Skip to content

European electorates are an ornery bunch – politicalbetting.com

13»

Comments

  • FishingFishing Posts: 6,358

    BBC TV News really is poor.

    Sarah Smith sane washing Trump is awful. I think she reports as she does because Trump accepts her calls. I suspect a truth sayer like Simon Marks would probably get the phone hung up on him by Trump.

    Maybe.

    But Trump is weird like that. Don't forget he has the memory of a goldfish, the attention span of a ten-year-old with ADHD and he's often too stupid to know when people are attacking him anyway (see the KCIII speech to Congress)..

    If you listen to Michael Wolff, he'll call people who've attacked him for years and just rant at them over the phone. Just as long as they don't say anything or offer any kind of opinion, because it's all about him.

    He has so many mental illnesses and pathologies that it needs quite a lot of imagination to think even vaguely how he thinks.
  • DopermeanDopermean Posts: 3,155

    Billions in aid handed to terrorists and criminals
    Secret dossier reveals foreign aid and Covid relief loans were appropriated by gangs and hostile states

    Terrorists, hostile states and gangsters have been given more than £28bn of taxpayers’ money, including through aid payments, according to a secret government report.
    ...
    More than £28bn ended up in the hands of those wishing to harm Britain between 2015 and 2021, according to the report, which was commissioned and produced by the Cabinet Office but was buried during the previous government.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/gift/bf51632ce387959b

    Gift link so no paywall.

    Telegraph comments show the intelligence of their readers, blaming the current govt for fraud commited 5-10 years ago under the Tories and covered up in 2023 by the Tories.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 40,203
    A few weeks ago, GaryEats was reviewing the worst-rated restaurant in London.

    Now he's just reviewed The Ritz restaurant.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yw8CVthU9yI
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GGV-xp1gds4
  • PeterCairnsPeterCairns Posts: 81
    Taz said:

    theProle said:

    eek said:

    Andy_JS said:

    DavidL said:

    kle4 said:

    A case study in why resisting reasonable development entirely can come back to bite you (if the developer ploy here works)? Work in the system to resist where you can, don't just pretend the system doesn't exist because you don't like it.

    Council rejects 100 homes.

    Developer wins appeal for 75 homes.

    Developer then submits another 65 homes on the remaining land.

    End result? Residents could get 140 homes instead of the original 100. Now they claim they’re being “picked on”.


    https://nitter.poast.org/jakewg_/status/2063551764796752183#m

    No sympathy for NIMBYs
    What about local democracy?
    Sadly I seem to repeat the same issue

    we have the same population as France but 7 million fewer homes..
    We've arrived at this point almost entirely by virtually unrestricted immigration and given the birth rate we could very easily shrink our population back again by making further immigration almost impossible.

    That is a much better deal for almost everyone than continually concreting over the country to build horrible Barratt new builds without any accompanying infrastructure.

    No more immigration, almost no more new housing, and in 15 years time housing will be affordable again. As a bonus, we can fill in the various holes in our labour force by redeployment of the people who are building houses to cope with immigration.
    Here’s 170 you can redeploy already.

    https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/170-jobs-lost-historic-gateshead-34087173
    Where to start;

    No one is building homes to cope with immigration, we aren’t building enough homes because not enough people can afford new ones. Largely flatlining wages after inflation , higher prices and supply and demand mean there are too few buyers who can afford them.

    If we stop immigration the average age will be 45 in 2040 with far too few young people and a rapidly ageing population. Are the pensioners going to build their own houses.


    In this scenario under sixteens would drop from 18% to 14%, the working population from 62% to 55% and the over 67’s would grow from about 19% to 29%…

    So dependency would go from roughly 2:1 to close to 1:1.

    Hey Presto not only no need for new houses with a collapsed economy no money to build them either!

    Peter.
  • PeterCairnsPeterCairns Posts: 81
    Taz said:

    theProle said:

    eek said:

    Andy_JS said:

    DavidL said:

    kle4 said:

    A case study in why resisting reasonable development entirely can come back to bite you (if the developer ploy here works)? Work in the system to resist where you can, don't just pretend the system doesn't exist because you don't like it.

    Council rejects 100 homes.

    Developer wins appeal for 75 homes.

    Developer then submits another 65 homes on the remaining land.

    End result? Residents could get 140 homes instead of the original 100. Now they claim they’re being “picked on”.


    https://nitter.poast.org/jakewg_/status/2063551764796752183#m

    No sympathy for NIMBYs
    What about local democracy?
    Sadly I seem to repeat the same issue

    we have the same population as France but 7 million fewer homes..
    We've arrived at this point almost entirely by virtually unrestricted immigration and given the birth rate we could very easily shrink our population back again by making further immigration almost impossible.

    That is a much better deal for almost everyone than continually concreting over the country to build horrible Barratt new builds without any accompanying infrastructure.

    No more immigration, almost no more new housing, and in 15 years time housing will be affordable again. As a bonus, we can fill in the various holes in our labour force by redeployment of the people who are building houses to cope with immigration.
    Here’s 170 you can redeploy already.

    https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/170-jobs-lost-historic-gateshead-34087173
    Where to start;

    No one is building homes to cope with immigration, we aren’t building enough homes because not enough people can afford new ones. Largely flatlining wages after inflation , higher prices and supply and demand mean there are too few buyers who can afford them.

    If we stop immigration the average age will be 45 in 2040 with far too few young people and a rapidly ageing population. Are the pensioners going to build their own houses.


    In this scenario under sixteens would drop from 18% to 14%, the working population from 62% to 55% and the over 67’s would grow from about 19% to 29%…

    So dependency would go from roughly 2:1 to close to 1:1.

    Hey Presto not only no need for new houses with a collapsed economy no money to build them either!

    Peter.
  • PeterCairnsPeterCairns Posts: 81
    edited 11:06PM
    Dopermean said:

    Billions in aid handed to terrorists and criminals
    Secret dossier reveals foreign aid and Covid relief loans were appropriated by gangs and hostile states

    Terrorists, hostile states and gangsters have been given more than £28bn of taxpayers’ money, including through aid payments, according to a secret government report.
    ...
    More than £28bn ended up in the hands of those wishing to harm Britain between 2015 and 2021, according to the report, which was commissioned and produced by the Cabinet Office but was buried during the previous government.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/gift/bf51632ce387959b

    Gift link so no paywall.

    Telegraph comments show the intelligence of their readers, blaming the current govt for fraud commited 5-10 years ago under the Tories and covered up in 2023 by the Tories.
    Quick skim read of the Telegraph article but what it actually seems to say is that because the Covid funds were badly designed, handled and monitored there was;

    Wide scale fraud, much undetected at the time.

    Some, perhaps but not definitely most, but certainly a large amount was done by organised criminal gangs.

    Many of those criminal gangs were Eastern European.

    Some of those gangs had links to terrorists and people smugglers and others in the Middle East.

    Therefore some of the money may well have reached these groups.

    So in conclusion: up to £28 Bn
    misappropriated but no way to know how much of that actual ended up with “The Baddies!”

    Peter.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 59,899

    Taz said:

    theProle said:

    eek said:

    Andy_JS said:

    DavidL said:

    kle4 said:

    A case study in why resisting reasonable development entirely can come back to bite you (if the developer ploy here works)? Work in the system to resist where you can, don't just pretend the system doesn't exist because you don't like it.

    Council rejects 100 homes.

    Developer wins appeal for 75 homes.

    Developer then submits another 65 homes on the remaining land.

    End result? Residents could get 140 homes instead of the original 100. Now they claim they’re being “picked on”.


    https://nitter.poast.org/jakewg_/status/2063551764796752183#m

    No sympathy for NIMBYs
    What about local democracy?
    Sadly I seem to repeat the same issue

    we have the same population as France but 7 million fewer homes..
    We've arrived at this point almost entirely by virtually unrestricted immigration and given the birth rate we could very easily shrink our population back again by making further immigration almost impossible.

    That is a much better deal for almost everyone than continually concreting over the country to build horrible Barratt new builds without any accompanying infrastructure.

    No more immigration, almost no more new housing, and in 15 years time housing will be affordable again. As a bonus, we can fill in the various holes in our labour force by redeployment of the people who are building houses to cope with immigration.
    Here’s 170 you can redeploy already.

    https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/170-jobs-lost-historic-gateshead-34087173
    Where to start;

    No one is building homes to cope with immigration, we aren’t building enough homes because not enough people can afford new ones. Largely flatlining wages after inflation , higher prices and supply and demand mean there are too few buyers who can afford them.

    If we stop immigration the average age will be 45 in 2040 with far too few young people and a rapidly ageing population. Are the pensioners going to build their own houses.


    In this scenario under sixteens would drop from 18% to 14%, the working population from 62% to 55% and the over 67’s would grow from about 19% to 29%…

    So dependency would go from roughly 2:1 to close to 1:1.

    Hey Presto not only no need for new houses with a collapsed economy no money to build them either!

    Peter.
    We've spent 25 years trying the approach of allowing mass immigration to increase the working age population in the face of what would otherwise be a natural decline and it has led to poor productivity growth, stagnant wages, inflated asset values and political instability. It's about time the people who advocated it learned to have some humility.
  • PeterCairnsPeterCairns Posts: 81

    Taz said:

    theProle said:

    eek said:

    Andy_JS said:

    DavidL said:

    kle4 said:

    A case study in why resisting reasonable development entirely can come back to bite you (if the developer ploy here works)? Work in the system to resist where you can, don't just pretend the system doesn't exist because you don't like it.

    Council rejects 100 homes.

    Developer wins appeal for 75 homes.

    Developer then submits another 65 homes on the remaining land.

    End result? Residents could get 140 homes instead of the original 100. Now they claim they’re being “picked on”.


    https://nitter.poast.org/jakewg_/status/2063551764796752183#m

    No sympathy for NIMBYs
    What about local democracy?
    Sadly I seem to repeat the same issue

    we have the same population as France but 7 million fewer homes..
    We've arrived at this point almost entirely by virtually unrestricted immigration and given the birth rate we could very easily shrink our population back again by making further immigration almost impossible.

    That is a much better deal for almost everyone than continually concreting over the country to build horrible Barratt new builds without any accompanying infrastructure.

    No more immigration, almost no more new housing, and in 15 years time housing will be affordable again. As a bonus, we can fill in the various holes in our labour force by redeployment of the people who are building houses to cope with immigration.
    Here’s 170 you can redeploy already.

    https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/170-jobs-lost-historic-gateshead-34087173
    Where to start;

    No one is building homes to cope with immigration, we aren’t building enough homes because not enough people can afford new ones. Largely flatlining wages after inflation , higher prices and supply and demand mean there are too few buyers who can afford them.

    If we stop immigration the average age will be 45 in 2040 with far too few young people and a rapidly ageing population. Are the pensioners going to build their own houses.


    In this scenario under sixteens would drop from 18% to 14%, the working population from 62% to 55% and the over 67’s would grow from about 19% to 29%…

    So dependency would go from roughly 2:1 to close to 1:1.

    Hey Presto not only no need for new houses with a collapsed economy no money to build them either!

    Peter.
    We've spent 25 years trying the approach of allowing mass immigration to increase the working age population in the face of what would otherwise be a natural decline and it has led to poor productivity growth, stagnant wages, inflated asset values and political instability. It's about time the people who advocated it learned to have some humility.
    We have had 25 years of large scale immigration.
    We have increased the working age population.
    We have so far managed to avoid the economic cliff edge of a naturally declining population.
    We have had low productivity and low wage growth.

    And you have abjectly failed to establish a causal link between them.

    Other Countries with high immigration have had productivity growth; the US for one.

    Developed Countries like Japan have had slow wage growth and little immigration.

    Peter.

  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 59,899

    Taz said:

    theProle said:

    eek said:

    Andy_JS said:

    DavidL said:

    kle4 said:

    A case study in why resisting reasonable development entirely can come back to bite you (if the developer ploy here works)? Work in the system to resist where you can, don't just pretend the system doesn't exist because you don't like it.

    Council rejects 100 homes.

    Developer wins appeal for 75 homes.

    Developer then submits another 65 homes on the remaining land.

    End result? Residents could get 140 homes instead of the original 100. Now they claim they’re being “picked on”.


    https://nitter.poast.org/jakewg_/status/2063551764796752183#m

    No sympathy for NIMBYs
    What about local democracy?
    Sadly I seem to repeat the same issue

    we have the same population as France but 7 million fewer homes..
    We've arrived at this point almost entirely by virtually unrestricted immigration and given the birth rate we could very easily shrink our population back again by making further immigration almost impossible.

    That is a much better deal for almost everyone than continually concreting over the country to build horrible Barratt new builds without any accompanying infrastructure.

    No more immigration, almost no more new housing, and in 15 years time housing will be affordable again. As a bonus, we can fill in the various holes in our labour force by redeployment of the people who are building houses to cope with immigration.
    Here’s 170 you can redeploy already.

    https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/170-jobs-lost-historic-gateshead-34087173
    Where to start;

    No one is building homes to cope with immigration, we aren’t building enough homes because not enough people can afford new ones. Largely flatlining wages after inflation , higher prices and supply and demand mean there are too few buyers who can afford them.

    If we stop immigration the average age will be 45 in 2040 with far too few young people and a rapidly ageing population. Are the pensioners going to build their own houses.


    In this scenario under sixteens would drop from 18% to 14%, the working population from 62% to 55% and the over 67’s would grow from about 19% to 29%…

    So dependency would go from roughly 2:1 to close to 1:1.

    Hey Presto not only no need for new houses with a collapsed economy no money to build them either!

    Peter.
    We've spent 25 years trying the approach of allowing mass immigration to increase the working age population in the face of what would otherwise be a natural decline and it has led to poor productivity growth, stagnant wages, inflated asset values and political instability. It's about time the people who advocated it learned to have some humility.
    We have had 25 years of large scale immigration.
    We have increased the working age population.
    We have so far managed to avoid the economic cliff edge of a naturally declining population.
    We have had low productivity and low wage growth.

    And you have abjectly failed to establish a causal link between them.

    Other Countries with high immigration have had productivity growth; the US for one.

    Developed Countries like Japan have had slow wage growth and little immigration.

    Peter.

    The onus isn't on me to prove a causal link. I have democracy on my side.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 59,899
    https://x.com/WSJ/status/2064106553423106264

    Breaking: OpenAI filed for an IPO, setting it up to potentially go public as soon as this fall
  • PeterCairnsPeterCairns Posts: 81

    Taz said:

    theProle said:

    eek said:

    Andy_JS said:

    DavidL said:

    kle4 said:

    A case study in why resisting reasonable development entirely can come back to bite you (if the developer ploy here works)? Work in the system to resist where you can, don't just pretend the system doesn't exist because you don't like it.

    Council rejects 100 homes.

    Developer wins appeal for 75 homes.

    Developer then submits another 65 homes on the remaining land.

    End result? Residents could get 140 homes instead of the original 100. Now they claim they’re being “picked on”.


    https://nitter.poast.org/jakewg_/status/2063551764796752183#m

    No sympathy for NIMBYs
    What about local democracy?
    Sadly I seem to repeat the same issue

    we have the same population as France but 7 million fewer homes..
    We've arrived at this point almost entirely by virtually unrestricted immigration and given the birth rate we could very easily shrink our population back again by making further immigration almost impossible.

    That is a much better deal for almost everyone than continually concreting over the country to build horrible Barratt new builds without any accompanying infrastructure.

    No more immigration, almost no more new housing, and in 15 years time housing will be affordable again. As a bonus, we can fill in the various holes in our labour force by redeployment of the people who are building houses to cope with immigration.
    Here’s 170 you can redeploy already.

    https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/170-jobs-lost-historic-gateshead-34087173
    Where to start;

    No one is building homes to cope with immigration, we aren’t building enough homes because not enough people can afford new ones. Largely flatlining wages after inflation , higher prices and supply and demand mean there are too few buyers who can afford them.

    If we stop immigration the average age will be 45 in 2040 with far too few young people and a rapidly ageing population. Are the pensioners going to build their own houses.


    In this scenario under sixteens would drop from 18% to 14%, the working population from 62% to 55% and the over 67’s would grow from about 19% to 29%…

    So dependency would go from roughly 2:1 to close to 1:1.

    Hey Presto not only no need for new houses with a collapsed economy no money to build them either!

    Peter.
    We've spent 25 years trying the approach of allowing mass immigration to increase the working age population in the face of what would otherwise be a natural decline and it has led to poor productivity growth, stagnant wages, inflated asset values and political instability. It's about time the people who advocated it learned to have some humility.
    We have had 25 years of large scale immigration.
    We have increased the working age population.
    We have so far managed to avoid the economic cliff edge of a naturally declining population.
    We have had low productivity and low wage growth.

    And you have abjectly failed to establish a causal link between them.

    Other Countries with high immigration have had productivity growth; the US for one.

    Developed Countries like Japan have had slow wage growth and little immigration.

    Peter.

    The onus isn't on me to prove a causal link. I have democracy on my side.
    No you have Populism and what’s popular isn’t always right and what’s right isn’t always popular.

    Essential you are adopting the Trumpian logic, that for something to be true the majority just has to believe it.

    Much like his Meet the Press walk out. His evidence consisted of only what he believed, nothing more.

    I am old fashioned, I like evidence based argument and still believe in objective truth.

    Peter.
Sign In or Register to comment.