We had a Conservative leaflet delivered very late yesterday evening (after 11pm) in my part of Newham.
I know Conservative activists are timid, nocturnal creatures and this seems to prove it.
Strangely enough, I think I may be in a Conservative target Ward (if such things exist). Labour usually win my Ward with 60-65% of the vote with the Conservatives on about 25% - I suspect the reasoning in my mainly Hindu Ward is the Conservative vote will hold up, the Newham Independents and perhaps the Greens will take chunks out of the Labour vote and the Tories will come through the middle.
Bloomberg: President Donald Trump is preparing to release a fiscal year 2027 budget plan on Friday that will frame his party’s midterm election message around a massive defense buildup, partially paid for by cuts to domestic agencies and health-care entitlements. https://x.com/PollTracker2024/status/2039667943122800854
Lose your healthcare and see cuts to public services so Trump has the money to embark on another war .
Not sure that’s a winning message for most voters but he’ll still have the MAGA morons onside.
Afternoon all. This weeks Find Out Now has Reform back up a little like MiC
Ref 26 (+2) Green 20 (=) Con 18 (=) Lab 15 (-1) LD 10 (-2) SNP 3 (=) Others 7 (=)
1-2 April, changes from 26-27 March
LibDems down again.
Wait until their "give motorists some money" policy gives them a bounce.
Motorists are massively overtaxed.
If that overtaxation is reduced then that is not being given money.
Some people have this bizarre idea that all money belongs to the state.
So where else does the tax come from to make up the lost money ?
Since it is being spent as general taxation, it should come from general taxation. Probably VAT or Income Tax.
Fuel is being phased out anyway, so fuel duty needs to be phased out too.
Reeves is starting to tackle that by introducing taxes on EVs on a per mile basis.
We will end up,with road pricing based on miles driven and time people drive.
If she cuts fuel duty and simultaneously introduces a per mile charge on EVs then I’m done with UK politics. Both are in isolation stupid policies; together a complete farce.
It’s like there is zero understanding of incentives, of the kind of journey that adds economic value, of any sense of where we want the UK to be in 10 years time. Every party is the same. The Greens win on default just by being happy - at least we’ll have a laugh on the way down.
She’s not going to cut fuel duty: Fuel duty is itself (kind of) road pricing by mileage!
Obviously as we transition to EVs, that tax income is going to disappear: The Treasury is going to insist that the £25billion of tax revenue be replaced from somewhere & a per mile tax on EVs seems like the closest equivalent economically speaking.
It was a hypothetical. Hopefully she doesn’t succumb to pressure from the Lib Dem’s (wtf are they up to). To be clear, my complaints are
1) If we want to transition to EVs, these are exactly the wrong incentives to put in place 2) cutting taxes or making payments during shocks is why we have ended up with an coddled population and economy. Freebies all the time. 3) cutting fuel duty now in particular is disaster for the risk of short term shortages 4) mile charging is deeply harmful to rural communities, who do long trips, versus short trips in cities (exactly the ones we want to reduce)
IF we tax EV transport (I agree with Bart that this isn’t strictly necessary, income tax and VAT are good replacements), then per journey is what you want.
Why not just put up the annual tax disc on EVs and hybrids. It is far easier than a mileage charge and encourages EV users to do higher milage trips in them?
And Mozart was FOURTEEN when he heard, just once, Allegri’s Miserere in - of all places - the Sistine Chapel. He heard it there because it was the only place it was allowed to be played, to keep it secret
Mozart then wrote it all down from memory - from that one hearing. Harmonies orchestration vocals everything. And then he went back once more to check he’d got it all right. He had
When the Pope heard of this he was meant to punish Mozart for transgressing the sacred secrecy of the Miserere, instead he gave him “The Order of the Golden Spur”
We must defend European civilisation with our lives. It is the greatest achievement of mankind. And it is in peril
Apparently this story is mostly false. Which is a shame, because it’s a great story.
We know it’s rubbish, because Allegri’s Miserere was performed in London from 1735 onwards & copies are known to have been available in Rome & elsewhere. Mozart is supposed to have transcribed it in 1770, according to a letter sent by his father.
What /was/ kept secret was the ornamentation of the notes which was kept exclusive to the Vatican - it’s far more plausible that Mozart was able to remember & later transcribe the vocal ornamentation over an extant copy of the piece than the idea that he was able to remember the entire five-vocal part plus accompanying keyboard music in its entirety. Mozart was a genius, but probably not that much of a genius.
We had a Conservative leaflet delivered very late yesterday evening (after 11pm) in my part of Newham.
I know Conservative activists are timid, nocturnal creatures and this seems to prove it.
Strangely enough, I think I may be in a Conservative target Ward (if such things exist). Labour usually win my Ward with 60-65% of the vote with the Conservatives on about 25% - I suspect the reasoning in my mainly Hindu Ward is the Conservative vote will hold up, the Newham Independents and perhaps the Greens will take chunks out of the Labour vote and the Tories will come through the middle.
We had a Conservative leaflet delivered very late yesterday evening (after 11pm) in my part of Newham.
I know Conservative activists are timid, nocturnal creatures and this seems to prove it.
Strangely enough, I think I may be in a Conservative target Ward (if such things exist). Labour usually win my Ward with 60-65% of the vote with the Conservatives on about 25% - I suspect the reasoning in my mainly Hindu Ward is the Conservative vote will hold up, the Newham Independents and perhaps the Greens will take chunks out of the Labour vote and the Tories will come through the middle.
I'm not entirely convinced.
The Tory Hindu vote is an interesting one. It won Leicester East against a very divided field, and a background of Labour in Leicester imploding.
But how much of it was down to the Tories having a Hindu leader as PM? Does it transfer to Badenoch's Tories? We might find out a little this May.
One of my Hindu colleagues is very pro-Farage, driven mostly by Islamophobia from GB news and Social Media. He might well regret it when the leopard eats his face, but there you go.
Afternoon all. This weeks Find Out Now has Reform back up a little like MiC
Ref 26 (+2) Green 20 (=) Con 18 (=) Lab 15 (-1) LD 10 (-2) SNP 3 (=) Others 7 (=)
1-2 April, changes from 26-27 March
LibDems down again.
Wait until their "give motorists some money" policy gives them a bounce.
Motorists are massively overtaxed.
If that overtaxation is reduced then that is not being given money.
Some people have this bizarre idea that all money belongs to the state.
So where else does the tax come from to make up the lost money ?
Since it is being spent as general taxation, it should come from general taxation. Probably VAT or Income Tax.
Fuel is being phased out anyway, so fuel duty needs to be phased out too.
There's no particular reason why tax raised in one area shouldn't be spent in another.
So no reason why the roads can't be financed through general taxation and leave driving untaxed altogether then?
Why single out driving as something that should be untaxed on some kind of point of principle, whereas working, investing, passing on money in your estate, spending on goods and services and so on are all taxed?
Given you're not going to be able to raise 100% of the income you need to provide the public services people want purely by using tax as a way of internalising negative externalities, you're going to need to accept that most of the tax you charge will have negative impacts - for example, productive economic activity that would take place but for the existence of the tax. At that point, the question just becomes one of spreading the pain appropriately so as to limit economic distortion and be broadly "fair". I don't see any general point of principle why that should exclude motoring specifically while including the broad range of other things that are taxed.
For the same reason that food and other essentials are zero-rated. Transportation is an essential, getting to work is not a luxury.
As it happens, I have said it would be reasonable for drivers to pay no more and no less than their costs including the cost of the roads but it should not be excessively taxed beyond that.
“Did you know: all five of the US flags planted by the Apollo missions have been bleached white by the UV rays which means now the moon technically belongs to France”
Afternoon all. This weeks Find Out Now has Reform back up a little like MiC
Ref 26 (+2) Green 20 (=) Con 18 (=) Lab 15 (-1) LD 10 (-2) SNP 3 (=) Others 7 (=)
1-2 April, changes from 26-27 March
LibDems down again.
Wait until their "give motorists some money" policy gives them a bounce.
Motorists are massively overtaxed.
If that overtaxation is reduced then that is not being given money.
Some people have this bizarre idea that all money belongs to the state.
So where else does the tax come from to make up the lost money ?
Since it is being spent as general taxation, it should come from general taxation. Probably VAT or Income Tax.
Fuel is being phased out anyway, so fuel duty needs to be phased out too.
Reeves is starting to tackle that by introducing taxes on EVs on a per mile basis.
We will end up,with road pricing based on miles driven and time people drive.
If she cuts fuel duty and simultaneously introduces a per mile charge on EVs then I’m done with UK politics. Both are in isolation stupid policies; together a complete farce.
It’s like there is zero understanding of incentives, of the kind of journey that adds economic value, of any sense of where we want the UK to be in 10 years time. Every party is the same. The Greens win on default just by being happy - at least we’ll have a laugh on the way down.
She’s not going to cut fuel duty: Fuel duty is itself (kind of) road pricing by mileage!
Obviously as we transition to EVs, that tax income is going to disappear: The Treasury is going to insist that the £25billion of tax revenue be replaced from somewhere & a per mile tax on EVs seems like the closest equivalent economically speaking.
It was a hypothetical. Hopefully she doesn’t succumb to pressure from the Lib Dem’s (wtf are they up to). To be clear, my complaints are
1) If we want to transition to EVs, these are exactly the wrong incentives to put in place 2) cutting taxes or making payments during shocks is why we have ended up with an coddled population and economy. Freebies all the time. 3) cutting fuel duty now in particular is disaster for the risk of short term shortages 4) mile charging is deeply harmful to rural communities, who do long trips, versus short trips in cities (exactly the ones we want to reduce)
IF we tax EV transport (I agree with Bart that this isn’t strictly necessary, income tax and VAT are good replacements), then per journey is what you want.
Why not just put up the annual tax disc on EVs and hybrids. It is far easier than a mileage charge and encourages EV users to do higher milage trips in them?
That incentivises mileage, not long journeys. It's the 2 billion journeys under a mile that we want to disincentivise.
From an equity perspective, that really harms middle-income people because they tend to do much lower mileage per year, but still have to incur all the fixed costs of owning a car. Ideally you want to make the marginal cost of driving higher relative to the initial cost (why car clubs are such a good system).
They might be right, they might be wrong, they are certainly quirky.
A striking difference between More in Common polls and all the others is the gap between Labour and Greens - +7 or so according to MiC, -negative according everyone else. What is the methodilogical difference causing this?
Yes, that is a very important question. Is it down to likelihood to actually vote? If so then past methods of calculating might be obselete. Polanski refreshes the parts that no one since Corbyn 2017 has reached.
Once again, Nigel is a pro surrounded by nasty idiots. The question of why Nigel is surrounded by nasty idiots is left as an exercise for the reader.
His comments could have been worded better, but they're absolutely spot on. This country is being brought to a halt by single issues not being addressed and weighed in the balance with other issues, but being given overriding importance and addressed with knee jerk legislation with legal teeth, piling another straw on the camel's back. Example: Covid, when the whole country went into the service of people not dying of covid. See also bat tunnels. See also equality legislation that means administrators must be paid the same as binmen. To be convulsed by knee jerk reactions to single issues is no way to run a country - it runs the country into the ground, and long term will cause more misery and suffering than it avoids.
"Many, many more people die on the roads driving cars, but we're not making cars illegal, so why are we stopping houses being built?" is a completely idiotic comment only makeable by someone who has practically no understanding of social issues.
It's reminiscent of Prince Philip saying after the Dunblane massacre words to the effect of "You wanna ban handguns, then why don't you ban cricket bats". Absolutely beneath contempt. Not "spot on" at all, or a question of suboptimal word choice. Everybody knows resources are limited. The country is not being brought to a halt by lack of recognition of that fact.
It's your knee that's jerking here. Next you'll be blaming trendy vicars or social workers.
This kind of thing makes me think there may be sense in laying Reform at their current price. They may find that the pond of Stupid Sociopathic Knuckledragger in which they fish isn't as deep as they believe.
I don’t know why you need to be so unpleasant. He’s not making an unreasonable point.
we take measures to minimise the amount of people who die on the roads. Airbags, crash protection, design of the BIW. We accept some risk and do not go too the nth degree.
The argument is on housebuilding we have gone too far. That’s worthy of debate as it may be choking off supply.
Yes but he trashed the point with the delivery of it.
"Everybody has to die sometime"
In relation to Grenfell. I mean, cmon, that's horrible and the rather banal point (about kneejerk reactions to tragedies) doesn't really come to the rescue.
We do indeed all have to die. But preferably not burned to death way before our time in a tower block inferno. 72 people, the youngest six months old.
Gross to say what he did and Farage is right to weed him out imo. He'll be needing to do lots more of this, I'd imagine. It's a problem for him. The people he attracts.
I don't think he was making the 'everyone will die' comment in relation to Grenfell directly. The point however is absolutely true. Humans have a finite lifespan (in one body at any rate) and we can go through life being kept utterly safe from all harm, a cause in which all building could cease, all prosperity be curtailed, but we'll still weaken and die. Being born is fatal.
“Did you know: all five of the US flags planted by the Apollo missions have been bleached white by the UV rays which means now the moon technically belongs to France”
Biggest shock to mortgage market since Truss mini-budget
The Iran war has triggered the sharpest shock to the UK mortgage market since the 2022 mini-budget delivered by Liz Truss, analysis by Moneyfacts has revealed.
Mortgage rates have soared in recent weeks, with the average two-year fixed deal jumping 100 basis points (bps) from 4.84% to 5.84% in March.
Typical five-year fixes have jumped from 4.96% to 5.75%.
Rates have not risen this sharply since autumn 2022.
Not exactly fixable though is it - interest rates are being driven by sharply higher inflation forecasts which is being driven by a lack of oil supply
Big G loves nothing more than to hloat when global issues affect UK economy under a non Tory Government.
It's all a bit ghoulish
Not gloating - just reminding those who celebrated the conservatives demise over the same crisis in 2022 that the ball is now in Starmer and labour's court
What goes around comes around
Labour will in the long term be seen as handling it far better.
That will be crucial come 2028
They have to survive Scotland and Wales plus avoid a shellacking in May, otherwise they will be heading into opposition in 29
An utter shellacking in May and in Wales is already long built in. Starmer will not be challenged whatever happens. Labour may do better in Scotland than many have forecast.
There is very little appetite for the Tories and it's still odds on Badenoch will go before Starmer.
Reform and Greens will be the headline makers, PC and SNP will win their parliaments
The surprise leadership challenge may be against Davey.
“Did you know: all five of the US flags planted by the Apollo missions have been bleached white by the UV rays which means now the moon technically belongs to France”
Not that there's any point to it in Trump's america.
"Fury in France as Trump insults Macron" angles appearing in UK and US media
Not really. General attitude here more that of the wonderful French proverb "La bave du crapaud n'atteint pas la blanche colombe" The toad's slime does not reach the white dove https://x.com/AlexTaylorNews/status/2039738384642388164
And Mozart was FOURTEEN when he heard, just once, Allegri’s Miserere in - of all places - the Sistine Chapel. He heard it there because it was the only place it was allowed to be played, to keep it secret
Mozart then wrote it all down from memory - from that one hearing. Harmonies orchestration vocals everything. And then he went back once more to check he’d got it all right. He had
When the Pope heard of this he was meant to punish Mozart for transgressing the sacred secrecy of the Miserere, instead he gave him “The Order of the Golden Spur”
We must defend European civilisation with our lives. It is the greatest achievement of mankind. And it is in peril
Apparently this story is mostly false. Which is a shame, because it’s a great story.
We know it’s rubbish, because Allegri’s Miserere was performed in London from 1735 onwards & copies are known to have been available in Rome & elsewhere. Mozart is supposed to have transcribed it in 1770, according to a letter sent by his father.
What /was/ kept secret was the ornamentation of the notes which was kept exclusive to the Vatican - it’s far more plausible that Mozart was able to remember & later transcribe the vocal ornamentation over an extant copy of the piece than the idea that he was able to remember the entire five-vocal part plus accompanying keyboard music in its entirety. Mozart was a genius, but probably not that much of a genius.
The story has lasted because it’s just about credible. The piece is relatively simple, and repetitive. Essentially one harmonic SATB passage, followed by one bit of plainsong and then one treble semi chorus, with those three repeated multiple times. Then a slightly different (and beautiful) resolution at the end. And the chord sequences - if we can call them that - throughout are fairly classic. No weirdness. Plus it’s a cappella so no orchestra or organ.
I can hear it end to end in my head, though to be fair I’ve probably sung it, if we include rehearsals, about 50 times as treble and tenor. But it wouldn’t be anywhere near as hard for someone like Mozart to transcribe than, say, a Bach sonata or even something by Monteverdi .
“Did you know: all five of the US flags planted by the Apollo missions have been bleached white by the UV rays which means now the moon technically belongs to France”
Not that there's any point to it in Trump's america.
"Fury in France as Trump insults Macron" angles appearing in UK and US media
Not really. General attitude here more that of the wonderful French proverb "La bave du crapaud n'atteint pas la blanche colombe" The toad's slime does not reach the white dove https://x.com/AlexTaylorNews/status/2039738384642388164
Macron’s response was well calibrated, and I think learned at least in part from Carney. Haughty disdain, which apparently is the best way to troll Trump.
Afternoon all. This weeks Find Out Now has Reform back up a little like MiC
Ref 26 (+2) Green 20 (=) Con 18 (=) Lab 15 (-1) LD 10 (-2) SNP 3 (=) Others 7 (=)
1-2 April, changes from 26-27 March
LibDems down again.
Wait until their "give motorists some money" policy gives them a bounce.
Motorists are massively overtaxed.
If that overtaxation is reduced then that is not being given money.
Some people have this bizarre idea that all money belongs to the state.
So where else does the tax come from to make up the lost money ?
Since it is being spent as general taxation, it should come from general taxation. Probably VAT or Income Tax.
Fuel is being phased out anyway, so fuel duty needs to be phased out too.
Reeves is starting to tackle that by introducing taxes on EVs on a per mile basis.
We will end up,with road pricing based on miles driven and time people drive.
If she cuts fuel duty and simultaneously introduces a per mile charge on EVs then I’m done with UK politics. Both are in isolation stupid policies; together a complete farce.
It’s like there is zero understanding of incentives, of the kind of journey that adds economic value, of any sense of where we want the UK to be in 10 years time. Every party is the same. The Greens win on default just by being happy - at least we’ll have a laugh on the way down.
She’s not going to cut fuel duty: Fuel duty is itself (kind of) road pricing by mileage!
Obviously as we transition to EVs, that tax income is going to disappear: The Treasury is going to insist that the £25billion of tax revenue be replaced from somewhere & a per mile tax on EVs seems like the closest equivalent economically speaking.
It was a hypothetical. Hopefully she doesn’t succumb to pressure from the Lib Dem’s (wtf are they up to). To be clear, my complaints are
1) If we want to transition to EVs, these are exactly the wrong incentives to put in place 2) cutting taxes or making payments during shocks is why we have ended up with an coddled population and economy. Freebies all the time. 3) cutting fuel duty now in particular is disaster for the risk of short term shortages 4) mile charging is deeply harmful to rural communities, who do long trips, versus short trips in cities (exactly the ones we want to reduce)
IF we tax EV transport (I agree with Bart that this isn’t strictly necessary, income tax and VAT are good replacements), then per journey is what you want.
Why not just put up the annual tax disc on EVs and hybrids. It is far easier than a mileage charge and encourages EV users to do higher milage trips in them?
That incentivises mileage, not long journeys. It's the 2 billion journeys under a mile that we want to disincentivise.
From an equity perspective, that really harms middle-income people because they tend to do much lower mileage per year, but still have to incur all the fixed costs of owning a car. Ideally you want to make the marginal cost of driving higher relative to the initial cost (why car clubs are such a good system).
A charging by the mile scheme is complex to calculate and collect, and unfair on rural folk.
Adjusting the road fund tax disc price allows adjustment by size of vehicle so compact economical vehicles remain cheaper than heavy Chelsea tractors.
If you want to reduce short journeys in towns then a congestion charge system would be better. (Albeit by accelerating the death of city centres in favour of suburban retail parks). Alternatively a low daily charge to encourage "no car days".
Once again, Nigel is a pro surrounded by nasty idiots. The question of why Nigel is surrounded by nasty idiots is left as an exercise for the reader.
His comments could have been worded better, but they're absolutely spot on. This country is being brought to a halt by single issues not being addressed and weighed in the balance with other issues, but being given overriding importance and addressed with knee jerk legislation with legal teeth, piling another straw on the camel's back. Example: Covid, when the whole country went into the service of people not dying of covid. See also bat tunnels. See also equality legislation that means administrators must be paid the same as binmen. To be convulsed by knee jerk reactions to single issues is no way to run a country - it runs the country into the ground, and long term will cause more misery and suffering than it avoids.
"Many, many more people die on the roads driving cars, but we're not making cars illegal, so why are we stopping houses being built?" is a completely idiotic comment only makeable by someone who has practically no understanding of social issues.
It's reminiscent of Prince Philip saying after the Dunblane massacre words to the effect of "You wanna ban handguns, then why don't you ban cricket bats". Absolutely beneath contempt. Not "spot on" at all, or a question of suboptimal word choice. Everybody knows resources are limited. The country is not being brought to a halt by lack of recognition of that fact.
It's your knee that's jerking here. Next you'll be blaming trendy vicars or social workers.
This kind of thing makes me think there may be sense in laying Reform at their current price. They may find that the pond of Stupid Sociopathic Knuckledragger in which they fish isn't as deep as they believe.
I don’t know why you need to be so unpleasant. He’s not making an unreasonable point.
we take measures to minimise the amount of people who die on the roads. Airbags, crash protection, design of the BIW. We accept some risk and do not go too the nth degree.
The argument is on housebuilding we have gone too far. That’s worthy of debate as it may be choking off supply.
Yes but he trashed the point with the delivery of it.
"Everybody has to die sometime"
In relation to Grenfell. I mean, cmon, that's horrible and the rather banal point (about kneejerk reactions to tragedies) doesn't really come to the rescue.
We do indeed all have to die. But preferably not burned to death way before our time in a tower block inferno. 72 people, the youngest six months old.
Gross to say what he did and Farage is right to weed him out imo. He'll be needing to do lots more of this, I'd imagine. It's a problem for him. The people he attracts.
The real problem is the disconnection of regulation, reality and *inspection*
So we see building with a vast pile of paperwork to justify them. Compete with structural problems, missing insulation, you name it.
Take the recent comedy about the chap who was poking at £18k to replace one window.
- the reports that cost £12k from expert report preparing consultants. - The £6k window from specialist window makers
You have 3 options
1) pay for the reports. Pay for the window. It will not actually be inspected - maybe a superficial look when it’s in place. 2) buy a window from an outfit in Poland that make custom windows. £k to make*. A few hundred to get a window fitter to fit it. Don’t bother with the reports. It’s never noticed or inspected. 3) have a cheap window made out of something explosive and inflamble. It’s never noticed or insoefted.
Guess what happens?
*it’s probably made in the same factory the “specialists” use
We had a Conservative leaflet delivered very late yesterday evening (after 11pm) in my part of Newham.
I know Conservative activists are timid, nocturnal creatures and this seems to prove it.
Strangely enough, I think I may be in a Conservative target Ward (if such things exist). Labour usually win my Ward with 60-65% of the vote with the Conservatives on about 25% - I suspect the reasoning in my mainly Hindu Ward is the Conservative vote will hold up, the Newham Independents and perhaps the Greens will take chunks out of the Labour vote and the Tories will come through the middle.
I'm not entirely convinced.
The Tory Hindu vote is an interesting one. It won Leicester East against a very divided field, and a background of Labour in Leicester imploding.
But how much of it was down to the Tories having a Hindu leader as PM? Does it transfer to Badenoch's Tories? We might find out a little this May.
One of my Hindu colleagues is very pro-Farage, driven mostly by Islamophobia from GB news and Social Media. He might well regret it when the leopard eats his face, but there you go.
Iirc The Tories gained a local by election surprisingly in Leicester East in the very brief post mini-budget poll collapse but pre Truss resignation period so on that front the vote maybe was swinging towards them in the area pre-Rishi?
Bloomberg: President Donald Trump is preparing to release a fiscal year 2027 budget plan on Friday that will frame his party’s midterm election message around a massive defense buildup, partially paid for by cuts to domestic agencies and health-care entitlements. https://x.com/PollTracker2024/status/2039667943122800854
Lose your healthcare and see cuts to public services so Trump has the money to embark on another war .
Not sure that’s a winning message for most voters but he’ll still have the MAGA morons onside.
Cheerio to the indies. Although most are already lost.
We had a Conservative leaflet delivered very late yesterday evening (after 11pm) in my part of Newham.
I know Conservative activists are timid, nocturnal creatures and this seems to prove it.
Strangely enough, I think I may be in a Conservative target Ward (if such things exist). Labour usually win my Ward with 60-65% of the vote with the Conservatives on about 25% - I suspect the reasoning in my mainly Hindu Ward is the Conservative vote will hold up, the Newham Independents and perhaps the Greens will take chunks out of the Labour vote and the Tories will come through the middle.
I'm not entirely convinced.
The Tory Hindu vote is an interesting one. It won Leicester East against a very divided field, and a background of Labour in Leicester imploding.
But how much of it was down to the Tories having a Hindu leader as PM? Does it transfer to Badenoch's Tories? We might find out a little this May.
One of my Hindu colleagues is very pro-Farage, driven mostly by Islamophobia from GB news and Social Media. He might well regret it when the leopard eats his face, but there you go.
Iirc The Tories gained a local by election surprisingly in Leicester East in the very brief post mini-budget poll collapse but pre Truss resignation period so on that front the vote maybe was swinging towards them in the area pre-Rishi?
Yes, that was when he was CoE I think, so very prominent.
But also after the meltdown in the Labour Party in Leicester with Mayor Soulsby purging many Labour Councillors. That Humpty Dumpty cannot be put back together again, and I do not think Labour will hold any seat in Leicester or Lecestershire at the next GE.
I cannot find the post, but @Eabhal made a point earlier that he agreed with me about solar farms harvesting constraint subsidies by positioning themselves in areas of poor grid connectivity, and that I should 'focus my attack on renewables' there (or words to that effect).
I think it's important to clarify that I am not against renewable energy in principle - that would be absurd. If we can use modern technology to harness nature and provide abundant cheap energy, how could anyone object to that?
My argument is against the UK's specific journey to Net Zero, and the green industrial complex that has grown up around it. We have imposed arbitrary green targets, companies (mostly overseas ones) know this, lobbyists get their noses into the trough, the entire push is sold to the public as a moral mission, and the chosen instruments for the transition are by their nature the most wasteful and inefficient, because on the other side of waste, there is someone making a shit tonne of money. That is the nature of waste.
I support tidal - very old idea, very reliable tech, would last centuries with little repair - hence no vast profits to be made, so little to no interest from corporations, or policy-makers.
It's a corrupt system, and it is quite deliberately pushing up the price of energy, with global investment funds the main beneficiaries, and the poor the main victims, all wrapped in hypocritical cant about saving the planet.
Afternoon all. This weeks Find Out Now has Reform back up a little like MiC
Ref 26 (+2) Green 20 (=) Con 18 (=) Lab 15 (-1) LD 10 (-2) SNP 3 (=) Others 7 (=)
1-2 April, changes from 26-27 March
LibDems down again.
Wait until their "give motorists some money" policy gives them a bounce.
Motorists are massively overtaxed.
If that overtaxation is reduced then that is not being given money.
Some people have this bizarre idea that all money belongs to the state.
So where else does the tax come from to make up the lost money ?
Since it is being spent as general taxation, it should come from general taxation. Probably VAT or Income Tax.
Fuel is being phased out anyway, so fuel duty needs to be phased out too.
Reeves is starting to tackle that by introducing taxes on EVs on a per mile basis.
We will end up,with road pricing based on miles driven and time people drive.
If she cuts fuel duty and simultaneously introduces a per mile charge on EVs then I’m done with UK politics. Both are in isolation stupid policies; together a complete farce.
It’s like there is zero understanding of incentives, of the kind of journey that adds economic value, of any sense of where we want the UK to be in 10 years time. Every party is the same. The Greens win on default just by being happy - at least we’ll have a laugh on the way down.
She’s not going to cut fuel duty: Fuel duty is itself (kind of) road pricing by mileage!
Obviously as we transition to EVs, that tax income is going to disappear: The Treasury is going to insist that the £25billion of tax revenue be replaced from somewhere & a per mile tax on EVs seems like the closest equivalent economically speaking.
It was a hypothetical. Hopefully she doesn’t succumb to pressure from the Lib Dem’s (wtf are they up to). To be clear, my complaints are
1) If we want to transition to EVs, these are exactly the wrong incentives to put in place 2) cutting taxes or making payments during shocks is why we have ended up with an coddled population and economy. Freebies all the time. 3) cutting fuel duty now in particular is disaster for the risk of short term shortages 4) mile charging is deeply harmful to rural communities, who do long trips, versus short trips in cities (exactly the ones we want to reduce)
IF we tax EV transport (I agree with Bart that this isn’t strictly necessary, income tax and VAT are good replacements), then per journey is what you want.
Why not just put up the annual tax disc on EVs and hybrids. It is far easier than a mileage charge and encourages EV users to do higher milage trips in them?
That incentivises mileage, not long journeys. It's the 2 billion journeys under a mile that we want to disincentivise.
From an equity perspective, that really harms middle-income people because they tend to do much lower mileage per year, but still have to incur all the fixed costs of owning a car. Ideally you want to make the marginal cost of driving higher relative to the initial cost (why car clubs are such a good system).
A charging by the mile scheme is complex to calculate and collect, and unfair on rural folk.
Adjusting the road fund tax disc price allows adjustment by size of vehicle so compact economical vehicles remain cheaper than heavy Chelsea tractors.
If you want to reduce short journeys in towns then a congestion charge system would be better. (Albeit by accelerating the death of city centres in favour of suburban retail parks). Alternatively a low daily charge to encourage "no car days".
Road tax set by an annual charge based on the 4th power of the vehicles mass (or axle load) would be a more suitable charge. Set at a rate enough to cover road costs, with no mileage charge.
Once again, Nigel is a pro surrounded by nasty idiots. The question of why Nigel is surrounded by nasty idiots is left as an exercise for the reader.
His comments could have been worded better, but they're absolutely spot on. This country is being brought to a halt by single issues not being addressed and weighed in the balance with other issues, but being given overriding importance and addressed with knee jerk legislation with legal teeth, piling another straw on the camel's back. Example: Covid, when the whole country went into the service of people not dying of covid. See also bat tunnels. See also equality legislation that means administrators must be paid the same as binmen. To be convulsed by knee jerk reactions to single issues is no way to run a country - it runs the country into the ground, and long term will cause more misery and suffering than it avoids.
"Many, many more people die on the roads driving cars, but we're not making cars illegal, so why are we stopping houses being built?" is a completely idiotic comment only makeable by someone who has practically no understanding of social issues.
It's reminiscent of Prince Philip saying after the Dunblane massacre words to the effect of "You wanna ban handguns, then why don't you ban cricket bats". Absolutely beneath contempt. Not "spot on" at all, or a question of suboptimal word choice. Everybody knows resources are limited. The country is not being brought to a halt by lack of recognition of that fact.
It's your knee that's jerking here. Next you'll be blaming trendy vicars or social workers.
This kind of thing makes me think there may be sense in laying Reform at their current price. They may find that the pond of Stupid Sociopathic Knuckledragger in which they fish isn't as deep as they believe.
I don’t know why you need to be so unpleasant. He’s not making an unreasonable point.
we take measures to minimise the amount of people who die on the roads. Airbags, crash protection, design of the BIW. We accept some risk and do not go too the nth degree.
The argument is on housebuilding we have gone too far. That’s worthy of debate as it may be choking off supply.
Yes but he trashed the point with the delivery of it.
"Everybody has to die sometime"
In relation to Grenfell. I mean, cmon, that's horrible and the rather banal point (about kneejerk reactions to tragedies) doesn't really come to the rescue.
We do indeed all have to die. But preferably not burned to death way before our time in a tower block inferno. 72 people, the youngest six months old.
Gross to say what he did and Farage is right to weed him out imo. He'll be needing to do lots more of this, I'd imagine. It's a problem for him. The people he attracts.
I don't think he was making the 'everyone will die' comment in relation to Grenfell directly. The point however is absolutely true. Humans have a finite lifespan (in one body at any rate) and we can go through life being kept utterly safe from all harm, a cause in which all building could cease, all prosperity be curtailed, but we'll still weaken and die. Being born is fatal.
It was directly re Grenfell per the reporting. Sure the point is a point but it's hardly of a weight and originality to mitigate such a crass presentation of it.
We had a Conservative leaflet delivered very late yesterday evening (after 11pm) in my part of Newham.
I know Conservative activists are timid, nocturnal creatures and this seems to prove it.
Strangely enough, I think I may be in a Conservative target Ward (if such things exist). Labour usually win my Ward with 60-65% of the vote with the Conservatives on about 25% - I suspect the reasoning in my mainly Hindu Ward is the Conservative vote will hold up, the Newham Independents and perhaps the Greens will take chunks out of the Labour vote and the Tories will come through the middle.
I'm not entirely convinced.
The Tory Hindu vote is an interesting one. It won Leicester East against a very divided field, and a background of Labour in Leicester imploding.
But how much of it was down to the Tories having a Hindu leader as PM? Does it transfer to Badenoch's Tories? We might find out a little this May.
One of my Hindu colleagues is very pro-Farage, driven mostly by Islamophobia from GB news and Social Media. He might well regret it when the leopard eats his face, but there you go.
Iirc The Tories gained a local by election surprisingly in Leicester East in the very brief post mini-budget poll collapse but pre Truss resignation period so on that front the vote maybe was swinging towards them in the area pre-Rishi?
Yes, that was when he was CoE I think, so very prominent.
But also after the meltdown in the Labour Party in Leicester with Mayor Soulsby purging many Labour Councillors. That Humpty Dumpty cannot be put back together again, and I do not think Labour will hold any seat in Leicester or Lecestershire at the next GE.
Bloomberg: President Donald Trump is preparing to release a fiscal year 2027 budget plan on Friday that will frame his party’s midterm election message around a massive defense buildup, partially paid for by cuts to domestic agencies and health-care entitlements. https://x.com/PollTracker2024/status/2039667943122800854
I cannot find the post, but @Eabhal made a point earlier that he agreed with me about solar farms harvesting constraint subsidies by positioning themselves in areas of poor grid connectivity, and that I should 'focus my attack on renewables' there (or words to that effect).
I think it's important to clarify that I am not against renewable energy in principle - that would be absurd. If we can use modern technology to harness nature and provide abundant cheap energy, how could anyone object to that?
My argument is against the UK's specific journey to Net Zero, and the green industrial complex that has grown up around it. We have imposed arbitrary green targets, companies (mostly overseas ones) know this, lobbyists get their noses into the trough, the entire push is sold to the public as a moral mission, and the chosen instruments for the transition are by their nature the most wasteful and inefficient, because on the other side of waste, there is someone making a shit tonne of money. That is the nature of waste.
I support tidal - very old idea, very reliable tech, would last centuries with little repair - hence no vast profits to be made, so little to no interest from corporations, or policy-makers.
It's a corrupt system, and it is quite deliberately pushing up the price of energy, with global investment funds the main beneficiaries, and the poor the main victims, all wrapped in hypocritical cant about saving the planet.
I don't think they do it maliciously. Just that the government shouldn't allow them to be built on CfD contracts unless there is sufficient local demand, sufficient transmission, or sufficient approved transmission. That rules out much of the Highlands, unless you set up nodal pricing so you get massive steelworks in Fort William or something.
I don't think any firm should be expected to the "right thing". It's up to government to regulate, tax, to ensure we get a good outcome. That goes for fossil fuels and renewables equally. If that's not happening now then we are right to complain.
(On tidal, I've never really understood what the benefits are. Intermittent, and none of the schemes contain sufficient storage in design to mitigate that. If it's cheaper than the alternatives then fair enough.)
Once again, Nigel is a pro surrounded by nasty idiots. The question of why Nigel is surrounded by nasty idiots is left as an exercise for the reader.
His comments could have been worded better, but they're absolutely spot on. This country is being brought to a halt by single issues not being addressed and weighed in the balance with other issues, but being given overriding importance and addressed with knee jerk legislation with legal teeth, piling another straw on the camel's back. Example: Covid, when the whole country went into the service of people not dying of covid. See also bat tunnels. See also equality legislation that means administrators must be paid the same as binmen. To be convulsed by knee jerk reactions to single issues is no way to run a country - it runs the country into the ground, and long term will cause more misery and suffering than it avoids.
"Many, many more people die on the roads driving cars, but we're not making cars illegal, so why are we stopping houses being built?" is a completely idiotic comment only makeable by someone who has practically no understanding of social issues.
It's reminiscent of Prince Philip saying after the Dunblane massacre words to the effect of "You wanna ban handguns, then why don't you ban cricket bats". Absolutely beneath contempt. Not "spot on" at all, or a question of suboptimal word choice. Everybody knows resources are limited. The country is not being brought to a halt by lack of recognition of that fact.
It's your knee that's jerking here. Next you'll be blaming trendy vicars or social workers.
This kind of thing makes me think there may be sense in laying Reform at their current price. They may find that the pond of Stupid Sociopathic Knuckledragger in which they fish isn't as deep as they believe.
I don’t know why you need to be so unpleasant. He’s not making an unreasonable point.
we take measures to minimise the amount of people who die on the roads. Airbags, crash protection, design of the BIW. We accept some risk and do not go too the nth degree.
The argument is on housebuilding we have gone too far. That’s worthy of debate as it may be choking off supply.
Yes but he trashed the point with the delivery of it.
"Everybody has to die sometime"
In relation to Grenfell. I mean, cmon, that's horrible and the rather banal point (about kneejerk reactions to tragedies) doesn't really come to the rescue.
We do indeed all have to die. But preferably not burned to death way before our time in a tower block inferno. 72 people, the youngest six months old.
Gross to say what he did and Farage is right to weed him out imo. He'll be needing to do lots more of this, I'd imagine. It's a problem for him. The people he attracts.
The real problem is the disconnection of regulation, reality and *inspection*
So we see building with a vast pile of paperwork to justify them. Compete with structural problems, missing insulation, you name it.
Take the recent comedy about the chap who was poking at £18k to replace one window.
- the reports that cost £12k from expert report preparing consultants. - The £6k window from specialist window makers
You have 3 options
1) pay for the reports. Pay for the window. It will not actually be inspected - maybe a superficial look when it’s in place. 2) buy a window from an outfit in Poland that make custom windows. £k to make*. A few hundred to get a window fitter to fit it. Don’t bother with the reports. It’s never noticed or inspected. 3) have a cheap window made out of something explosive and inflamble. It’s never noticed or insoefted.
Guess what happens?
*it’s probably made in the same factory the “specialists” use
We've done this a few times, Malmesbury, and as you know I'm not one to defend a cumbersome approach to window replacement. In fact I agree with the general point that disastrous events often trigger OTT rules and processes in response. The everpresent 'cya' principle goes into overdrive. There's a few examples in our world (finance) we could cite. Whole industries within the industry sometimes. SOX is one I particularly recall.
If one has some spare cash, where does one put it? I find myself slightly unexpectedly flush, but with the world in turmoil, shares seem risky, bonds are also maybe risky (who knows?), gold is crazy, Bitcoin is even crazier. So, where?!
You may have already done this, but: your daughter is at uni - you can minimise her debt. That strikes me as a pretty tax efficient investment. Yes, technically, it'll no longer be your money - but it'll all end up going to her in the long run anyway.
That's a nice idea, and thankyou for taking time t advise me, but I honestly think the global economic system is going to be totally overturned within five-fifteen years because REDACTED REDACTED so long term debt (and pensions and mortgages) really will not matter. We will either be dead, enslaved or living in wild abundance
I want somewhere I can put my money, keep it pretty liquid, get a decent return in the short term. If such a thing is possible. It may not be
Just spend your capital and say fuck it. If you were to reap a decent return in the short term, what help would it be when the short term is over and the Great Overturning is upon us? Or make a few hail Mary bets for the lolz if you feel a need to keep thinking about money.
I’ve actually spent all I can I sensibly spend, in the last year
I’ve bought Tsarist silver, £400 jackets, amazing wines, amber fossils, unique cacti, Chinese opium boxes, Trinitite, lovely linen shirts, more wine. Did I mention the wine?
The south western corner of my sitting room now looks like this, with my self discovered antiquities (eg gobekli Tepe arrowhead) floating in vintage Murano glass on my lovely 1830s inlaid etagere
I think if I spend any more I could justly be accused of “going over the top”. I can’t spend on travel as I get it all for free
So I guess I must invest
Good to hear you've been spending it. But why worry about what happens to money that you feel you can't spend? I get it that you don't want to lose it, but by the time the Overturning occurs, will the difference between 40% more and 40% less matter at all? The question I'd be asking is what asset is most likely to stay above 60% of its current value in real terms. Answer might be gold. (Actually I think it will go up in value, probably by a lot. But in any case a drop of 40% is far less likely than it is for shares, bonds, flats, cafes, or scaffolding companies.)
Good question, but I don't think gold is the answer, even tho I do respect your logic
Hmm. It is a puzzler. If I had squillions - which I do not - I would buy a beautiful and DEFENSIBLE seaside property. In, say, Cornwall, or Brittany, or maybe northern California. You get the beauty and utility but also the bunker
I might just buy more wine. Hic
Gold has almost trebled in price (up 175%) since the start of covid a mere six years ago in March 2020. Between 1930 and 1970, a period more than six times as long and full of upheavals, it rose by only ~70%. Almost guaranteed it will rise in price during the Great Overturning, given among other things the way the metal is viewed in the world's two most populated countries. Indeed in all of the top five with the exception of the USA.
This said, only an idiot would take financial advice from a waster such as myself who is little interested in investment.
Once again, Nigel is a pro surrounded by nasty idiots. The question of why Nigel is surrounded by nasty idiots is left as an exercise for the reader.
His comments could have been worded better, but they're absolutely spot on. This country is being brought to a halt by single issues not being addressed and weighed in the balance with other issues, but being given overriding importance and addressed with knee jerk legislation with legal teeth, piling another straw on the camel's back. Example: Covid, when the whole country went into the service of people not dying of covid. See also bat tunnels. See also equality legislation that means administrators must be paid the same as binmen. To be convulsed by knee jerk reactions to single issues is no way to run a country - it runs the country into the ground, and long term will cause more misery and suffering than it avoids.
"Many, many more people die on the roads driving cars, but we're not making cars illegal, so why are we stopping houses being built?" is a completely idiotic comment only makeable by someone who has practically no understanding of social issues.
It's reminiscent of Prince Philip saying after the Dunblane massacre words to the effect of "You wanna ban handguns, then why don't you ban cricket bats". Absolutely beneath contempt. Not "spot on" at all, or a question of suboptimal word choice. Everybody knows resources are limited. The country is not being brought to a halt by lack of recognition of that fact.
It's your knee that's jerking here. Next you'll be blaming trendy vicars or social workers.
This kind of thing makes me think there may be sense in laying Reform at their current price. They may find that the pond of Stupid Sociopathic Knuckledragger in which they fish isn't as deep as they believe.
I don’t know why you need to be so unpleasant. He’s not making an unreasonable point.
we take measures to minimise the amount of people who die on the roads. Airbags, crash protection, design of the BIW. We accept some risk and do not go too the nth degree.
The argument is on housebuilding we have gone too far. That’s worthy of debate as it may be choking off supply.
Yes but he trashed the point with the delivery of it.
"Everybody has to die sometime"
In relation to Grenfell. I mean, cmon, that's horrible and the rather banal point (about kneejerk reactions to tragedies) doesn't really come to the rescue.
We do indeed all have to die. But preferably not burned to death way before our time in a tower block inferno. 72 people, the youngest six months old.
Gross to say what he did and Farage is right to weed him out imo. He'll be needing to do lots more of this, I'd imagine. It's a problem for him. The people he attracts.
The real problem is the disconnection of regulation, reality and *inspection*
So we see building with a vast pile of paperwork to justify them. Compete with structural problems, missing insulation, you name it.
Take the recent comedy about the chap who was poking at £18k to replace one window.
- the reports that cost £12k from expert report preparing consultants. - The £6k window from specialist window makers
You have 3 options
1) pay for the reports. Pay for the window. It will not actually be inspected - maybe a superficial look when it’s in place. 2) buy a window from an outfit in Poland that make custom windows. £k to make*. A few hundred to get a window fitter to fit it. Don’t bother with the reports. It’s never noticed or inspected. 3) have a cheap window made out of something explosive and inflamble. It’s never noticed or insoefted.
Guess what happens?
*it’s probably made in the same factory the “specialists” use
We've done this a few times, Malmesbury, and as you know I'm not one to defend a cumbersome approach to window replacement. In fact I agree with the general point that disastrous events often trigger OTT rules and processes in response. The everpresent 'cya' principle goes into overdrive. There's a few examples in our world (finance) we could cite. Whole industries within the industry sometimes. SOX is one I particularly recall.
The process is a part of the problem.
I’m quite convinced that some of the *new* cladding being put on buildings is made of fire lighters.
The 10,000 pages saying they aren’t is a comfort blanket.
Back in the 80s, electric blankets had a reputation for starting fires…
Edit: the heart of it is that doing the wrong thing is the easiest and cheapest option. So, in the window example, the guy who spends £1k on dangerous windows wins. At least until the fire.
This is not a coherent campaign, it is strategic improvisation. And strategic improvisation, in this context, does not bring regime change closer; it pushes it further away.
You know what happened on the day of the last general election? My prediction was ready at 6am, one hour before polling stations opened, but I was too chicken to post it until 10pm. It turned out my forecast was almost exactly the same as the exit poll.
I cannot find the post, but @Eabhal made a point earlier that he agreed with me about solar farms harvesting constraint subsidies by positioning themselves in areas of poor grid connectivity, and that I should 'focus my attack on renewables' there (or words to that effect).
I think it's important to clarify that I am not against renewable energy in principle - that would be absurd. If we can use modern technology to harness nature and provide abundant cheap energy, how could anyone object to that?
My argument is against the UK's specific journey to Net Zero, and the green industrial complex that has grown up around it. We have imposed arbitrary green targets, companies (mostly overseas ones) know this, lobbyists get their noses into the trough, the entire push is sold to the public as a moral mission, and the chosen instruments for the transition are by their nature the most wasteful and inefficient, because on the other side of waste, there is someone making a shit tonne of money. That is the nature of waste.
I support tidal - very old idea, very reliable tech, would last centuries with little repair - hence no vast profits to be made, so little to no interest from corporations, or policy-makers.
It's a corrupt system, and it is quite deliberately pushing up the price of energy, with global investment funds the main beneficiaries, and the poor the main victims, all wrapped in hypocritical cant about saving the planet.
I don't think they do it maliciously. Just that the government shouldn't allow them to be built on CfD contracts unless there is sufficient local demand, sufficient transmission, or sufficient approved transmission. That rules out much of the Highlands, unless you set up nodal pricing so you get massive steelworks in Fort William or something.
I don't think any firm should be expected to the "right thing". It's up to government to regulate, tax, to ensure we get a good outcome. That goes for fossil fuels and renewables equally. If that's not happening now then we are right to complain.
(On tidal, I've never really understood what the benefits are. Intermittent, and none of the schemes contain sufficient storage in design to mitigate that. If it's cheaper than the alternatives then fair enough.)
Intermittent but very predictable unlike solar and wind. Useful in the mix, surely?
Once again, Nigel is a pro surrounded by nasty idiots. The question of why Nigel is surrounded by nasty idiots is left as an exercise for the reader.
His comments could have been worded better, but they're absolutely spot on. This country is being brought to a halt by single issues not being addressed and weighed in the balance with other issues, but being given overriding importance and addressed with knee jerk legislation with legal teeth, piling another straw on the camel's back. Example: Covid, when the whole country went into the service of people not dying of covid. See also bat tunnels. See also equality legislation that means administrators must be paid the same as binmen. To be convulsed by knee jerk reactions to single issues is no way to run a country - it runs the country into the ground, and long term will cause more misery and suffering than it avoids.
"Many, many more people die on the roads driving cars, but we're not making cars illegal, so why are we stopping houses being built?" is a completely idiotic comment only makeable by someone who has practically no understanding of social issues.
It's reminiscent of Prince Philip saying after the Dunblane massacre words to the effect of "You wanna ban handguns, then why don't you ban cricket bats". Absolutely beneath contempt. Not "spot on" at all, or a question of suboptimal word choice. Everybody knows resources are limited. The country is not being brought to a halt by lack of recognition of that fact.
It's your knee that's jerking here. Next you'll be blaming trendy vicars or social workers.
This kind of thing makes me think there may be sense in laying Reform at their current price. They may find that the pond of Stupid Sociopathic Knuckledragger in which they fish isn't as deep as they believe.
I don’t know why you need to be so unpleasant. He’s not making an unreasonable point.
we take measures to minimise the amount of people who die on the roads. Airbags, crash protection, design of the BIW. We accept some risk and do not go too the nth degree.
The argument is on housebuilding we have gone too far. That’s worthy of debate as it may be choking off supply.
Yes but he trashed the point with the delivery of it.
"Everybody has to die sometime"
In relation to Grenfell. I mean, cmon, that's horrible and the rather banal point (about kneejerk reactions to tragedies) doesn't really come to the rescue.
We do indeed all have to die. But preferably not burned to death way before our time in a tower block inferno. 72 people, the youngest six months old.
Gross to say what he did and Farage is right to weed him out imo. He'll be needing to do lots more of this, I'd imagine. It's a problem for him. The people he attracts.
The real problem is the disconnection of regulation, reality and *inspection*
So we see building with a vast pile of paperwork to justify them. Compete with structural problems, missing insulation, you name it.
Take the recent comedy about the chap who was poking at £18k to replace one window.
- the reports that cost £12k from expert report preparing consultants. - The £6k window from specialist window makers
You have 3 options
1) pay for the reports. Pay for the window. It will not actually be inspected - maybe a superficial look when it’s in place. 2) buy a window from an outfit in Poland that make custom windows. £k to make*. A few hundred to get a window fitter to fit it. Don’t bother with the reports. It’s never noticed or inspected. 3) have a cheap window made out of something explosive and inflamble. It’s never noticed or insoefted.
Guess what happens?
*it’s probably made in the same factory the “specialists” use
We've done this a few times, Malmesbury, and as you know I'm not one to defend a cumbersome approach to window replacement. In fact I agree with the general point that disastrous events often trigger OTT rules and processes in response. The everpresent 'cya' principle goes into overdrive. There's a few examples in our world (finance) we could cite. Whole industries within the industry sometimes. SOX is one I particularly recall.
The process is a part of the problem.
I’m quite convinced that some of the *new* cladding being put on buildings is made of fire lighters.
The 10,000 pages saying they aren’t is a comfort blanket.
Back in the 80s, electric blankets had a reputation for starting fires…
Edit: the heart of it is that doing the wrong thing is the easiest and cheapest option. So, in the window example, the guy who spends £1k on dangerous windows wins. At least until the fire.
What gets you off the 'quite convinced' step?
I rather like your posts - they remind me in small part of Feynman, and J E Gordon. It's a very small part, but then it's an enormous compliment.
If one has some spare cash, where does one put it? I find myself slightly unexpectedly flush, but with the world in turmoil, shares seem risky, bonds are also maybe risky (who knows?), gold is crazy, Bitcoin is even crazier. So, where?!
You may have already done this, but: your daughter is at uni - you can minimise her debt. That strikes me as a pretty tax efficient investment. Yes, technically, it'll no longer be your money - but it'll all end up going to her in the long run anyway.
That's a nice idea, and thankyou for taking time t advise me, but I honestly think the global economic system is going to be totally overturned within five-fifteen years because REDACTED REDACTED so long term debt (and pensions and mortgages) really will not matter. We will either be dead, enslaved or living in wild abundance
I want somewhere I can put my money, keep it pretty liquid, get a decent return in the short term. If such a thing is possible. It may not be
Just spend your capital and say fuck it. If you were to reap a decent return in the short term, what help would it be when the short term is over and the Great Overturning is upon us? Or make a few hail Mary bets for the lolz if you feel a need to keep thinking about money.
I’ve actually spent all I can I sensibly spend, in the last year
I’ve bought Tsarist silver, £400 jackets, amazing wines, amber fossils, unique cacti, Chinese opium boxes, Trinitite, lovely linen shirts, more wine. Did I mention the wine?
The south western corner of my sitting room now looks like this, with my self discovered antiquities (eg gobekli Tepe arrowhead) floating in vintage Murano glass on my lovely 1830s inlaid etagere
I think if I spend any more I could justly be accused of “going over the top”. I can’t spend on travel as I get it all for free
So I guess I must invest
Good to hear you've been spending it. But why worry about what happens to money that you feel you can't spend? I get it that you don't want to lose it, but by the time the Overturning occurs, will the difference between 40% more and 40% less matter at all? The question I'd be asking is what asset is most likely to stay above 60% of its current value in real terms. Answer might be gold. (Actually I think it will go up in value, probably by a lot. But in any case a drop of 40% is far less likely than it is for shares, bonds, flats, cafes, or scaffolding companies.)
Good question, but I don't think gold is the answer, even tho I do respect your logic
Hmm. It is a puzzler. If I had squillions - which I do not - I would buy a beautiful and DEFENSIBLE seaside property. In, say, Cornwall, or Brittany, or maybe northern California. You get the beauty and utility but also the bunker
I might just buy more wine. Hic
Gold has almost trebled in price (up 175%) since the start of covid a mere six years ago in March 2020. Between 1930 and 1970, a period more than six times as long and full of upheavals, it rose by only ~70%. Almost guaranteed it will rise in price during the Great Overturning, given among other things the way the metal is viewed in the world's two most populated countries. Indeed in all of the top five with the exception of the USA.
This said, only an idiot would take financial advice from a waster such as myself who is little interested in investment.
That’s all well and good, as financial advice. But instead of putting my money into an ISA (or buying gold) yesterday I bought a late 17th century wrought iron German “alms box” for £375
I have absolutely no use for it. Barely anywhere to put it. The only reason I bought it is because it oozes noom as dark as the devil’s char-grilled arse and it looks like Vlad Dracul’s ugliest spittoon
Well pick me up off the floor that's so sharp and original.
Does he get paid for this stuff?
Seen him once
Utter garbage.
Mind you he was on a bill with Jasper Carrott and Jethro, proper comedians.
He's mega successful so I'm going to assume his material is usually better than that.
Just been doorstopped by the LD candidate for the locals. Very pleasant guy. Told him I was a Labour Party member so no. He grinned and said, fine but if I am elected don't hesitate. I grinned back and said, great and good luck. A really nice couple of minutes.
I’d like to point out that seventy eight seconds ago I wrote the line “the only reason I bought it is because it oozes noom as dark as the devil’s char-grilled arse and it looks like Vlad Dracul’s ugliest spittoon”
Which is a piece of fucking prose poetry when you consider the internal rhymes of “char” and “arse”, and “Dracul” and “spitoon” plus it introduces the idea that Vlad Dracul kept a selection of spitoons, one of which was aesthetically disfavoured
“Did you know: all five of the US flags planted by the Apollo missions have been bleached white by the UV rays which means now the moon technically belongs to France”
Not that there's any point to it in Trump's america.
"Fury in France as Trump insults Macron" angles appearing in UK and US media
Not really. General attitude here more that of the wonderful French proverb "La bave du crapaud n'atteint pas la blanche colombe" The toad's slime does not reach the white dove https://x.com/AlexTaylorNews/status/2039738384642388164
Macron’s response was well calibrated, and I think learned at least in part from Carney. Haughty disdain, which apparently is the best way to troll Trump.
Indeed that's the way, because Trump can't match it in return. He's essentially incapable of that self-confident rejection of abuse, and he knows deep down that Carney and Macron are his superiors, and that he can never gain their respect. Starmer should pay attention.
I’d like to point out that seventy eight seconds ago I wrote the line “the only reason I bought it is because it oozes noom as dark as the devil’s char-grilled arse and it looks like Vlad Dracul’s ugliest spittoon”
Which is a piece of fucking prose poetry when you consider the internal rhymes of “char” and “arse”, and “Dracul” and “spitoon” plus it introduces the idea that Vlad Dracul kept a selection of spitoons, one of which was aesthetically disfavoured
Anyone ever told you you are a self regarding bore. The dullest I've read on here. I can hardly bear to read it when you are drooling over yourself
The medium sized news in East Ham and Barking continues to be fuel prices.
At my local Tesco's, E10 unleaded is now 149.9p per litre with diesel 179.9p per litre. That's a rise of 7p in the last 48 hours.
Call me a bluff old cynic but it seems curious the price has jumped just as we reach the Easter holiday for all oil prices continue to gyrate around like I used to at the student disco back in the late Triassic.
At a nearby Shell station, petrol was 155,9p per litre and diesel 182.9p but no queues and all pumps fully stocked.
Gotta wonder whether Simon Dudley may have started a trend among those who want to stand out among hard right pols: "They just died, we've all got to die some time, who GAF?"
I cannot find the post, but @Eabhal made a point earlier that he agreed with me about solar farms harvesting constraint subsidies by positioning themselves in areas of poor grid connectivity, and that I should 'focus my attack on renewables' there (or words to that effect).
I think it's important to clarify that I am not against renewable energy in principle - that would be absurd. If we can use modern technology to harness nature and provide abundant cheap energy, how could anyone object to that?
My argument is against the UK's specific journey to Net Zero, and the green industrial complex that has grown up around it. We have imposed arbitrary green targets, companies (mostly overseas ones) know this, lobbyists get their noses into the trough, the entire push is sold to the public as a moral mission, and the chosen instruments for the transition are by their nature the most wasteful and inefficient, because on the other side of waste, there is someone making a shit tonne of money. That is the nature of waste.
I support tidal - very old idea, very reliable tech, would last centuries with little repair - hence no vast profits to be made, so little to no interest from corporations, or policy-makers.
It's a corrupt system, and it is quite deliberately pushing up the price of energy, with global investment funds the main beneficiaries, and the poor the main victims, all wrapped in hypocritical cant about saving the planet.
I don't think they do it maliciously. Just that the government shouldn't allow them to be built on CfD contracts unless there is sufficient local demand, sufficient transmission, or sufficient approved transmission. That rules out much of the Highlands, unless you set up nodal pricing so you get massive steelworks in Fort William or something.
I don't think any firm should be expected to the "right thing". It's up to government to regulate, tax, to ensure we get a good outcome. That goes for fossil fuels and renewables equally. If that's not happening now then we are right to complain.
(On tidal, I've never really understood what the benefits are. Intermittent, and none of the schemes contain sufficient storage in design to mitigate that. If it's cheaper than the alternatives then fair enough.)
Intermittent but very predictable unlike solar and wind. Useful in the mix, surely?
Scale. A 3.2 GW tidal lagoon power station off Cardiff would capture the power of the Severn - powering 1.4 million homes, the risk-free same power as Hinkly C for a fraction of the price and with a lifespan of 2-3 times.
Gotta wonder whether Simon Dudley may have started a trend among those who want to stand out among hard right pols: "They just died, we've all got to die some time, who GAF?"
Well pick me up off the floor that's so sharp and original.
Does he get paid for this stuff?
Seen him once
Utter garbage.
Mind you he was on a bill with Jasper Carrott and Jethro, proper comedians.
He's mega successful so I'm going to assume his material is usually better than that.
Just been doorstopped by the LD candidate for the locals. Very pleasant guy. Told him I was a Labour Party member so no. He grinned and said, fine but if I am elected don't hesitate. I grinned back and said, great and good luck. A really nice couple of minutes.
I’d like to point out that seventy eight seconds ago I wrote the line “the only reason I bought it is because it oozes noom as dark as the devil’s char-grilled arse and it looks like Vlad Dracul’s ugliest spittoon”
Which is a piece of fucking prose poetry when you consider the internal rhymes of “char” and “arse”, and “Dracul” and “spitoon” plus it introduces the idea that Vlad Dracul kept a selection of spitoons, one of which was aesthetically disfavoured
Anyone ever told you you are a self regarding bore. The dullest I've read on here. I can hardly bear to read it when you are drooling over yourself
No! No, I won't have that! There's a bloke in Eastbourne
I’d like to point out that seventy eight seconds ago I wrote the line “the only reason I bought it is because it oozes noom as dark as the devil’s char-grilled arse and it looks like Vlad Dracul’s ugliest spittoon”
Which is a piece of fucking prose poetry when you consider the internal rhymes of “char” and “arse”, and “Dracul” and “spitoon” plus it introduces the idea that Vlad Dracul kept a selection of spitoons, one of which was aesthetically disfavoured
Anyone ever told you you are a self regarding bore. The dullest I've read on here. I can hardly bear to read it when you are drooling over yourself
My line is indeed triply fascinating because it bruits the theologically profound yet challenging concept that the devil himself suffers from the torments of hell. You’re welcome, Roger
Gotta wonder whether Simon Dudley may have started a trend among those who want to stand out among hard right pols: "They just died, we've all got to die some time, who GAF?"
Crassness masquerading as 'seasoned man of the world'.
I can prove my prediction was ready at 6am on polling day because I sent it to a number of people via email at that time, including Professor Michael Thrasher.
The medium sized news in East Ham and Barking continues to be fuel prices.
At my local Tesco's, E10 unleaded is now 149.9p per litre with diesel 179.9p per litre. That's a rise of 7p in the last 48 hours.
Call me a bluff old cynic but it seems curious the price has jumped just as we reach the Easter holiday for all oil prices continue to gyrate around like I used to at the student disco back in the late Triassic.
At a nearby Shell station, petrol was 155,9p per litre and diesel 182.9p but no queues and all pumps fully stocked.
I don't care what the apologists say. They put prices up at any and every opportunity.
If we're talking 2024 election results, I lost money on the LibDems, where I expected them to do slightly worse than they did. But pretty much all my other bets came in.
I can prove my prediction was ready at 6am on polling day because I sent it to a number of people via email at that time, including Professor Michael Thrasher.
I for one believe you. You’ve a track record of amazing predix - everyone on here knows that
Next time screw your courage to the sticking place!
Gotta wonder whether Simon Dudley may have started a trend among those who want to stand out among hard right pols: "They just died, we've all got to die some time, who GAF?"
Crassness masquerading as 'seasoned man of the world'.
It's one of the biggest yawns out there.
I suspect its just a case of non politician being incredibly naive about politics. It was a throwaway line in a long interview where he did call Grenfell a tragedy. It is valid to consider where we want to be on the trade off between safety and cost in housebuilding, just as it is in healthcare or road traffic.
This is probably one reason Farage has gone for the failed Tory re-treads as the Reform non politicians are just going to keep making obvious and frequent faux pas.
Well pick me up off the floor that's so sharp and original.
Does he get paid for this stuff?
Seen him once
Utter garbage.
Mind you he was on a bill with Jasper Carrott and Jethro, proper comedians.
He's mega successful so I'm going to assume his material is usually better than that.
Just been doorstopped by the LD candidate for the locals. Very pleasant guy. Told him I was a Labour Party member so no. He grinned and said, fine but if I am elected don't hesitate. I grinned back and said, great and good luck. A really nice couple of minutes.
He is utter crap, as funny as a hole in the head
I'm so sorry, but at least we now understand why you are the way you are.
Once again, Nigel is a pro surrounded by nasty idiots. The question of why Nigel is surrounded by nasty idiots is left as an exercise for the reader.
His comments could have been worded better, but they're absolutely spot on. This country is being brought to a halt by single issues not being addressed and weighed in the balance with other issues, but being given overriding importance and addressed with knee jerk legislation with legal teeth, piling another straw on the camel's back. Example: Covid, when the whole country went into the service of people not dying of covid. See also bat tunnels. See also equality legislation that means administrators must be paid the same as binmen. To be convulsed by knee jerk reactions to single issues is no way to run a country - it runs the country into the ground, and long term will cause more misery and suffering than it avoids.
"Many, many more people die on the roads driving cars, but we're not making cars illegal, so why are we stopping houses being built?" is a completely idiotic comment only makeable by someone who has practically no understanding of social issues.
It's reminiscent of Prince Philip saying after the Dunblane massacre words to the effect of "You wanna ban handguns, then why don't you ban cricket bats". Absolutely beneath contempt. Not "spot on" at all, or a question of suboptimal word choice. Everybody knows resources are limited. The country is not being brought to a halt by lack of recognition of that fact.
It's your knee that's jerking here. Next you'll be blaming trendy vicars or social workers.
This kind of thing makes me think there may be sense in laying Reform at their current price. They may find that the pond of Stupid Sociopathic Knuckledragger in which they fish isn't as deep as they believe.
I don’t know why you need to be so unpleasant. He’s not making an unreasonable point.
we take measures to minimise the amount of people who die on the roads. Airbags, crash protection, design of the BIW. We accept some risk and do not go too the nth degree.
The argument is on housebuilding we have gone too far. That’s worthy of debate as it may be choking off supply.
Yes but he trashed the point with the delivery of it.
"Everybody has to die sometime"
In relation to Grenfell. I mean, cmon, that's horrible and the rather banal point (about kneejerk reactions to tragedies) doesn't really come to the rescue.
We do indeed all have to die. But preferably not burned to death way before our time in a tower block inferno. 72 people, the youngest six months old.
Gross to say what he did and Farage is right to weed him out imo. He'll be needing to do lots more of this, I'd imagine. It's a problem for him. The people he attracts.
The real problem is the disconnection of regulation, reality and *inspection*
So we see building with a vast pile of paperwork to justify them. Compete with structural problems, missing insulation, you name it.
Take the recent comedy about the chap who was poking at £18k to replace one window.
- the reports that cost £12k from expert report preparing consultants. - The £6k window from specialist window makers
You have 3 options
1) pay for the reports. Pay for the window. It will not actually be inspected - maybe a superficial look when it’s in place. 2) buy a window from an outfit in Poland that make custom windows. £k to make*. A few hundred to get a window fitter to fit it. Don’t bother with the reports. It’s never noticed or inspected. 3) have a cheap window made out of something explosive and inflamble. It’s never noticed or insoefted.
Guess what happens?
*it’s probably made in the same factory the “specialists” use
We've done this a few times, Malmesbury, and as you know I'm not one to defend a cumbersome approach to window replacement. In fact I agree with the general point that disastrous events often trigger OTT rules and processes in response. The everpresent 'cya' principle goes into overdrive. There's a few examples in our world (finance) we could cite. Whole industries within the industry sometimes. SOX is one I particularly recall.
The process is a part of the problem.
I’m quite convinced that some of the *new* cladding being put on buildings is made of fire lighters.
The 10,000 pages saying they aren’t is a comfort blanket.
Back in the 80s, electric blankets had a reputation for starting fires…
Edit: the heart of it is that doing the wrong thing is the easiest and cheapest option. So, in the window example, the guy who spends £1k on dangerous windows wins. At least until the fire.
What gets you off the 'quite convinced' step?
I rather like your posts - they remind me in small part of Feynman, and J E Gordon. It's a very small part, but then it's an enormous compliment.
The large amounts of money involved, is what convinces me.
A regulation is a promise, in some ways. The government makes a promise that if you are honest, all is good. It is also a promise to defend the good people against the bad.
So, if I follow the regulations, fill out the paperwork and follow up by doing the right thing, it can cost a vast sum of money.
If the government doesn’t defend the regulation with enforcement, then Mr Scumbag can destroy my business by cheating. And then everyone else starts to cheat to survive.
It’s not uncommon in the building industry to find areas, where if you bid for a job on an honest and lawful approach, you will be undercut. By half.
Some building re-cladding jobs fall into this category.
The medium sized news in East Ham and Barking continues to be fuel prices.
At my local Tesco's, E10 unleaded is now 149.9p per litre with diesel 179.9p per litre. That's a rise of 7p in the last 48 hours.
Call me a bluff old cynic but it seems curious the price has jumped just as we reach the Easter holiday for all oil prices continue to gyrate around like I used to at the student disco back in the late Triassic.
At a nearby Shell station, petrol was 155,9p per litre and diesel 182.9p but no queues and all pumps fully stocked.
I don't care what the apologists say. They put prices up at any and every opportunity.
If they were 142.9 in London a couple of days ago, they were in the cheapest 5-10% of local petrol stations. Even today at 149,9 they will be well under London average. So clearly they are not just putting prices up at every opportunity or they would be high 150s by now.
The medium sized news in East Ham and Barking continues to be fuel prices.
At my local Tesco's, E10 unleaded is now 149.9p per litre with diesel 179.9p per litre. That's a rise of 7p in the last 48 hours.
Call me a bluff old cynic but it seems curious the price has jumped just as we reach the Easter holiday for all oil prices continue to gyrate around like I used to at the student disco back in the late Triassic.
At a nearby Shell station, petrol was 155,9p per litre and diesel 182.9p but no queues and all pumps fully stocked.
That unleaded is cheaper than I can find here in Gloucestershire.
The medium sized news in East Ham and Barking continues to be fuel prices.
At my local Tesco's, E10 unleaded is now 149.9p per litre with diesel 179.9p per litre. That's a rise of 7p in the last 48 hours.
Call me a bluff old cynic but it seems curious the price has jumped just as we reach the Easter holiday for all oil prices continue to gyrate around like I used to at the student disco back in the late Triassic.
At a nearby Shell station, petrol was 155,9p per litre and diesel 182.9p but no queues and all pumps fully stocked.
I don't care what the apologists say. They put prices up at any and every opportunity.
If they were 142.9 in London a couple of days ago, they were in the cheapest 5-10% of local petrol stations. Even today at 149,9 they will be well under London average. So clearly they are not just putting prices up at every opportunity or they would be high 150s by now.
I was once told the East London petrol stations were among some of the cheapest because of their proximity to Coryton Refinery but I don't know if that's true.
Sainsbury's at Beckton was also 149.9p per litre for petrol but Shell in Barking was 155.9pper litre which makes me wonder whether the supermarkets are absorbing some of the petrol costs.
Gotta wonder whether Simon Dudley may have started a trend among those who want to stand out among hard right pols: "They just died, we've all got to die some time, who GAF?"
Crassness masquerading as 'seasoned man of the world'.
It's one of the biggest yawns out there.
I suspect its just a case of non politician being incredibly naive about politics. It was a throwaway line in a long interview where he did call Grenfell a tragedy. It is valid to consider where we want to be on the trade off between safety and cost in housebuilding, just as it is in healthcare or road traffic.
This is probably one reason Farage has gone for the failed Tory re-treads as the Reform non politicians are just going to keep making obvious and frequent faux pas.
I'm a non politician and I'd never say that phrase about an event like Grenfell. Of course the general point (risk v cost) is perennially valid.
Yes agreed on the retreads. Farage needs some safe hands and clearly knows this.
The medium sized news in East Ham and Barking continues to be fuel prices.
At my local Tesco's, E10 unleaded is now 149.9p per litre with diesel 179.9p per litre. That's a rise of 7p in the last 48 hours.
Call me a bluff old cynic but it seems curious the price has jumped just as we reach the Easter holiday for all oil prices continue to gyrate around like I used to at the student disco back in the late Triassic.
At a nearby Shell station, petrol was 155,9p per litre and diesel 182.9p but no queues and all pumps fully stocked.
I don't care what the apologists say. They put prices up at any and every opportunity.
If they were 142.9 in London a couple of days ago, they were in the cheapest 5-10% of local petrol stations. Even today at 149,9 they will be well under London average. So clearly they are not just putting prices up at every opportunity or they would be high 150s by now.
I follow our price app and the rises seem consistent and more to come no doubt
Suggesting anything else is political nonsense and not fair to the staff at these filling stations
Gotta wonder whether Simon Dudley may have started a trend among those who want to stand out among hard right pols: "They just died, we've all got to die some time, who GAF?"
Crassness masquerading as 'seasoned man of the world'.
It's one of the biggest yawns out there.
I suspect its just a case of non politician being incredibly naive about politics. It was a throwaway line in a long interview where he did call Grenfell a tragedy. It is valid to consider where we want to be on the trade off between safety and cost in housebuilding, just as it is in healthcare or road traffic.
This is probably one reason Farage has gone for the failed Tory re-treads as the Reform non politicians are just going to keep making obvious and frequent faux pas.
I'm a non politician and I'd never say that phrase about an event like Grenfell. Of course the general point (risk v cost) is perennially valid.
Yes agreed on the retreads. Farage needs some safe hands and clearly knows this.
Some people would and do say things like that though - and they are mostly normal, caring people who speak bluntly and/or casually.
Moving from a world where you discuss things over normal length conversations and interviews to one where every phrase can be taken in isolation and end your career in an instant will be a challenge for most normals.
The medium sized news in East Ham and Barking continues to be fuel prices.
At my local Tesco's, E10 unleaded is now 149.9p per litre with diesel 179.9p per litre. That's a rise of 7p in the last 48 hours.
Call me a bluff old cynic but it seems curious the price has jumped just as we reach the Easter holiday for all oil prices continue to gyrate around like I used to at the student disco back in the late Triassic.
At a nearby Shell station, petrol was 155,9p per litre and diesel 182.9p but no queues and all pumps fully stocked.
That unleaded is cheaper than I can find here in Gloucestershire.
The medium sized news in East Ham and Barking continues to be fuel prices.
At my local Tesco's, E10 unleaded is now 149.9p per litre with diesel 179.9p per litre. That's a rise of 7p in the last 48 hours.
Call me a bluff old cynic but it seems curious the price has jumped just as we reach the Easter holiday for all oil prices continue to gyrate around like I used to at the student disco back in the late Triassic.
At a nearby Shell station, petrol was 155,9p per litre and diesel 182.9p but no queues and all pumps fully stocked.
I don't care what the apologists say. They put prices up at any and every opportunity.
If they were 142.9 in London a couple of days ago, they were in the cheapest 5-10% of local petrol stations. Even today at 149,9 they will be well under London average. So clearly they are not just putting prices up at every opportunity or they would be high 150s by now.
I was once told the East London petrol stations were among some of the cheapest because of their proximity to Coryton Refinery but I don't know if that's true.
Sainsbury's at Beckton was also 149.9p per litre for petrol but Shell in Barking was 155.9pper litre which makes me wonder whether the supermarkets are absorbing some of the petrol costs.
Supermarket petrol tends to have… nuanced energy rating. That is, they use petrol that meets the standards in *tests*, but strangely, your car uses more fuel to do the same journey.
There are a wide range of ways of doing this, but it means using cheaper fractions. So it’s cheaper for them, to buy.
“Did you know: all five of the US flags planted by the Apollo missions have been bleached white by the UV rays which means now the moon technically belongs to France”
Here’s a question for PBers. I’ve been arguing it with my brother but it might interest the forum
Has the west. - as in, the entire west - ever been so badly governed? Everywhere you look there is total mediocrity at best, or asinine stupidity. Keir Starmer is a vain, thick, footling and treacherous wanker who thinks he’s smart. Trump is much worse. Metz lol. Macron at least is clever but his home life IS fucking disturbing and he’s barely achieved anything
Carney shows some spine and brains but it’s far too early to tell
And is democracy finished if this is what it produces?
Here’s a question for PBers. I’ve been arguing it with my brother but it might interest the forum
Has the west. - as in, the entire west - ever been so badly governed? Everywhere you look there is total mediocrity at best, or asinine stupidity. Keir Starmer is a vain, thick, footling and treacherous wanker who thinks he’s smart. Trump is much worse. Metz lol. Macron at least is clever but his home life IS fucking disturbing and he’s barely achieved anything
Carney shows some spine and brains but it’s far too early to tell
And is democracy finished if this is what it produces?
To add to the debate. One of the main arguments offered in favour of Israel is that it is “the only democracy in the region”
Which is true to an extent but that so-called democracy has now delivered 18 years - 18 years! - of the corrupt and contemptible Bibi Netanyahu as prime minister and that same democracy has now introduced an overtly race-based death penalty aimed at one minority, something even apartheid South Africa never quite managed
So what’s the fucking big deal about Israel being democratic if democracy produces this?
Gotta wonder whether Simon Dudley may have started a trend among those who want to stand out among hard right pols: "They just died, we've all got to die some time, who GAF?"
Crassness masquerading as 'seasoned man of the world'.
It's one of the biggest yawns out there.
I suspect its just a case of non politician being incredibly naive about politics. It was a throwaway line in a long interview where he did call Grenfell a tragedy. It is valid to consider where we want to be on the trade off between safety and cost in housebuilding, just as it is in healthcare or road traffic.
This is probably one reason Farage has gone for the failed Tory re-treads as the Reform non politicians are just going to keep making obvious and frequent faux pas.
I'm a non politician and I'd never say that phrase about an event like Grenfell. Of course the general point (risk v cost) is perennially valid.
Yes agreed on the retreads. Farage needs some safe hands and clearly knows this.
Some people would and do say things like that though - and they are mostly normal, caring people who speak bluntly and/or casually.
Moving from a world where you discuss things over normal length conversations and interviews to one where every phrase can be taken in isolation and end your career in an instant will be a challenge for most normals.
I don't think a normal caring person would utter the phrase "everybody has to die sometime" when discussing the Grenfell fire. Otoh I do know the importance of tone and context and I have not seen or read the whole conversation. But with that caveat, no, gross.
Here’s a question for PBers. I’ve been arguing it with my brother but it might interest the forum
Has the west. - as in, the entire west - ever been so badly governed? Everywhere you look there is total mediocrity at best, or asinine stupidity. Keir Starmer is a vain, thick, footling and treacherous wanker who thinks he’s smart. Trump is much worse. Metz lol. Macron at least is clever but his home life IS fucking disturbing and he’s barely achieved anything
Carney shows some spine and brains but it’s far too early to tell
And is democracy finished if this is what it produces?
As Churchill once said:
"Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."
Lol, King Charles is the head of the Church of England. Where do they find these people?
It's all over the US RIght, especially Evangelical Right.
It's right up there with the Eurabia (as was), "Civisational Erasure" (per Trump's National Security Strategy) and Londonistan conspiracy theories.
I think it's a particular porcupine-up-the-fundament for Natcons and Christian Nationalists that the State Church in the UK (which they think should be lead by some sort of bloodthirsty Jesus-Ayatollah) is actually inclusive, tolerant and liberal, not some sort of fear-driven Medievallist war machine dedicated to causing chaos.
We need to set Ehud on some of these Yanks.
Tell me - is Charlie’s conversion to Jediism voluntary or something to do with space lasers?
Lol, King Charles is the head of the Church of England. Where do they find these people?
It's all over the US RIght, especially Evangelical Right.
It's right up there with the Eurabia (as was), "Civisational Erasure" (per Trump's National Security Strategy) and Londonistan conspiracy theories.
I think it's a particular porcupine-up-the-fundament for Natcons and Christian Nationalists that the State Church in the UK (which they think should be lead by some sort of bloodthirsty Jesus-Ayatollah) is actually inclusive, tolerant and liberal, not some sort of fear-driven Medievallist war machine dedicated to causing chaos.
We need to set Ehud on some of these Yanks.
Tell me - is Charlie’s conversion to Jediism voluntary or something to do with space lasers?
Only just seen this. I'm suspicious that Reform may well sweep the NE. I believe I mentioned a couple of days ago that I expect Sunderland, Gateshead and South Tyneside. And that I thought Newcastle isn't a stretch. Leaves me in the sad place of having to vote Lib Dem (I'm in a currently 3 LD ward). I'm very bearish on Labour prospects everywhere really. (Not knowledgeable enough about London).
The large amounts of money involved, is what convinces me.
A regulation is a promise, in some ways. The government makes a promise that if you are honest, all is good. It is also a promise to defend the good people against the bad.
So, if I follow the regulations, fill out the paperwork and follow up by doing the right thing, it can cost a vast sum of money.
If the government doesn’t defend the regulation with enforcement, then Mr Scumbag can destroy my business by cheating. And then everyone else starts to cheat to survive.
It’s not uncommon in the building industry to find areas, where if you bid for a job on an honest and lawful approach, you will be undercut. By half.
Some building re-cladding jobs fall into this category.
Well yeah any lawful activity that is regulated and where it is expensive to do things right can create a perverse incentive to cheat and reap the margin for doing things cheaply. So you'd better be tough on eforcing the rules or you will get a lot of cheating.
We seem to have got into a real mess with waste and recycling where the costs for doing the right thing has created a lot of dumping for profit. i.e. Charge the customer as though you are disposing of waste properly but dump it in a field somewhere.
Comments
We had a Conservative leaflet delivered very late yesterday evening (after 11pm) in my part of Newham.
I know Conservative activists are timid, nocturnal creatures and this seems to prove it.
Strangely enough, I think I may be in a Conservative target Ward (if such things exist). Labour usually win my Ward with 60-65% of the vote with the Conservatives on about 25% - I suspect the reasoning in my mainly Hindu Ward is the Conservative vote will hold up, the Newham Independents and perhaps the Greens will take chunks out of the Labour vote and the Tories will come through the middle.
I'm not entirely convinced.
Not sure that’s a winning message for most voters but he’ll still have the MAGA morons onside.
But how much of it was down to the Tories having a Hindu leader as PM? Does it transfer to Badenoch's Tories? We might find out a little this May.
One of my Hindu colleagues is very pro-Farage, driven mostly by Islamophobia from GB news and Social Media. He might well regret it when the leopard eats his face, but there you go.
As it happens, I have said it would be reasonable for drivers to pay no more and no less than their costs including the cost of the roads but it should not be excessively taxed beyond that.
https://x.com/TMZ/status/2039709041476141454
Doesn't seem to have succumbed to his dementia yet.
“Did you know: all five of the US flags planted by the Apollo missions have been bleached white by the UV rays which means now the moon technically belongs to France”
https://x.com/msmelchen/status/2039692192088760428?s=46
From an equity perspective, that really harms middle-income people because they tend to do much lower mileage per year, but still have to incur all the fixed costs of owning a car. Ideally you want to make the marginal cost of driving higher relative to the initial cost (why car clubs are such a good system).
Not that there's any point to it in Trump's america.
There is very little appetite for the Tories and it's still odds on Badenoch will go before Starmer.
Reform and Greens will be the headline makers, PC and SNP will win their parliaments
The surprise leadership challenge may be against Davey.
Not really. General attitude here more that of the wonderful French proverb
"La bave du crapaud n'atteint pas la blanche colombe"
The toad's slime does not reach the white dove
https://x.com/AlexTaylorNews/status/2039738384642388164
I can hear it end to end in my head, though to be fair I’ve probably sung it, if we include rehearsals, about 50 times as treble and tenor. But it wouldn’t be anywhere near as hard for someone like Mozart to transcribe than, say, a Bach sonata or even something by Monteverdi .
Adjusting the road fund tax disc price allows adjustment by size of vehicle so compact economical vehicles remain cheaper than heavy Chelsea tractors.
If you want to reduce short journeys in towns then a congestion charge system would be better. (Albeit by accelerating the death of city centres in favour of suburban retail parks). Alternatively a low daily charge to encourage "no car days".
So we see building with a vast pile of paperwork to justify them. Compete with structural problems, missing insulation, you name it.
Take the recent comedy about the chap who was poking at £18k to replace one window.
- the reports that cost £12k from expert report preparing consultants.
- The £6k window from specialist window makers
You have 3 options
1) pay for the reports. Pay for the window. It will not actually be inspected - maybe a superficial look when it’s in place.
2) buy a window from an outfit in Poland that make custom windows. £k to make*. A few hundred to get a window fitter to fit it. Don’t bother with the reports. It’s never noticed or inspected.
3) have a cheap window made out of something explosive and inflamble. It’s never noticed or insoefted.
Guess what happens?
*it’s probably made in the same factory the “specialists” use
But also after the meltdown in the Labour Party in Leicester with Mayor Soulsby purging many Labour Councillors. That Humpty Dumpty cannot be put back together again, and I do not think Labour will hold any seat in Leicester or Lecestershire at the next GE.
https://x.com/skint_eastwood1/status/2039710777205043357
I think it's important to clarify that I am not against renewable energy in principle - that would be absurd. If we can use modern technology to harness nature and provide abundant cheap energy, how could anyone object to that?
My argument is against the UK's specific journey to Net Zero, and the green industrial complex that has grown up around it. We have imposed arbitrary green targets, companies (mostly overseas ones) know this, lobbyists get their noses into the trough, the entire push is sold to the public as a moral mission, and the chosen instruments for the transition are by their nature the most wasteful and inefficient, because on the other side of waste, there is someone making a shit tonne of money. That is the nature of waste.
I support tidal - very old idea, very reliable tech, would last centuries with little repair - hence no vast profits to be made, so little to no interest from corporations, or policy-makers.
It's a corrupt system, and it is quite deliberately pushing up the price of energy, with global investment funds the main beneficiaries, and the poor the main victims, all wrapped in hypocritical cant about saving the planet.
Would charge SUVs a lot more than hatchbacks.
Here it is, Oct 19th 2022, so Truss PM, Hunt CofE
Day before Truss resigned!
I don't think any firm should be expected to the "right thing". It's up to government to regulate, tax, to ensure we get a good outcome. That goes for fossil fuels and renewables equally. If that's not happening now then we are right to complain.
(On tidal, I've never really understood what the benefits are. Intermittent, and none of the schemes contain sufficient storage in design to mitigate that. If it's cheaper than the alternatives then fair enough.)
Who was at least a fictional character.
This said, only an idiot would take financial advice from a waster such as myself who is little interested in investment.
Does he get paid for this stuff?
I’m quite convinced that some of the *new* cladding being put on buildings is made of fire lighters.
The 10,000 pages saying they aren’t is a comfort blanket.
Back in the 80s, electric blankets had a reputation for starting fires…
Edit: the heart of it is that doing the wrong thing is the easiest and cheapest option. So, in the window example, the guy who spends £1k on dangerous windows wins. At least until the fire.
Utter garbage.
Mind you he was on a bill with Jasper Carrott and Jethro, proper comedians.
https://x.com/citrinowicz/status/2039746658431320157
I rather like your posts - they remind me in small part of Feynman, and J E Gordon. It's a very small part, but then it's an enormous compliment.
I have absolutely no use for it. Barely anywhere to put it. The only reason I bought it is because it oozes noom as dark as the devil’s char-grilled arse and it looks like Vlad Dracul’s ugliest spittoon
Just been doorstopped by the LD candidate for the locals. Very pleasant guy. Told him I was a Labour Party member so no. He grinned and said, fine but if I am elected don't hesitate. I grinned back and said, great and good luck. A really nice couple of minutes.
Fans should boycott and the corrupt organisation can try and explain the empty stadiums .
Which is a piece of fucking prose poetry when you consider the internal rhymes of “char” and “arse”, and “Dracul” and “spitoon” plus it introduces the idea that Vlad Dracul kept a selection of spitoons, one of which was aesthetically disfavoured
I'm guessing a lot of PBers could have made some money if I'd posted it earlier in the day.
At my local Tesco's, E10 unleaded is now 149.9p per litre with diesel 179.9p per litre. That's a rise of 7p in the last 48 hours.
Call me a bluff old cynic but it seems curious the price has jumped just as we reach the Easter holiday for all oil prices continue to gyrate around like I used to at the student disco back in the late Triassic.
At a nearby Shell station, petrol was 155,9p per litre and diesel 182.9p but no queues and all pumps fully stocked.
It's one of the biggest yawns out there.
Next time screw your courage to the sticking place!
This is probably one reason Farage has gone for the failed Tory re-treads as the Reform non politicians are just going to keep making obvious and frequent faux pas.
A regulation is a promise, in some ways. The government makes a promise that if you are honest, all is good. It is also a promise to defend the good people against the bad.
So, if I follow the regulations, fill out the paperwork and follow up by doing the right thing, it can cost a vast sum of money.
If the government doesn’t defend the regulation with enforcement, then Mr Scumbag can destroy my business by cheating. And then everyone else starts to cheat to survive.
It’s not uncommon in the building industry to find areas, where if you bid for a job on an honest and lawful approach, you will be undercut. By half.
Some building re-cladding jobs fall into this category.
I think I'll drive down and get some.
Sainsbury's at Beckton was also 149.9p per litre for petrol but Shell in Barking was 155.9pper litre which makes me wonder whether the supermarkets are absorbing some of the petrol costs.
Yes agreed on the retreads. Farage needs some safe hands and clearly knows this.
Suggesting anything else is political nonsense and not fair to the staff at these filling stations
Moving from a world where you discuss things over normal length conversations and interviews to one where every phrase can be taken in isolation and end your career in an instant will be a challenge for most normals.
https://www.petrolprices.com/locations/gloucester/st-ann-way/25768
https://bsky.app/profile/avitek.bsky.social/post/3mijrzvlaws2u
There are a wide range of ways of doing this, but it means using cheaper fractions. So it’s cheaper for them, to buy.
Six flags
Has the west. - as in, the entire west - ever been so badly governed? Everywhere you look there is total mediocrity at best, or asinine stupidity. Keir Starmer is a vain, thick, footling and treacherous wanker who thinks he’s smart. Trump is much worse. Metz lol. Macron at least is clever but his home life IS fucking disturbing and he’s barely achieved anything
Carney shows some spine and brains but it’s far too early to tell
And is democracy finished if this is what it produces?
Which is true to an extent but that so-called democracy has now delivered 18 years - 18 years! - of the corrupt and contemptible Bibi Netanyahu as prime minister and that same democracy has now introduced an overtly race-based death penalty aimed at one minority, something even apartheid South Africa never quite managed
So what’s the fucking big deal about Israel being democratic if democracy produces this?
"Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."
I'm suspicious that Reform may well sweep the NE. I believe I mentioned a couple of days ago that I expect Sunderland, Gateshead and South Tyneside. And that I thought Newcastle isn't a stretch.
Leaves me in the sad place of having to vote Lib Dem (I'm in a currently 3 LD ward).
I'm very bearish on Labour prospects everywhere really. (Not knowledgeable enough about London).
We seem to have got into a real mess with waste and recycling where the costs for doing the right thing has created a lot of dumping for profit. i.e. Charge the customer as though you are disposing of waste properly but dump it in a field somewhere.