "wasn't it just attention seeking?"
Post2: You say you don't care enough to read the details to see if it was indeed just attention seeking.
Post3: Whilst still not caring to check if it was just attention seeking you say it's nevertheless interesting.
Really rather odd. But, look, you're not in the dock, and it is Christmas, so that's probably enough on the matter. I note your overall 'deeply unpleasant and probably a racist' assessment of the bloke we're talking about. Big tick for that.
Not at all. Very easy to reconcile.
I’m aware he behaved badly at school but haven’t checked into details. The only thing that has stuck in my mind is him walking around making nazi salutes. Which to my mind is more childishly trying to shock people/seek attention. But it may be he did other stuff which was more targeted at specific individuals (which for me is the threshold of bullying).
But whether he’s a spiv and a bully or a spiv and an attention seeker won’t materially change how I view him in the round, so would rather do more uplifting things with my time
Ok, so just a snippet to give you a flavour.
He would torment a particular Jewish pupil by continually leaning in close and saying, "should have gassed you all".
With gas enunciated as "gassssssss" to mimic the sound of it hissing into the chambers at the death camps.
It seems to me that despite all this being so long ago it does actually matter. Boys (I was one once) behave abominably about all sorts of things. Stuff was said, and done, that we didn't want our mum to know about.
But there is sub-optimal stuff that tells you generically what boys can be like, and their disgusting minds. And there is stuff which goes to deeper aspects of character. Such stuff is, if true, the example here.
This is the best Christmas present me, my family and my friends could have had. I can now safely sleep at night, that is how bad it has been. Especially for those older than me with serious health issues. Bad news for agricultural valuers of course who would have made a fortune over the arguing the toss over the values of farms. It takes my estate out of the danger zone and so we can now look forwards to building the shed which we have needed for many years.
I had expected this to become a jockeying point when the new Labour leader was selected or else it to be put off for a year, and a year and a year.
They pointed the shotgun at the whole farming industry. We stood up to them and they have blinked. But we won't forget, no we won't forget ...
That is the whole point
The farmers will not forgive or vote labour because of this
They also voted en masse for Brexit and then realised they had screwed themselves. They are the ultimate selfish opportunists who believe the world owes them a living. Of course they won't vote labour.
British farmers do appear to be cretinous, as a class. Brexit is exhibit 1.
However, if you care about land use and food quality, then you need to care about farmers.
Reeves’s problem is she actively hates much of the country, including farmers.
The amount of political capital burnt in this thing is incredible. Ultimately, the correct decision, tax should be targeted at investors and companies buying land. The vast majority of farm estates will now be exempt, providing they make use of the £5m spouse allowance
The people benefiting from this change are those sitting on a highly tax efficient asset worth many millions who quite sincerely and genuinely want to keep it that way and don't see why they should pay the same tax as say someone running a productive business.
We have to concede an extremely effective lobbying exercise by wealthy landowners but we don't really need to agree with the principle of it. It's far more egregious than WFA for example.
Those who are genuinely worried about family farming would be far better off looking at *incomes* - for instance, supermarket buying practices - and food security.
But this lobbying has been all about protecting capital investment.
It's like houses - those who have houses are treated far better than those without when it comes to IHT. No wonder the values are distorted.
IHT is theft!
Property is theft comrade.
Your family member dies, you're bereaved, and you're left with a massive bill to Haitch-MRC - how does that work?
A family member dies and you're left a massive unearned pot of gold. How is that fair?
Because your family member worked hard all their life and should be allowed to dispose of their savings as they see fit?
So if we all work hard enough we can have rich grand-parents?
No expert, but it doesn't look like a battleship to me.
TBF a Great War/WW2 corvette didn't look like the small sailing ship of the mid-C19 ... What is also notable is that it's to be called the Trump Class, which indicates that the first ship of the class will be named after Mr Trump (a class of warships is usually named after the first of the class, pace [edit] UK MoD and its stupid messing around of late).
Usually Presidential names get applied to Nimitz- or Ford-class nuclear aircraft carriers. But it's not cut and dry. Mr Carter got a nuke sub named after him (entirely appropriately and I imagine amicably, as he was a nuke sub engineer by trade).
No serving leader of any nation (with the possible exception of Russia) has ever named a ship after themselves. It's pretty well the ultimate in imbecilic narcissism.
Do HMS Queen Elizabeth and the Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carriers count?
It's named after the first Elizabeth. Both have boring names - I want Dwarf and Dainty, to confuse the enemy.
They should have been Ark Royal and Illustrious or Hermes but the MoD named them QE/PoW to make it politically difficult to cancel them. It worked!
HMS Winter Fuel Payment and HMS National Health Service work quite well.
(Actually a little concerned they might go for the latter...)
the way Doug Burgum, who openly celebrated wind energy when he was governor of North Dakota, has totally just debased himself to satisfy Trump’s insane anti-wind nonsense is so pathetic https://x.com/ArmandDoma/status/2003186662835388459
For someone who is fundementally opposed to Labour, I find myself in agreement with both of the policy announcements made - on Non Crime Hate Incidents and increasing the threshhold for family business inheritance tax - and with the comments from Ministers about 4 day weeks and not joining a Customs Union.
Credit where it is due.
Oh and no credit to the Tories. Of course they will claim this was some sort of victory for them but they had little or nothing to do with these annnouncements and are pretty much an irrelevance at present. Trying to claim they were responsible for forcing reversals rather than just welcoming the changes makes them look petty.
No expert, but it doesn't look like a battleship to me.
TBF a Great War/WW2 corvette didn't look like the small sailing ship of the mid-C19 ... What is also notable is that it's to be called the Trump Class, which indicates that the first ship of the class will be named after Mr Trump (a class of warships is usually named after the first of the class, pace [edit] UK MoD and its stupid messing around of late).
Usually Presidential names get applied to Nimitz- or Ford-class nuclear aircraft carriers. But it's not cut and dry. Mr Carter got a nuke sub named after him (entirely appropriately and I imagine amicably, as he was a nuke sub engineer by trade).
No serving leader of any nation (with the possible exception of Russia) has ever named a ship after themselves. It's pretty well the ultimate in imbecilic narcissism.
Henry VII and VIII had a warship in the Royal Navy called "Great Harry".
I do think the early modern monarchs are a good pattern for Trump's ambitions, more than 20th century totalitarians.
No expert, but it doesn't look like a battleship to me.
TBF a Great War/WW2 corvette didn't look like the small sailing ship of the mid-C19 ... What is also notable is that it's to be called the Trump Class, which indicates that the first ship of the class will be named after Mr Trump (a class of warships is usually named after the first of the class, pace [edit] UK MoD and its stupid messing around of late).
Usually Presidential names get applied to Nimitz- or Ford-class nuclear aircraft carriers. But it's not cut and dry. Mr Carter got a nuke sub named after him (entirely appropriately and I imagine amicably, as he was a nuke sub engineer by trade).
No serving leader of any nation (with the possible exception of Russia) has ever named a ship after themselves. It's pretty well the ultimate in imbecilic narcissism.
Henry VII and VIII had a warship in the Royal Navy called "Great Harry".
I do think the early modern monarchs are a good pattern for Trump's ambitions, more than 20th century totalitarians.
For someone who is fundementally opposed to Labour, I find myself in agreement with both of the policy announcements made - on Non Crime Hate Incidents and increasing the threshhold for family business inheritance tax - and with the comments from Ministers about 4 day weeks and not joining a Customs Union.
Credit where it is due.
Oh and no credit to the Tories. Of course they will claim this was some sort of victory for them but they had little or nothing to do with these annnouncements and are pretty much an irrelevance at present. Trying to claim they were responsible for forcing reversals rather than just welcoming the changes makes them look petty.
It's a difficult line to attempt in such situations, and sometimes it is more plausible than others. I once saw a local election leaflet from one party claiming credit for a major policy enacted by the other side on the basis that they had supported it - they couldn't say they had forced the party in power to do it, that would have been a lie, but they implied as hard as they could it wouldn't have happened without them.
The government have spent it's first year and a half looking for trouble. If one of the Palestine Action people die on hunger strike it will be very serious for them. They seem to have gone out of their way to alienate people.
Seeing Greta Thunburg arrested just makes them look ridiculous. People have been very patient with Starmer but I think it's time to get themselves a LABOUR leader. I'd go with Streeting. As much to wash away the detritus that's attached to them as anything else
This is the best Christmas present me, my family and my friends could have had. I can now safely sleep at night, that is how bad it has been. Especially for those older than me with serious health issues. Bad news for agricultural valuers of course who would have made a fortune over the arguing the toss over the values of farms. It takes my estate out of the danger zone and so we can now look forwards to building the shed which we have needed for many years.
I had expected this to become a jockeying point when the new Labour leader was selected or else it to be put off for a year, and a year and a year.
They pointed the shotgun at the whole farming industry. We stood up to them and they have blinked. But we won't forget, no we won't forget ...
That is the whole point
The farmers will not forgive or vote labour because of this
They also voted en masse for Brexit and then realised they had screwed themselves. They are the ultimate selfish opportunists who believe the world owes them a living. Of course they won't vote labour.
British farmers do appear to be cretinous, as a class. Brexit is exhibit 1.
However, if you care about land use and food quality, then you need to care about farmers.
Reeves’s problem is she actively hates much of the country, including farmers.
The amount of political capital burnt in this thing is incredible. Ultimately, the correct decision, tax should be targeted at investors and companies buying land. The vast majority of farm estates will now be exempt, providing they make use of the £5m spouse allowance
The people benefiting from this change are those sitting on a highly tax efficient asset worth many millions who quite sincerely and genuinely want to keep it that way and don't see why they should pay the same tax as say someone running a productive business.
We have to concede an extremely effective lobbying exercise by wealthy landowners but we don't really need to agree with the principle of it. It's far more egregious than WFA for example.
Those who are genuinely worried about family farming would be far better off looking at *incomes* - for instance, supermarket buying practices - and food security.
But this lobbying has been all about protecting capital investment.
It's like houses - those who have houses are treated far better than those without when it comes to IHT. No wonder the values are distorted.
IHT is theft!
Property is theft comrade.
Your family member dies, you're bereaved, and you're left with a massive bill to Haitch-MRC - how does that work?
A family member dies and you're left a massive unearned pot of gold. How is that fair?
Because your family member worked hard all their life and should be allowed to dispose of their savings as they see fit?
Just be grateful and pay the tax.
Let’s say someone has a big success and gets paid a £1m bonus on April 1. They pay income tax on it under PAYE.
They then die on April 8.
And you think the government should have the right to double dip on that income simply because the individual concerned has died?
This is the best Christmas present me, my family and my friends could have had. I can now safely sleep at night, that is how bad it has been. Especially for those older than me with serious health issues. Bad news for agricultural valuers of course who would have made a fortune over the arguing the toss over the values of farms. It takes my estate out of the danger zone and so we can now look forwards to building the shed which we have needed for many years.
I had expected this to become a jockeying point when the new Labour leader was selected or else it to be put off for a year, and a year and a year.
They pointed the shotgun at the whole farming industry. We stood up to them and they have blinked. But we won't forget, no we won't forget ...
That is the whole point
The farmers will not forgive or vote labour because of this
They also voted en masse for Brexit and then realised they had screwed themselves. They are the ultimate selfish opportunists who believe the world owes them a living. Of course they won't vote labour.
British farmers do appear to be cretinous, as a class. Brexit is exhibit 1.
However, if you care about land use and food quality, then you need to care about farmers.
Reeves’s problem is she actively hates much of the country, including farmers.
The amount of political capital burnt in this thing is incredible. Ultimately, the correct decision, tax should be targeted at investors and companies buying land. The vast majority of farm estates will now be exempt, providing they make use of the £5m spouse allowance
The people benefiting from this change are those sitting on a highly tax efficient asset worth many millions who quite sincerely and genuinely want to keep it that way and don't see why they should pay the same tax as say someone running a productive business.
We have to concede an extremely effective lobbying exercise by wealthy landowners but we don't really need to agree with the principle of it. It's far more egregious than WFA for example.
Those who are genuinely worried about family farming would be far better off looking at *incomes* - for instance, supermarket buying practices - and food security.
But this lobbying has been all about protecting capital investment.
It's like houses - those who have houses are treated far better than those without when it comes to IHT. No wonder the values are distorted.
IHT is theft!
Property is theft comrade.
Your family member dies, you're bereaved, and you're left with a massive bill to Haitch-MRC - how does that work?
A family member dies and you're left a massive unearned pot of gold. How is that fair?
Because your family member worked hard all their life and should be allowed to dispose of their savings as they see fit?
So if we all work hard enough we can have rich grand-parents?
No, you can be rich grandparents should you so wish
This is the best Christmas present me, my family and my friends could have had. I can now safely sleep at night, that is how bad it has been. Especially for those older than me with serious health issues. Bad news for agricultural valuers of course who would have made a fortune over the arguing the toss over the values of farms. It takes my estate out of the danger zone and so we can now look forwards to building the shed which we have needed for many years.
I had expected this to become a jockeying point when the new Labour leader was selected or else it to be put off for a year, and a year and a year.
They pointed the shotgun at the whole farming industry. We stood up to them and they have blinked. But we won't forget, no we won't forget ...
That is the whole point
The farmers will not forgive or vote labour because of this
They also voted en masse for Brexit and then realised they had screwed themselves. They are the ultimate selfish opportunists who believe the world owes them a living. Of course they won't vote labour.
British farmers do appear to be cretinous, as a class. Brexit is exhibit 1.
However, if you care about land use and food quality, then you need to care about farmers.
Reeves’s problem is she actively hates much of the country, including farmers.
The amount of political capital burnt in this thing is incredible. Ultimately, the correct decision, tax should be targeted at investors and companies buying land. The vast majority of farm estates will now be exempt, providing they make use of the £5m spouse allowance
The people benefiting from this change are those sitting on a highly tax efficient asset worth many millions who quite sincerely and genuinely want to keep it that way and don't see why they should pay the same tax as say someone running a productive business.
We have to concede an extremely effective lobbying exercise by wealthy landowners but we don't really need to agree with the principle of it. It's far more egregious than WFA for example.
Those who are genuinely worried about family farming would be far better off looking at *incomes* - for instance, supermarket buying practices - and food security.
But this lobbying has been all about protecting capital investment.
It's like houses - those who have houses are treated far better than those without when it comes to IHT. No wonder the values are distorted.
IHT is theft!
Property is theft comrade.
Your family member dies, you're bereaved, and you're left with a massive bill to Haitch-MRC - how does that work?
A family member dies and you're left a massive unearned pot of gold. How is that fair?
Because your family member worked hard all their life and should be allowed to dispose of their savings as they see fit?
Just be grateful and pay the tax.
Let’s say someone has a big success and gets paid a £1m bonus on April 1. They pay income tax on it under PAYE.
They then die on April 8.
And you think the government should have the right to double dip on that income simply because the individual concerned has died?
Well yes, because there is effectively a tax on dying.
The person who earned it, after all, has no further use for the money.
The government have spent it's first year and a half looking for trouble. If one of the Palestine Action people die of hunger strike it will be very serious for them. They seem to have gone out of their way to alienate people. Seeing Greta Thunburg arrested just makes them look ridiculous. People have been very patient with Starmer but I think it's now time to get themselves a LABOUR leader. I'd go with Streeting. As much to wash away the detritus that's attached to them as anything else
Leaving aside the merits of the PA proscription, is Greta Thunberg still flavour of the month? I don't seem to stumble upon news about her very much anymore, though I get the impression she has predominantly transitioned from environmental causes to the palestinian cause, so it feels like she needs to get arrested to get attention, which makes it less compelling than, say, reports than 100 grannies have been arrested for doign the same.
This is the best Christmas present me, my family and my friends could have had. I can now safely sleep at night, that is how bad it has been. Especially for those older than me with serious health issues. Bad news for agricultural valuers of course who would have made a fortune over the arguing the toss over the values of farms. It takes my estate out of the danger zone and so we can now look forwards to building the shed which we have needed for many years.
I had expected this to become a jockeying point when the new Labour leader was selected or else it to be put off for a year, and a year and a year.
They pointed the shotgun at the whole farming industry. We stood up to them and they have blinked. But we won't forget, no we won't forget ...
That is the whole point
The farmers will not forgive or vote labour because of this
They also voted en masse for Brexit and then realised they had screwed themselves. They are the ultimate selfish opportunists who believe the world owes them a living. Of course they won't vote labour.
British farmers do appear to be cretinous, as a class. Brexit is exhibit 1.
However, if you care about land use and food quality, then you need to care about farmers.
Reeves’s problem is she actively hates much of the country, including farmers.
The amount of political capital burnt in this thing is incredible. Ultimately, the correct decision, tax should be targeted at investors and companies buying land. The vast majority of farm estates will now be exempt, providing they make use of the £5m spouse allowance
The people benefiting from this change are those sitting on a highly tax efficient asset worth many millions who quite sincerely and genuinely want to keep it that way and don't see why they should pay the same tax as say someone running a productive business.
We have to concede an extremely effective lobbying exercise by wealthy landowners but we don't really need to agree with the principle of it. It's far more egregious than WFA for example.
Those who are genuinely worried about family farming would be far better off looking at *incomes* - for instance, supermarket buying practices - and food security.
But this lobbying has been all about protecting capital investment.
It's like houses - those who have houses are treated far better than those without when it comes to IHT. No wonder the values are distorted.
IHT is theft!
Property is theft comrade.
Your family member dies, you're bereaved, and you're left with a massive bill to Haitch-MRC - how does that work?
A family member dies and you're left a massive unearned pot of gold. How is that fair?
Because your family member worked hard all their life and should be allowed to dispose of their savings as they see fit?
Just be grateful and pay the tax.
Let’s say someone has a big success and gets paid a £1m bonus on April 1. They pay income tax on it under PAYE.
They then die on April 8.
And you think the government should have the right to double dip on that income simply because the individual concerned has died?
Feels like the ship sailed a long time ago on that question, I cannot imagine any government abandoning the principle even if they said they initially said they would, instead tinkering at the margins.
Based on this polling I wouldn’t be surprised the Tories ahead of Reform at some point in quarter one of 2026, if present trends hold, not consistently but on an outlier basis.
Word missing there?
On the substantive point, am I right in thinking as well that Farage is at the same time the oldest and the least experienced of the four major party leaders? He's not likely to be improving now as he ages and he's never been in cabinet.
He has considerable political experience, but very little parliamentary experience. The latter is not that much of a barrier anymore, he will have had 4-5 years of it by the time of the next election which is not that far off several modern PMs, though the odds woudl also be that he has extremely few MPs in his ranks with much parliamentary let alone governmental experience, which may be a more significant factor.
This is it! Your 100k post. You were trying to keep it untrumpeted, weren't you. So in character.
Well I'm not having it. 100k is massive and rare and it should be marked. All should 'like" (unless they hate the post which few will surely do).
This is the best Christmas present me, my family and my friends could have had. I can now safely sleep at night, that is how bad it has been. Especially for those older than me with serious health issues. Bad news for agricultural valuers of course who would have made a fortune over the arguing the toss over the values of farms. It takes my estate out of the danger zone and so we can now look forwards to building the shed which we have needed for many years.
I had expected this to become a jockeying point when the new Labour leader was selected or else it to be put off for a year, and a year and a year.
They pointed the shotgun at the whole farming industry. We stood up to them and they have blinked. But we won't forget, no we won't forget ...
That is the whole point
The farmers will not forgive or vote labour because of this
They also voted en masse for Brexit and then realised they had screwed themselves. They are the ultimate selfish opportunists who believe the world owes them a living. Of course they won't vote labour.
British farmers do appear to be cretinous, as a class. Brexit is exhibit 1.
However, if you care about land use and food quality, then you need to care about farmers.
Reeves’s problem is she actively hates much of the country, including farmers.
The amount of political capital burnt in this thing is incredible. Ultimately, the correct decision, tax should be targeted at investors and companies buying land. The vast majority of farm estates will now be exempt, providing they make use of the £5m spouse allowance
The people benefiting from this change are those sitting on a highly tax efficient asset worth many millions who quite sincerely and genuinely want to keep it that way and don't see why they should pay the same tax as say someone running a productive business.
We have to concede an extremely effective lobbying exercise by wealthy landowners but we don't really need to agree with the principle of it. It's far more egregious than WFA for example.
Those who are genuinely worried about family farming would be far better off looking at *incomes* - for instance, supermarket buying practices - and food security.
But this lobbying has been all about protecting capital investment.
It's like houses - those who have houses are treated far better than those without when it comes to IHT. No wonder the values are distorted.
IHT is theft!
Property is theft comrade.
Your family member dies, you're bereaved, and you're left with a massive bill to Haitch-MRC - how does that work?
A family member dies and you're left a massive unearned pot of gold. How is that fair?
Because your family member worked hard all their life and should be allowed to dispose of their savings as they see fit?
Just be grateful and pay the tax.
Let’s say someone has a big success and gets paid a £1m bonus on April 1. They pay income tax on it under PAYE.
They then die on April 8.
And you think the government should have the right to double dip on that income simply because the individual concerned has died?
No expert, but it doesn't look like a battleship to me.
TBF a Great War/WW2 corvette didn't look like the small sailing ship of the mid-C19 ... What is also notable is that it's to be called the Trump Class, which indicates that the first ship of the class will be named after Mr Trump (a class of warships is usually named after the first of the class, pace [edit] UK MoD and its stupid messing around of late).
Usually Presidential names get applied to Nimitz- or Ford-class nuclear aircraft carriers. But it's not cut and dry. Mr Carter got a nuke sub named after him (entirely appropriately and I imagine amicably, as he was a nuke sub engineer by trade).
No serving leader of any nation (with the possible exception of Russia) has ever named a ship after themselves. It's pretty well the ultimate in imbecilic narcissism.
Do HMS Queen Elizabeth and the Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carriers count?
If memory serves they were named after QE1 not QE2.
This is the best Christmas present me, my family and my friends could have had. I can now safely sleep at night, that is how bad it has been. Especially for those older than me with serious health issues. Bad news for agricultural valuers of course who would have made a fortune over the arguing the toss over the values of farms. It takes my estate out of the danger zone and so we can now look forwards to building the shed which we have needed for many years.
I had expected this to become a jockeying point when the new Labour leader was selected or else it to be put off for a year, and a year and a year.
They pointed the shotgun at the whole farming industry. We stood up to them and they have blinked. But we won't forget, no we won't forget ...
That is the whole point
The farmers will not forgive or vote labour because of this
They also voted en masse for Brexit and then realised they had screwed themselves. They are the ultimate selfish opportunists who believe the world owes them a living. Of course they won't vote labour.
British farmers do appear to be cretinous, as a class. Brexit is exhibit 1.
However, if you care about land use and food quality, then you need to care about farmers.
Reeves’s problem is she actively hates much of the country, including farmers.
The amount of political capital burnt in this thing is incredible. Ultimately, the correct decision, tax should be targeted at investors and companies buying land. The vast majority of farm estates will now be exempt, providing they make use of the £5m spouse allowance
The people benefiting from this change are those sitting on a highly tax efficient asset worth many millions who quite sincerely and genuinely want to keep it that way and don't see why they should pay the same tax as say someone running a productive business.
We have to concede an extremely effective lobbying exercise by wealthy landowners but we don't really need to agree with the principle of it. It's far more egregious than WFA for example.
Those who are genuinely worried about family farming would be far better off looking at *incomes* - for instance, supermarket buying practices - and food security.
But this lobbying has been all about protecting capital investment.
It's like houses - those who have houses are treated far better than those without when it comes to IHT. No wonder the values are distorted.
IHT is theft!
Property is theft comrade.
Your family member dies, you're bereaved, and you're left with a massive bill to Haitch-MRC - how does that work?
A family member dies and you're left a massive unearned pot of gold. How is that fair?
Because your family member worked hard all their life and should be allowed to dispose of their savings as they see fit?
Just be grateful and pay the tax.
Let’s say someone has a big success and gets paid a £1m bonus on April 1. They pay income tax on it under PAYE.
They then die on April 8.
And you think the government should have the right to double dip on that income simply because the individual concerned has died?
Yes. The person who has died obviously doesn't care. And the person who inherits is a lucky sod.
This is the best Christmas present me, my family and my friends could have had. I can now safely sleep at night, that is how bad it has been. Especially for those older than me with serious health issues. Bad news for agricultural valuers of course who would have made a fortune over the arguing the toss over the values of farms. It takes my estate out of the danger zone and so we can now look forwards to building the shed which we have needed for many years.
I had expected this to become a jockeying point when the new Labour leader was selected or else it to be put off for a year, and a year and a year.
They pointed the shotgun at the whole farming industry. We stood up to them and they have blinked. But we won't forget, no we won't forget ...
That is the whole point
The farmers will not forgive or vote labour because of this
They also voted en masse for Brexit and then realised they had screwed themselves. They are the ultimate selfish opportunists who believe the world owes them a living. Of course they won't vote labour.
British farmers do appear to be cretinous, as a class. Brexit is exhibit 1.
However, if you care about land use and food quality, then you need to care about farmers.
Reeves’s problem is she actively hates much of the country, including farmers.
The amount of political capital burnt in this thing is incredible. Ultimately, the correct decision, tax should be targeted at investors and companies buying land. The vast majority of farm estates will now be exempt, providing they make use of the £5m spouse allowance
The people benefiting from this change are those sitting on a highly tax efficient asset worth many millions who quite sincerely and genuinely want to keep it that way and don't see why they should pay the same tax as say someone running a productive business.
We have to concede an extremely effective lobbying exercise by wealthy landowners but we don't really need to agree with the principle of it. It's far more egregious than WFA for example.
Those who are genuinely worried about family farming would be far better off looking at *incomes* - for instance, supermarket buying practices - and food security.
But this lobbying has been all about protecting capital investment.
It's like houses - those who have houses are treated far better than those without when it comes to IHT. No wonder the values are distorted.
IHT is theft!
Property is theft comrade.
Your family member dies, you're bereaved, and you're left with a massive bill to Haitch-MRC - how does that work?
You are not paying the bill. Your dead relative is. You have to tax somebody, and dead people are better than live ones.
By those terms my dead relative has arisen from the grave to change his will and deny HMRC any money.
Anyway, the split between housing and other assets is indeed daft as pointed out earlier.
My relative moved into a small detached bungalow which was eminently suitable for his needs. This being the Flatlands it cost rather less than the (double) threshold.
In theory he could have moved into a larger property than he needed and by doing so saved about £60k in (theoretical) IHT.
I'm not sure the government really wants to encourage that.
Based on this polling I wouldn’t be surprised the Tories ahead of Reform at some point in quarter one of 2026, if present trends hold, not consistently but on an outlier basis.
Word missing there?
On the substantive point, am I right in thinking as well that Farage is at the same time the oldest and the least experienced of the four major party leaders? He's not likely to be improving now as he ages and he's never been in cabinet.
He has considerable political experience, but very little parliamentary experience. The latter is not that much of a barrier anymore, he will have had 4-5 years of it by the time of the next election which is not that far off several modern PMs, though the odds woudl also be that he has extremely few MPs in his ranks with much parliamentary let alone governmental experience, which may be a more significant factor.
This is it! Your 100k post. You were trying to keep it untrumpeted, weren't you. So in character.
I had intended to try something more profound, but then immediately forgot and posted something without thinking about it for more than 5 seconds - that's the key to excessive commentary!
This is the best Christmas present me, my family and my friends could have had. I can now safely sleep at night, that is how bad it has been. Especially for those older than me with serious health issues. Bad news for agricultural valuers of course who would have made a fortune over the arguing the toss over the values of farms. It takes my estate out of the danger zone and so we can now look forwards to building the shed which we have needed for many years.
I had expected this to become a jockeying point when the new Labour leader was selected or else it to be put off for a year, and a year and a year.
They pointed the shotgun at the whole farming industry. We stood up to them and they have blinked. But we won't forget, no we won't forget ...
That is the whole point
The farmers will not forgive or vote labour because of this
They also voted en masse for Brexit and then realised they had screwed themselves. They are the ultimate selfish opportunists who believe the world owes them a living. Of course they won't vote labour.
British farmers do appear to be cretinous, as a class. Brexit is exhibit 1.
However, if you care about land use and food quality, then you need to care about farmers.
Reeves’s problem is she actively hates much of the country, including farmers.
The amount of political capital burnt in this thing is incredible. Ultimately, the correct decision, tax should be targeted at investors and companies buying land. The vast majority of farm estates will now be exempt, providing they make use of the £5m spouse allowance
The people benefiting from this change are those sitting on a highly tax efficient asset worth many millions who quite sincerely and genuinely want to keep it that way and don't see why they should pay the same tax as say someone running a productive business.
We have to concede an extremely effective lobbying exercise by wealthy landowners but we don't really need to agree with the principle of it. It's far more egregious than WFA for example.
Those who are genuinely worried about family farming would be far better off looking at *incomes* - for instance, supermarket buying practices - and food security.
But this lobbying has been all about protecting capital investment.
It's like houses - those who have houses are treated far better than those without when it comes to IHT. No wonder the values are distorted.
IHT is theft!
Property is theft comrade.
Your family member dies, you're bereaved, and you're left with a massive bill to Haitch-MRC - how does that work?
A family member dies and you're left a massive unearned pot of gold. How is that fair?
Because your family member worked hard all their life and should be allowed to dispose of their savings as they see fit?
Just be grateful and pay the tax.
Let’s say someone has a big success and gets paid a £1m bonus on April 1. They pay income tax on it under PAYE.
They then die on April 8.
And you think the government should have the right to double dip on that income simply because the individual concerned has died?
Well yes, because there is effectively a tax on dying.
The person who earned it, after all, has no further use for the money.
But we don't live and work just for ourselves. We live and work for our families. People with children sacrifice much (if necessary) for their wellbeing. Others do the same for other close relations or even friends.
Why should the State take what they have earned and which they wish to pass on to those they care about?
Based on this polling I wouldn’t be surprised the Tories ahead of Reform at some point in quarter one of 2026, if present trends hold, not consistently but on an outlier basis.
Word missing there?
On the substantive point, am I right in thinking as well that Farage is at the same time the oldest and the least experienced of the four major party leaders? He's not likely to be improving now as he ages and he's never been in cabinet.
No, Starmer is about 18 months older than Farage.
Blair and Cameron had never been in government before they became PM.
Fair enough on the first point.
Cameron and Blair had both been Leaders of the Opposition. Farage hasn't even done that.
Indeed he quite often skives off Parliament. I think he finds it boring because its not all about him.
This has recently set me wondering if Nigel Farage might bail soon. He is rarely in the Commons or in Clacton, and does not even seem to have much to say about Streeting or Lammy advocating customs unions with the EU, an issue you'd think would be mother's milk to him. Is he still interested in politics? (That said, maybe he is just under the weather as there are some nasty bugs doing the rounds.)
I wonder if the 'I can't really remember what happened 50 years ago but I definitely did not say those racist and antisemitic things' row has put his gas at a peep. The one time I saw Farage address the issue directly he seemed uncharacteristically shifty and evasive.
28 witnesses, including Jewish students, and written communications amongst teachers, is quite a lot to dismiss as "lies, all lies". Tice is that crass imo; Farage is not.
It's also quite awkward with respect to Farage's position on Israel, and the portrayal of Muslims as The Mortal Enemy of Western Civilisation.
Witnesses at the time (as in recording in diaries, letters etc) or witnesses ‘recalling’ events of 50 years ago. Very big difference, as all good historians know.
28 witnesses seems pretty corroborative to me. The man’s a bully, and a spiv, and has been so since his earliest years.
I haven’t cared enough to look at what he did at school in detail, but isn’t prancing around with your arm in the air attention seeking rather than bullying?
Farage is deeply unpleasant man who is probably a racist. Spending 5 minutes reading a guardian article to confirm those views isn’t a good use of my time
So why did you venture in with your first comment about it being attention seeking not bullying then?
Because it was an interesting discussion.
Not all of the conversations on here are entirely fact based and it’s a better board for it
Ok but hang on.
Post 1: You counter the 'bully' allegations with "wasn't it just attention seeking?"
Post2: You say you don't care enough to read the details to see if it was indeed just attention seeking.
Post3: Whilst still not caring to check if it was just attention seeking you say it's nevertheless interesting.
Really rather odd. But, look, you're not in the dock, and it is Christmas, so that's probably enough on the matter. I note your overall 'deeply unpleasant and probably a racist' assessment of the bloke we're talking about. Big tick for that.
Not at all. Very easy to reconcile.
I’m aware he behaved badly at school but haven’t checked into details. The only thing that has stuck in my mind is him walking around making nazi salutes. Which to my mind is more childishly trying to shock people/seek attention. But it may be he did other stuff which was more targeted at specific individuals (which for me is the threshold of bullying).
But whether he’s a spiv and a bully or a spiv and an attention seeker won’t materially change how I view him in the round, so would rather do more uplifting things with my time
Ok, so just a snippet to give you a flavour.
He would torment a particular Jewish pupil by continually leaning in close and saying, "should have gassed you all".
With gas enunciated as "gassssssss" to mimic the sound of it hissing into the chambers at the death camps.
A pedant notes that the most common Nazi gas chambers used Prussia acid crystals that produce cyanide when moist, so no gas would have been hissing into the chamber. I don’t expect Farage would have known that. But then I’m probably being disingenuous.
No that's good knowledge. No dark inference taken from your supplying it.
This is the best Christmas present me, my family and my friends could have had. I can now safely sleep at night, that is how bad it has been. Especially for those older than me with serious health issues. Bad news for agricultural valuers of course who would have made a fortune over the arguing the toss over the values of farms. It takes my estate out of the danger zone and so we can now look forwards to building the shed which we have needed for many years.
I had expected this to become a jockeying point when the new Labour leader was selected or else it to be put off for a year, and a year and a year.
They pointed the shotgun at the whole farming industry. We stood up to them and they have blinked. But we won't forget, no we won't forget ...
That is the whole point
The farmers will not forgive or vote labour because of this
They also voted en masse for Brexit and then realised they had screwed themselves. They are the ultimate selfish opportunists who believe the world owes them a living. Of course they won't vote labour.
British farmers do appear to be cretinous, as a class. Brexit is exhibit 1.
However, if you care about land use and food quality, then you need to care about farmers.
Reeves’s problem is she actively hates much of the country, including farmers.
The amount of political capital burnt in this thing is incredible. Ultimately, the correct decision, tax should be targeted at investors and companies buying land. The vast majority of farm estates will now be exempt, providing they make use of the £5m spouse allowance
The people benefiting from this change are those sitting on a highly tax efficient asset worth many millions who quite sincerely and genuinely want to keep it that way and don't see why they should pay the same tax as say someone running a productive business.
We have to concede an extremely effective lobbying exercise by wealthy landowners but we don't really need to agree with the principle of it. It's far more egregious than WFA for example.
Those who are genuinely worried about family farming would be far better off looking at *incomes* - for instance, supermarket buying practices - and food security.
But this lobbying has been all about protecting capital investment.
It's like houses - those who have houses are treated far better than those without when it comes to IHT. No wonder the values are distorted.
IHT is theft!
Property is theft comrade.
Your family member dies, you're bereaved, and you're left with a massive bill to Haitch-MRC - how does that work?
You are not paying the bill. Your dead relative is. You have to tax somebody, and dead people are better than live ones.
By those terms my dead relative has arisen from the grave to change his will and deny HMRC any money.
Anyway, the split between housing and other assets is indeed daft as pointed out earlier.
My relative moved into a small detached bungalow which was eminently suitable for his needs. This being the Flatlands it cost rather less than the (double) threshold.
In theory he could have moved into a larger property than he needed and by doing so saved about £60k in IHT.
I'm not sure the government really wants to encourage that.
Yes but by downsizing he realised a load of cash he could spend on cruising or just getting pissed.
My children will be lucky sods. Though everything I spend, I mentally deduct 40% IHT they won't have to pay. So everything seems very cheap. 40% discount. Hence my holiday in Martinique followed by a skiing holiday in the Dolomites. My kids encourage me.
This is the best Christmas present me, my family and my friends could have had. I can now safely sleep at night, that is how bad it has been. Especially for those older than me with serious health issues. Bad news for agricultural valuers of course who would have made a fortune over the arguing the toss over the values of farms. It takes my estate out of the danger zone and so we can now look forwards to building the shed which we have needed for many years.
I had expected this to become a jockeying point when the new Labour leader was selected or else it to be put off for a year, and a year and a year.
They pointed the shotgun at the whole farming industry. We stood up to them and they have blinked. But we won't forget, no we won't forget ...
That is the whole point
The farmers will not forgive or vote labour because of this
They also voted en masse for Brexit and then realised they had screwed themselves. They are the ultimate selfish opportunists who believe the world owes them a living. Of course they won't vote labour.
British farmers do appear to be cretinous, as a class. Brexit is exhibit 1.
However, if you care about land use and food quality, then you need to care about farmers.
Reeves’s problem is she actively hates much of the country, including farmers.
The amount of political capital burnt in this thing is incredible. Ultimately, the correct decision, tax should be targeted at investors and companies buying land. The vast majority of farm estates will now be exempt, providing they make use of the £5m spouse allowance
The people benefiting from this change are those sitting on a highly tax efficient asset worth many millions who quite sincerely and genuinely want to keep it that way and don't see why they should pay the same tax as say someone running a productive business.
We have to concede an extremely effective lobbying exercise by wealthy landowners but we don't really need to agree with the principle of it. It's far more egregious than WFA for example.
Those who are genuinely worried about family farming would be far better off looking at *incomes* - for instance, supermarket buying practices - and food security.
But this lobbying has been all about protecting capital investment.
It's like houses - those who have houses are treated far better than those without when it comes to IHT. No wonder the values are distorted.
IHT is theft!
Property is theft comrade.
Your family member dies, you're bereaved, and you're left with a massive bill to Haitch-MRC - how does that work?
A family member dies and you're left a massive unearned pot of gold. How is that fair?
Because your family member worked hard all their life and should be allowed to dispose of their savings as they see fit?
Just be grateful and pay the tax.
Let’s say someone has a big success and gets paid a £1m bonus on April 1. They pay income tax on it under PAYE.
They then die on April 8.
And you think the government should have the right to double dip on that income simply because the individual concerned has died?
Well yes, because there is effectively a tax on dying.
The person who earned it, after all, has no further use for the money.
Your argument is circulate. You’re saying the government should have the right because it has the right.
There is tax on value creating activity (I include transaction taxes like VAT in that as there is a willing buyer / willing seller). Death should not be a trigger for further tax - it’s just a transfer of existing assets from one name to another.
Based on this polling I wouldn’t be surprised the Tories ahead of Reform at some point in quarter one of 2026, if present trends hold, not consistently but on an outlier basis.
Word missing there?
On the substantive point, am I right in thinking as well that Farage is at the same time the oldest and the least experienced of the four major party leaders? He's not likely to be improving now as he ages and he's never been in cabinet.
No, Starmer is about 18 months older than Farage.
Blair and Cameron had never been in government before they became PM.
Fair enough on the first point.
Cameron and Blair had both been Leaders of the Opposition. Farage hasn't even done that.
Indeed he quite often skives off Parliament. I think he finds it boring because its not all about him.
This has recently set me wondering if Nigel Farage might bail soon. He is rarely in the Commons or in Clacton, and does not even seem to have much to say about Streeting or Lammy advocating customs unions with the EU, an issue you'd think would be mother's milk to him. Is he still interested in politics? (That said, maybe he is just under the weather as there are some nasty bugs doing the rounds.)
I wonder if the 'I can't really remember what happened 50 years ago but I definitely did not say those racist and antisemitic things' row has put his gas at a peep. The one time I saw Farage address the issue directly he seemed uncharacteristically shifty and evasive.
28 witnesses, including Jewish students, and written communications amongst teachers, is quite a lot to dismiss as "lies, all lies". Tice is that crass imo; Farage is not.
It's also quite awkward with respect to Farage's position on Israel, and the portrayal of Muslims as The Mortal Enemy of Western Civilisation.
Witnesses at the time (as in recording in diaries, letters etc) or witnesses ‘recalling’ events of 50 years ago. Very big difference, as all good historians know.
28 witnesses seems pretty corroborative to me. The man’s a bully, and a spiv, and has been so since his earliest years.
I haven’t cared enough to look at what he did at school in detail, but isn’t prancing around with your arm in the air attention seeking rather than bullying?
Farage is deeply unpleasant man who is probably a racist. Spending 5 minutes reading a guardian article to confirm those views isn’t a good use of my time
So why did you venture in with your first comment about it being attention seeking not bullying then?
Because it was an interesting discussion.
Not all of the conversations on here are entirely fact based and it’s a better board for it
Ok but hang on.
Post 1: You counter the 'bully' allegations with "wasn't it just attention seeking?"
Post2: You say you don't care enough to read the details to see if it was indeed just attention seeking.
Post3: Whilst still not caring to check if it was just attention seeking you say it's nevertheless interesting.
Really rather odd. But, look, you're not in the dock, and it is Christmas, so that's probably enough on the matter. I note your overall 'deeply unpleasant and probably a racist' assessment of the bloke we're talking about. Big tick for that.
Not at all. Very easy to reconcile.
I’m aware he behaved badly at school but haven’t checked into details. The only thing that has stuck in my mind is him walking around making nazi salutes. Which to my mind is more childishly trying to shock people/seek attention. But it may be he did other stuff which was more targeted at specific individuals (which for me is the threshold of bullying).
But whether he’s a spiv and a bully or a spiv and an attention seeker won’t materially change how I view him in the round, so would rather do more uplifting things with my time
Ok, so just a snippet to give you a flavour.
He would torment a particular Jewish pupil by continually leaning in close and saying, "should have gassed you all".
With gas enunciated as "gassssssss" to mimic the sound of it hissing into the chambers at the death camps.
It seems to me that despite all this being so long ago it does actually matter. Boys (I was one once) behave abominably about all sorts of things. Stuff was said, and done, that we didn't want our mum to know about.
But there is sub-optimal stuff that tells you generically what boys can be like, and their disgusting minds. And there is stuff which goes to deeper aspects of character. Such stuff is, if true, the example here.
I think with a lot of these sorts of things it's not so much what was done then that matters, but how a person acknowledges it now.
I would have thought Farage could have brushed it off as something he did when he was a daft teenager trying to provoke a reaction, but that obviously he's grown up now, etc, etc.
The government have spent it's first year and a half looking for trouble. If one of the Palestine Action people die of hunger strike it will be very serious for them. They seem to have gone out of their way to alienate people. Seeing Greta Thunburg arrested just makes them look ridiculous. People have been very patient with Starmer but I think it's now time to get themselves a LABOUR leader. I'd go with Streeting. As much to wash away the detritus that's attached to them as anything else
Leaving aside the merits of the PA proscription, is Greta Thunberg still flavour of the month? I don't seem to stumble upon news about her very much anymore, though I get the impression she has predominantly transitioned from environmental causes to the palestinian cause, so it feels like she needs to get arrested to get attention, which makes it less compelling than, say, reports than 100 grannies have been arrested for doign the same.
Matt Ridley in a recent Speccie article (worth a read), suggesting that the bottom has fallen out of the climate change market:
A top climate scientist is warning climate change will wipe out humanity unless we stop using fossil fuels over the next five years,’ tweeted Greta Thunberg in 2018. Five years later she deleted her tweet and shortly after decided that Palestine was a more promising way of staying in the limelight.
No expert, but it doesn't look like a battleship to me.
TBF a Great War/WW2 corvette didn't look like the small sailing ship of the mid-C19 ... What is also notable is that it's to be called the Trump Class, which indicates that the first ship of the class will be named after Mr Trump (a class of warships is usually named after the first of the class, pace [edit] UK MoD and its stupid messing around of late).
Usually Presidential names get applied to Nimitz- or Ford-class nuclear aircraft carriers. But it's not cut and dry. Mr Carter got a nuke sub named after him (entirely appropriately and I imagine amicably, as he was a nuke sub engineer by trade).
No serving leader of any nation (with the possible exception of Russia) has ever named a ship after themselves. It's pretty well the ultimate in imbecilic narcissism.
Do HMS Queen Elizabeth and the Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carriers count?
It's named after the first Elizabeth. Both have boring names - I want Dwarf and Dainty, to confuse the enemy.
Bring back HMS Hood.
HMS Trafalgar and HMS Waterloo.
HMS Agincourt too.
HMS Hood exploded about 5 minutes into the gun battle with the Bismarck.
I like names like Warspite, Defiance and Vengeance. Or Temeraire, to confuse the French
At one point the RN had a ship named after the most significant hiding they ever got off the French - HMS Chesapeake. I'm sure that confused them.
This is the best Christmas present me, my family and my friends could have had. I can now safely sleep at night, that is how bad it has been. Especially for those older than me with serious health issues. Bad news for agricultural valuers of course who would have made a fortune over the arguing the toss over the values of farms. It takes my estate out of the danger zone and so we can now look forwards to building the shed which we have needed for many years.
I had expected this to become a jockeying point when the new Labour leader was selected or else it to be put off for a year, and a year and a year.
They pointed the shotgun at the whole farming industry. We stood up to them and they have blinked. But we won't forget, no we won't forget ...
That is the whole point
The farmers will not forgive or vote labour because of this
They also voted en masse for Brexit and then realised they had screwed themselves. They are the ultimate selfish opportunists who believe the world owes them a living. Of course they won't vote labour.
British farmers do appear to be cretinous, as a class. Brexit is exhibit 1.
However, if you care about land use and food quality, then you need to care about farmers.
Reeves’s problem is she actively hates much of the country, including farmers.
The amount of political capital burnt in this thing is incredible. Ultimately, the correct decision, tax should be targeted at investors and companies buying land. The vast majority of farm estates will now be exempt, providing they make use of the £5m spouse allowance
The people benefiting from this change are those sitting on a highly tax efficient asset worth many millions who quite sincerely and genuinely want to keep it that way and don't see why they should pay the same tax as say someone running a productive business.
We have to concede an extremely effective lobbying exercise by wealthy landowners but we don't really need to agree with the principle of it. It's far more egregious than WFA for example.
Those who are genuinely worried about family farming would be far better off looking at *incomes* - for instance, supermarket buying practices - and food security.
But this lobbying has been all about protecting capital investment.
It's like houses - those who have houses are treated far better than those without when it comes to IHT. No wonder the values are distorted.
IHT is theft!
Property is theft comrade.
Your family member dies, you're bereaved, and you're left with a massive bill to Haitch-MRC - how does that work?
A family member dies and you're left a massive unearned pot of gold. How is that fair?
Because your family member worked hard all their life and should be allowed to dispose of their savings as they see fit?
Just be grateful and pay the tax.
Let’s say someone has a big success and gets paid a £1m bonus on April 1. They pay income tax on it under PAYE.
They then die on April 8.
And you think the government should have the right to double dip on that income simply because the individual concerned has died?
Yes. The person who has died obviously doesn't care. And the person who inherits is a lucky sod.
The fundamental difference is that I believe people own their assets. You clearly believe that they have them on suffrance from the government
This is the best Christmas present me, my family and my friends could have had. I can now safely sleep at night, that is how bad it has been. Especially for those older than me with serious health issues. Bad news for agricultural valuers of course who would have made a fortune over the arguing the toss over the values of farms. It takes my estate out of the danger zone and so we can now look forwards to building the shed which we have needed for many years.
I had expected this to become a jockeying point when the new Labour leader was selected or else it to be put off for a year, and a year and a year.
They pointed the shotgun at the whole farming industry. We stood up to them and they have blinked. But we won't forget, no we won't forget ...
That is the whole point
The farmers will not forgive or vote labour because of this
They also voted en masse for Brexit and then realised they had screwed themselves. They are the ultimate selfish opportunists who believe the world owes them a living. Of course they won't vote labour.
British farmers do appear to be cretinous, as a class. Brexit is exhibit 1.
However, if you care about land use and food quality, then you need to care about farmers.
Reeves’s problem is she actively hates much of the country, including farmers.
The amount of political capital burnt in this thing is incredible. Ultimately, the correct decision, tax should be targeted at investors and companies buying land. The vast majority of farm estates will now be exempt, providing they make use of the £5m spouse allowance
The people benefiting from this change are those sitting on a highly tax efficient asset worth many millions who quite sincerely and genuinely want to keep it that way and don't see why they should pay the same tax as say someone running a productive business.
We have to concede an extremely effective lobbying exercise by wealthy landowners but we don't really need to agree with the principle of it. It's far more egregious than WFA for example.
Those who are genuinely worried about family farming would be far better off looking at *incomes* - for instance, supermarket buying practices - and food security.
But this lobbying has been all about protecting capital investment.
It's like houses - those who have houses are treated far better than those without when it comes to IHT. No wonder the values are distorted.
IHT is theft!
Property is theft comrade.
Your family member dies, you're bereaved, and you're left with a massive bill to Haitch-MRC - how does that work?
A family member dies and you're left a massive unearned pot of gold. How is that fair?
Because your family member worked hard all their life and should be allowed to dispose of their savings as they see fit?
Just be grateful and pay the tax.
Let’s say someone has a big success and gets paid a £1m bonus on April 1. They pay income tax on it under PAYE.
They then die on April 8.
And you think the government should have the right to double dip on that income simply because the individual concerned has died?
Well yes, because there is effectively a tax on dying.
The person who earned it, after all, has no further use for the money.
Your argument is circulate. You’re saying the government should have the right because it has the right.
There is tax on value creating activity (I include transaction taxes like VAT in that as there is a willing buyer / willing seller). Death should not be a trigger for further tax - it’s just a transfer of existing assets from one name to another.
This is the best Christmas present me, my family and my friends could have had. I can now safely sleep at night, that is how bad it has been. Especially for those older than me with serious health issues. Bad news for agricultural valuers of course who would have made a fortune over the arguing the toss over the values of farms. It takes my estate out of the danger zone and so we can now look forwards to building the shed which we have needed for many years.
I had expected this to become a jockeying point when the new Labour leader was selected or else it to be put off for a year, and a year and a year.
They pointed the shotgun at the whole farming industry. We stood up to them and they have blinked. But we won't forget, no we won't forget ...
That is the whole point
The farmers will not forgive or vote labour because of this
They also voted en masse for Brexit and then realised they had screwed themselves. They are the ultimate selfish opportunists who believe the world owes them a living. Of course they won't vote labour.
British farmers do appear to be cretinous, as a class. Brexit is exhibit 1.
However, if you care about land use and food quality, then you need to care about farmers.
Reeves’s problem is she actively hates much of the country, including farmers.
The amount of political capital burnt in this thing is incredible. Ultimately, the correct decision, tax should be targeted at investors and companies buying land. The vast majority of farm estates will now be exempt, providing they make use of the £5m spouse allowance
The people benefiting from this change are those sitting on a highly tax efficient asset worth many millions who quite sincerely and genuinely want to keep it that way and don't see why they should pay the same tax as say someone running a productive business.
We have to concede an extremely effective lobbying exercise by wealthy landowners but we don't really need to agree with the principle of it. It's far more egregious than WFA for example.
Those who are genuinely worried about family farming would be far better off looking at *incomes* - for instance, supermarket buying practices - and food security.
But this lobbying has been all about protecting capital investment.
It's like houses - those who have houses are treated far better than those without when it comes to IHT. No wonder the values are distorted.
IHT is theft!
Property is theft comrade.
Your family member dies, you're bereaved, and you're left with a massive bill to Haitch-MRC - how does that work?
A family member dies and you're left a massive unearned pot of gold. How is that fair?
Because your family member worked hard all their life and should be allowed to dispose of their savings as they see fit?
Just be grateful and pay the tax.
Let’s say someone has a big success and gets paid a £1m bonus on April 1. They pay income tax on it under PAYE.
They then die on April 8.
And you think the government should have the right to double dip on that income simply because the individual concerned has died?
The government essentially taxes money every time it moves from one person/company to another. There are very few transactions that are free of taxation.
Why should inheritance stick out as one such transaction that is untaxed?
No expert, but it doesn't look like a battleship to me.
TBF a Great War/WW2 corvette didn't look like the small sailing ship of the mid-C19 ... What is also notable is that it's to be called the Trump Class, which indicates that the first ship of the class will be named after Mr Trump (a class of warships is usually named after the first of the class, pace [edit] UK MoD and its stupid messing around of late).
Usually Presidential names get applied to Nimitz- or Ford-class nuclear aircraft carriers. But it's not cut and dry. Mr Carter got a nuke sub named after him (entirely appropriately and I imagine amicably, as he was a nuke sub engineer by trade).
No serving leader of any nation (with the possible exception of Russia) has ever named a ship after themselves. It's pretty well the ultimate in imbecilic narcissism.
Do HMS Queen Elizabeth and the Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carriers count?
It's named after the first Elizabeth. Both have boring names - I want Dwarf and Dainty, to confuse the enemy.
Bring back HMS Hood.
HMS Trafalgar and HMS Waterloo.
HMS Agincourt too.
HMS Hood exploded about 5 minutes into the gun battle with the Bismarck.
I like names like Warspite, Defiance and Vengeance. Or Temeraire, to confuse the French
At one point the RN had a ship named after the most significant hiding they ever got off the French - HMS Chesapeake. I'm sure that confused them.
That was at a second remove. It was actually USS Chesapeake and got captured by the Shannon in a big fixture so of course they kept the name. Even if it was confusing.
There were of course Cockchafer (I think Insect class gunboat or escort) though sadly HMS Pansy (Flower corvette) got quickly renamed before launch when some mean spirut spotted it.
This is the best Christmas present me, my family and my friends could have had. I can now safely sleep at night, that is how bad it has been. Especially for those older than me with serious health issues. Bad news for agricultural valuers of course who would have made a fortune over the arguing the toss over the values of farms. It takes my estate out of the danger zone and so we can now look forwards to building the shed which we have needed for many years.
I had expected this to become a jockeying point when the new Labour leader was selected or else it to be put off for a year, and a year and a year.
They pointed the shotgun at the whole farming industry. We stood up to them and they have blinked. But we won't forget, no we won't forget ...
That is the whole point
The farmers will not forgive or vote labour because of this
They also voted en masse for Brexit and then realised they had screwed themselves. They are the ultimate selfish opportunists who believe the world owes them a living. Of course they won't vote labour.
British farmers do appear to be cretinous, as a class. Brexit is exhibit 1.
However, if you care about land use and food quality, then you need to care about farmers.
Reeves’s problem is she actively hates much of the country, including farmers.
The amount of political capital burnt in this thing is incredible. Ultimately, the correct decision, tax should be targeted at investors and companies buying land. The vast majority of farm estates will now be exempt, providing they make use of the £5m spouse allowance
The people benefiting from this change are those sitting on a highly tax efficient asset worth many millions who quite sincerely and genuinely want to keep it that way and don't see why they should pay the same tax as say someone running a productive business.
We have to concede an extremely effective lobbying exercise by wealthy landowners but we don't really need to agree with the principle of it. It's far more egregious than WFA for example.
Those who are genuinely worried about family farming would be far better off looking at *incomes* - for instance, supermarket buying practices - and food security.
But this lobbying has been all about protecting capital investment.
It's like houses - those who have houses are treated far better than those without when it comes to IHT. No wonder the values are distorted.
IHT is theft!
Property is theft comrade.
Your family member dies, you're bereaved, and you're left with a massive bill to Haitch-MRC - how does that work?
A family member dies and you're left a massive unearned pot of gold. How is that fair?
Because your family member worked hard all their life and should be allowed to dispose of their savings as they see fit?
Just be grateful and pay the tax.
Let’s say someone has a big success and gets paid a £1m bonus on April 1. They pay income tax on it under PAYE.
They then die on April 8.
And you think the government should have the right to double dip on that income simply because the individual concerned has died?
Well yes, because there is effectively a tax on dying.
The person who earned it, after all, has no further use for the money.
Your argument is circulate. You’re saying the government should have the right because it has the right.
There is tax on value creating activity (I include transaction taxes like VAT in that as there is a willing buyer / willing seller). Death should not be a trigger for further tax - it’s just a transfer of existing assets from one name to another.
In which case, tax bequests received as income.
A transfer is not income. That’s why it is called a “transfer”.
Based on this polling I wouldn’t be surprised the Tories ahead of Reform at some point in quarter one of 2026, if present trends hold, not consistently but on an outlier basis.
Word missing there?
On the substantive point, am I right in thinking as well that Farage is at the same time the oldest and the least experienced of the four major party leaders? He's not likely to be improving now as he ages and he's never been in cabinet.
No, Starmer is about 18 months older than Farage.
Blair and Cameron had never been in government before they became PM.
Fair enough on the first point.
Cameron and Blair had both been Leaders of the Opposition. Farage hasn't even done that.
Indeed he quite often skives off Parliament. I think he finds it boring because its not all about him.
This has recently set me wondering if Nigel Farage might bail soon. He is rarely in the Commons or in Clacton, and does not even seem to have much to say about Streeting or Lammy advocating customs unions with the EU, an issue you'd think would be mother's milk to him. Is he still interested in politics? (That said, maybe he is just under the weather as there are some nasty bugs doing the rounds.)
I wonder if the 'I can't really remember what happened 50 years ago but I definitely did not say those racist and antisemitic things' row has put his gas at a peep. The one time I saw Farage address the issue directly he seemed uncharacteristically shifty and evasive.
28 witnesses, including Jewish students, and written communications amongst teachers, is quite a lot to dismiss as "lies, all lies". Tice is that crass imo; Farage is not.
It's also quite awkward with respect to Farage's position on Israel, and the portrayal of Muslims as The Mortal Enemy of Western Civilisation.
Witnesses at the time (as in recording in diaries, letters etc) or witnesses ‘recalling’ events of 50 years ago. Very big difference, as all good historians know.
28 witnesses seems pretty corroborative to me. The man’s a bully, and a spiv, and has been so since his earliest years.
I haven’t cared enough to look at what he did at school in detail, but isn’t prancing around with your arm in the air attention seeking rather than bullying?
Farage is deeply unpleasant man who is probably a racist. Spending 5 minutes reading a guardian article to confirm those views isn’t a good use of my time
So why did you venture in with your first comment about it being attention seeking not bullying then?
Because it was an interesting discussion.
Not all of the conversations on here are entirely fact based and it’s a better board for it
Ok but hang on.
Post 1: You counter the 'bully' allegations with "wasn't it just attention seeking?"
Post2: You say you don't care enough to read the details to see if it was indeed just attention seeking.
Post3: Whilst still not caring to check if it was just attention seeking you say it's nevertheless interesting.
Really rather odd. But, look, you're not in the dock, and it is Christmas, so that's probably enough on the matter. I note your overall 'deeply unpleasant and probably a racist' assessment of the bloke we're talking about. Big tick for that.
Not at all. Very easy to reconcile.
I’m aware he behaved badly at school but haven’t checked into details. The only thing that has stuck in my mind is him walking around making nazi salutes. Which to my mind is more childishly trying to shock people/seek attention. But it may be he did other stuff which was more targeted at specific individuals (which for me is the threshold of bullying).
But whether he’s a spiv and a bully or a spiv and an attention seeker won’t materially change how I view him in the round, so would rather do more uplifting things with my time
Ok, so just a snippet to give you a flavour.
He would torment a particular Jewish pupil by continually leaning in close and saying, "should have gassed you all".
With gas enunciated as "gassssssss" to mimic the sound of it hissing into the chambers at the death camps.
Knowing that has made my life slightly worse, thank you
Yes, I know what you mean. Let's move on, roast some chestnuts, talk about nicer things. It's Christmas Eve Eve. One of my favourite days of the year.
This is the best Christmas present me, my family and my friends could have had. I can now safely sleep at night, that is how bad it has been. Especially for those older than me with serious health issues. Bad news for agricultural valuers of course who would have made a fortune over the arguing the toss over the values of farms. It takes my estate out of the danger zone and so we can now look forwards to building the shed which we have needed for many years.
I had expected this to become a jockeying point when the new Labour leader was selected or else it to be put off for a year, and a year and a year.
They pointed the shotgun at the whole farming industry. We stood up to them and they have blinked. But we won't forget, no we won't forget ...
That is the whole point
The farmers will not forgive or vote labour because of this
They also voted en masse for Brexit and then realised they had screwed themselves. They are the ultimate selfish opportunists who believe the world owes them a living. Of course they won't vote labour.
British farmers do appear to be cretinous, as a class. Brexit is exhibit 1.
However, if you care about land use and food quality, then you need to care about farmers.
Reeves’s problem is she actively hates much of the country, including farmers.
The amount of political capital burnt in this thing is incredible. Ultimately, the correct decision, tax should be targeted at investors and companies buying land. The vast majority of farm estates will now be exempt, providing they make use of the £5m spouse allowance
The people benefiting from this change are those sitting on a highly tax efficient asset worth many millions who quite sincerely and genuinely want to keep it that way and don't see why they should pay the same tax as say someone running a productive business.
We have to concede an extremely effective lobbying exercise by wealthy landowners but we don't really need to agree with the principle of it. It's far more egregious than WFA for example.
Those who are genuinely worried about family farming would be far better off looking at *incomes* - for instance, supermarket buying practices - and food security.
But this lobbying has been all about protecting capital investment.
It's like houses - those who have houses are treated far better than those without when it comes to IHT. No wonder the values are distorted.
IHT is theft!
Property is theft comrade.
Your family member dies, you're bereaved, and you're left with a massive bill to Haitch-MRC - how does that work?
A family member dies and you're left a massive unearned pot of gold. How is that fair?
Because your family member worked hard all their life and should be allowed to dispose of their savings as they see fit?
Just be grateful and pay the tax.
Let’s say someone has a big success and gets paid a £1m bonus on April 1. They pay income tax on it under PAYE.
They then die on April 8.
And you think the government should have the right to double dip on that income simply because the individual concerned has died?
The government essentially taxes money every time it moves from one person/company to another. There are very few transactions that are free of taxation.
Why should inheritance stick out as one such transaction that is untaxed?
Because all other transactions create value (or perceived value). In theory the government is taking a slice of the increase in the value not the principal.
Comments
No one will listen to the comparatively lugubrious William F. Buckley style voice any more.
He wasn't President at the time, but that's only because they hadn't won the war yet. I think it's reasonable to categorise him as a "serving leader".
https://www.racingpost.com/news/how-to-add-racing-post-as-a-google-preferred-source-aXuMw1I3jMYX/
There is a US Navy proscription against naming ships after living people (although Vinson and Stennis got passes) so this new whatever-it-is is the 'Trump Class' and the lead ship will be USS Defiant. If it ever gets built.
I’m aware he behaved badly at school but haven’t checked into details. The only thing that has stuck in my mind is him walking around making nazi salutes. Which to my mind is more childishly trying to shock people/seek attention. But it may be he did other stuff which was more targeted at specific individuals (which for me is the threshold of bullying).
But whether he’s a spiv and a bully or a spiv and an attention seeker won’t materially change how I view him in the round, so would rather do more uplifting things with my time
https://x.com/europarl_en/status/2003405219808612844?s=61
He would torment a particular Jewish pupil by continually leaning in close and saying, "should have gassed you all".
With gas enunciated as "gassssssss" to mimic the sound of it hissing into the chambers at the death camps.
HMS Trafalgar and HMS Waterloo.
HMS Agincourt too.
Incidentally, are those spurs alleged to have given him any trouble later life? Difficulty walking round a golf course for example.
I'm planning on a Brussels Effect about half an hour after lunch on the 25th.
(Actually a little concerned they might go for the latter...)
Maybe that’s why Trump likes him?
I seriously doubt the ego-class cruiser will ever be built.
Its primary and likely sole mission is air defence, if it ever does get built. There's just no logic in throwing all the other kit they're talking about onto the same platform.
Just makes it more expensive, more difficult to build (if they can at all) and a juicier target.
Ows about that then,
But there is sub-optimal stuff that tells you generically what boys can be like, and their disgusting minds. And there is stuff which goes to deeper aspects of character. Such stuff is, if true, the example here.
the way Doug Burgum, who openly celebrated wind energy when he was governor of North Dakota, has totally just debased himself to satisfy Trump’s insane anti-wind nonsense is so pathetic
https://x.com/ArmandDoma/status/2003186662835388459
For someone who is fundementally opposed to Labour, I find myself in agreement with both of the policy announcements made - on Non Crime Hate Incidents and increasing the threshhold for family business inheritance tax - and with the comments from Ministers about 4 day weeks and not joining a Customs Union.
Credit where it is due.
Oh and no credit to the Tories. Of course they will claim this was some sort of victory for them but they had little or nothing to do with these annnouncements and are pretty much an irrelevance at present. Trying to claim they were responsible for forcing reversals rather than just welcoming the changes makes them look petty.
I do think the early modern monarchs are a good pattern for Trump's ambitions, more than 20th century totalitarians.
Seeing Greta Thunburg arrested just makes them look ridiculous. People have been very patient with Starmer but I think it's time to get themselves a LABOUR leader. I'd go with Streeting. As much to wash away the detritus that's attached to them as anything else
They then die on April 8.
And you think the government should have the right to double dip on that income simply because the individual concerned has died?
The person who earned it, after all, has no further use for the money.
I must say it doesn't feel very Christmassy here in Martinique.
Plenty of rum though. There is that.
Well I'm not having it. 100k is massive and rare and it should be marked. All should 'like" (unless they hate the post which few will surely do).
I've obliged anyway.
Anyway, the split between housing and other assets is indeed daft as pointed out earlier.
My relative moved into a small detached bungalow which was eminently suitable for his needs. This being the Flatlands it cost rather less than the (double) threshold.
In theory he could have moved into a larger property than he needed and by doing so saved about £60k in (theoretical) IHT.
I'm not sure the government really wants to encourage that.
Why should the State take what they have earned and which they wish to pass on to those they care about?
There is tax on value creating activity (I include transaction taxes like VAT in that as there is a willing buyer / willing seller). Death should not be a trigger for further tax - it’s just a transfer of existing assets from one name to another.
I would have thought Farage could have brushed it off as something he did when he was a daft teenager trying to provoke a reaction, but that obviously he's grown up now, etc, etc.
A top climate scientist is warning climate change will wipe out humanity unless we stop using fossil fuels over the next five years,’ tweeted Greta Thunberg in 2018. Five years later she deleted her tweet and shortly after decided that Palestine was a more promising way of staying in the limelight.
https://spectator.com/article/the-great-climate-climbdown-is-finally-here/
Why should inheritance stick out as one such transaction that is untaxed?
Even if it was confusing.
There were of course Cockchafer (I think Insect class gunboat or escort) though sadly HMS Pansy (Flower corvette) got quickly renamed before launch when some mean spirut spotted it.