Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » NEW PB/Polling Matters podcast: Jeremy Corbyn is Britain’s mos

SystemSystem Posts: 12,260
edited July 2017 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » NEW PB/Polling Matters podcast: Jeremy Corbyn is Britain’s most popular politician – but there’s a catch LISTEN

On this week’s PB/Polling Matters podcast, Keiran Pedley and Leo Barasi discuss exclusive polling from Opinium that looks at how popular a series of frontline British politicians are.

Read the full story here


«1

Comments

  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,919
    edited July 2017
    Thirst.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    Thirst.

    Until the thread disappears...
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,919
    Scott_P said:

    Thirst.

    Until the thread disappears...
    They'd never do that to me! ;)
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Scott_P said:

    Thirst.

    Until the thread disappears...
    Like Britain's future...
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    edited July 2017

    Like Britain's future...

    Threaxit... ™
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 120,345
    Scott_P said:

    Like Britain's future...

    Threaxit...
    Nah, this thread has been published as planned.

    There has been no premature posting.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 52,846
    Scott_P said:

    Like Britain's future...

    Threaxit... ™
    No spiel is better than a bad spiel.
  • PeterMannionPeterMannion Posts: 712
    Is the answer Michael 'Govey' Gove?
  • MonikerDiCanioMonikerDiCanio Posts: 5,792

    Scott_P said:

    Like Britain's future...

    Threaxit... ™
    No spiel is better than a bad spiel.
    I encourage you to see Christopher Nolan's Brexit allegory " Dunkirk ". Stirring.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    It has taken me this long just to listen to the podcast. Posting before listening is cheating imo.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 120,345

    It has taken me this long just to listen to the podcast. Posting before listening is cheating imo.

    I listened to the podcast before I posted. So nehhhh
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @steve_hawkes: Rumours David Gauke may be about to signal that he wants to bring forward an increase in state retirement age. Would be a good day to do it
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    Scott_P said:

    @steve_hawkes: Rumours David Gauke may be about to signal that he wants to bring forward an increase in state retirement age. Would be a good day to do it

    A quick glance at the Conservative manifesto doesn't find any mention of raising the retirement age. Can anyone give me a page number?
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,406

    Scott_P said:

    @steve_hawkes: Rumours David Gauke may be about to signal that he wants to bring forward an increase in state retirement age. Would be a good day to do it

    A quick glance at the Conservative manifesto doesn't find any mention of raising the retirement age. Can anyone give me a page number?
    They say state pension will go up in line with life expectancy on page 66 online, 64 in document.

    "We will also ensure that the state pension age reflects increases in life expectancy, while protecting each generation fairly".

    I think that's the basis of it...
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,485
    From one of the previous threads:

    "Do they pay local council tax in both areas? If not, then yes, vote once. if they do, then they should be able to vote once in each council area they have to pay council tax in."

    Absolutely not. One person, one vote. We don't link the right to vote to how much tax we pay. Otherwise those who pay higher rate tax would get more votes than others.

    If students have - illegally - voted twice they should be prosecuted. Just like anyone else. And we should tighten up the rules, if necessary, not to suppress voting but to maintain the integrity of our voting system.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,111
    Cyclefree said:

    From one of the previous threads:

    "Do they pay local council tax in both areas? If not, then yes, vote once. if they do, then they should be able to vote once in each council area they have to pay council tax in."

    Absolutely not. One person, one vote. We don't link the right to vote to how much tax we pay. Otherwise those who pay higher rate tax would get more votes than others.

    If students have - illegally - voted twice they should be prosecuted. Just like anyone else. And we should tighten up the rules, if necessary, not to suppress voting but to maintain the integrity of our voting system.

    Nope. If you live in two areas and pay council tax in each area you get two votes. Taxation without representation is tyranny.

    GE of course not - one vote only.
  • rkrkrk said:

    Scott_P said:

    @steve_hawkes: Rumours David Gauke may be about to signal that he wants to bring forward an increase in state retirement age. Would be a good day to do it

    A quick glance at the Conservative manifesto doesn't find any mention of raising the retirement age. Can anyone give me a page number?
    They say state pension will go up in line with life expectancy on page 66 online, 64 in document.

    "We will also ensure that the state pension age reflects increases in life expectancy, while protecting each generation fairly".

    I think that's the basis of it...
    Trouble is life expectancy is dropping.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 50,288
    edited July 2017
    FPT:

    Excellent chart de-bunking much fake news.

    Not really - the chart itself is close to being fake news; it is designed to distract from the huge inequality that has arisen from the explosion in asset prices and hence rising wealth of the rich since 2008, much completely untaxed.
  • PClippPClipp Posts: 2,138

    Is the answer Michael 'Govey' Gove?

    If the question is "Who is the most unpopular member of this Tory Cabinet?", then the answer, based on the podcast, would indeed seem to be the hapless Gove.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    From one of the previous threads:

    "Do they pay local council tax in both areas? If not, then yes, vote once. if they do, then they should be able to vote once in each council area they have to pay council tax in."

    Absolutely not. One person, one vote. We don't link the right to vote to how much tax we pay. Otherwise those who pay higher rate tax would get more votes than others.

    If students have - illegally - voted twice they should be prosecuted. Just like anyone else. And we should tighten up the rules, if necessary, not to suppress voting but to maintain the integrity of our voting system.

    Nope. If you live in two areas and pay council tax in each area you get two votes. Taxation without representation is tyranny.

    GE of course not - one vote only.
    You now pay a premium on council tax for second home i think it can be 50% or 100%
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,406

    rkrkrk said:

    Scott_P said:

    @steve_hawkes: Rumours David Gauke may be about to signal that he wants to bring forward an increase in state retirement age. Would be a good day to do it

    A quick glance at the Conservative manifesto doesn't find any mention of raising the retirement age. Can anyone give me a page number?
    They say state pension will go up in line with life expectancy on page 66 online, 64 in document.

    "We will also ensure that the state pension age reflects increases in life expectancy, while protecting each generation fairly".

    I think that's the basis of it...
    Trouble is life expectancy is dropping.
    I think the rate of increase has slowed but still rising.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-40608256
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,180

    rkrkrk said:

    Scott_P said:

    @steve_hawkes: Rumours David Gauke may be about to signal that he wants to bring forward an increase in state retirement age. Would be a good day to do it

    A quick glance at the Conservative manifesto doesn't find any mention of raising the retirement age. Can anyone give me a page number?
    They say state pension will go up in line with life expectancy on page 66 online, 64 in document.

    "We will also ensure that the state pension age reflects increases in life expectancy, while protecting each generation fairly".

    I think that's the basis of it...
    Trouble is life expectancy is dropping.
    Wrong.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 52,846
    edited July 2017
  • PeterMannionPeterMannion Posts: 712
    PClipp said:

    Is the answer Michael 'Govey' Gove?

    If the question is "Who is the most unpopular member of this Tory Cabinet?", then the answer, based on the podcast, would indeed seem to be the hapless Gove.
    So undeserved on poor Govey

    He should listen to the Master Negotiator (Brexit Bulldog)'s advice on how to return to favour
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,111
    nichomar said:

    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    From one of the previous threads:

    "Do they pay local council tax in both areas? If not, then yes, vote once. if they do, then they should be able to vote once in each council area they have to pay council tax in."

    Absolutely not. One person, one vote. We don't link the right to vote to how much tax we pay. Otherwise those who pay higher rate tax would get more votes than others.

    If students have - illegally - voted twice they should be prosecuted. Just like anyone else. And we should tighten up the rules, if necessary, not to suppress voting but to maintain the integrity of our voting system.

    Nope. If you live in two areas and pay council tax in each area you get two votes. Taxation without representation is tyranny.

    GE of course not - one vote only.
    You now pay a premium on council tax for second home i think it can be 50% or 100%
    Because often councils want to stop half-empty homes when there is local demand. Not 100% sure the union set is that big between second homes and local demand but that is the rationale.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,485
    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    From one of the previous threads:

    "Do they pay local council tax in both areas? If not, then yes, vote once. if they do, then they should be able to vote once in each council area they have to pay council tax in."

    Absolutely not. One person, one vote. We don't link the right to vote to how much tax we pay. Otherwise those who pay higher rate tax would get more votes than others.

    If students have - illegally - voted twice they should be prosecuted. Just like anyone else. And we should tighten up the rules, if necessary, not to suppress voting but to maintain the integrity of our voting system.

    Nope. If you live in two areas and pay council tax in each area you get two votes. Taxation without representation is tyranny.

    GE of course not - one vote only.
    No. Your vote is not - and should not - be dependant on how much tax you pay. Should those on benefits or unemployed be denied the vote because they pay no tax? Of course not.

    And students don't pay council tax, in any case. They are exempt.
  • felix said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Scott_P said:

    @steve_hawkes: Rumours David Gauke may be about to signal that he wants to bring forward an increase in state retirement age. Would be a good day to do it

    A quick glance at the Conservative manifesto doesn't find any mention of raising the retirement age. Can anyone give me a page number?
    They say state pension will go up in line with life expectancy on page 66 online, 64 in document.

    "We will also ensure that the state pension age reflects increases in life expectancy, while protecting each generation fairly".

    I think that's the basis of it...
    Trouble is life expectancy is dropping.
    Wrong.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-40608256
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 50,288
    nichomar said:

    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    From one of the previous threads:

    "Do they pay local council tax in both areas? If not, then yes, vote once. if they do, then they should be able to vote once in each council area they have to pay council tax in."

    Absolutely not. One person, one vote. We don't link the right to vote to how much tax we pay. Otherwise those who pay higher rate tax would get more votes than others.

    If students have - illegally - voted twice they should be prosecuted. Just like anyone else. And we should tighten up the rules, if necessary, not to suppress voting but to maintain the integrity of our voting system.

    Nope. If you live in two areas and pay council tax in each area you get two votes. Taxation without representation is tyranny.

    GE of course not - one vote only.
    You now pay a premium on council tax for second home i think it can be 50% or 100%
    nichomar said:

    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    From one of the previous threads:

    "Do they pay local council tax in both areas? If not, then yes, vote once. if they do, then they should be able to vote once in each council area they have to pay council tax in."

    Absolutely not. One person, one vote. We don't link the right to vote to how much tax we pay. Otherwise those who pay higher rate tax would get more votes than others.

    If students have - illegally - voted twice they should be prosecuted. Just like anyone else. And we should tighten up the rules, if necessary, not to suppress voting but to maintain the integrity of our voting system.

    Nope. If you live in two areas and pay council tax in each area you get two votes. Taxation without representation is tyranny.

    GE of course not - one vote only.
    You now pay a premium on council tax for second home i think it can be 50% or 100%
    Eh? Second homes can still get a discount, up to your local council, although most have of course withdrawn it as part of the cuts. There is no premium (except that you can't get single person discount) unless the property has been empty for two years, after which point it is up to your council whether to charge a premium or not.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 50,288
    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    From one of the previous threads:

    "Do they pay local council tax in both areas? If not, then yes, vote once. if they do, then they should be able to vote once in each council area they have to pay council tax in."

    Absolutely not. One person, one vote. We don't link the right to vote to how much tax we pay. Otherwise those who pay higher rate tax would get more votes than others.

    If students have - illegally - voted twice they should be prosecuted. Just like anyone else. And we should tighten up the rules, if necessary, not to suppress voting but to maintain the integrity of our voting system.

    Nope. If you live in two areas and pay council tax in each area you get two votes. Taxation without representation is tyranny.

    GE of course not - one vote only.
    No-one gets two votes. If you have two (genuine) homes, you get one vote for each council, if they are different; if the homes are in the same area you only get one vote.
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    edited July 2017
    Students should have one vote in local elections. The default should be that they vote in their home town, where they have grown up & have some connection to the community.

    They are temporary residents in University towns, at least during their undergraduate days.

    One of the reasons why this is important is that it has a distorting effect on local elections in University towns. How many students are interested in footpath repairs, or waste collection, or street lighting, or pot holes, or fly tipping? The students who do vote are the party tribalists.

    In my ward at the last local election, we even had the misfortune to have a candidate (for the LibDems) who was a student. What did he want to do?

    He wanted us to vote for him to send a message to Donald Trump. Seriously, he wrote that as the reason why he should be elected to the local council.

    This is not what local elections should be about.

    They should be about choosing competent, fair-minded people, interested in their local community, who are willing to serve it honestly and fairly. In practise, this involves doing a lot of low-level, and fairly boring work.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    IanB2 said:

    nichomar said:

    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    From one of the previous threads:

    "Do they pay local council tax in both areas? If not, then yes, vote once. if they do, then they should be able to vote once in each council area they have to pay council tax in."

    Absolutely not. One person, one vote. We don't link the right to vote to how much tax we pay. Otherwise those who pay higher rate tax would get more votes than others.

    If students have - illegally - voted twice they should be prosecuted. Just like anyone else. And we should tighten up the rules, if necessary, not to suppress voting but to maintain the integrity of our voting system.

    Nope. If you live in two areas and pay council tax in each area you get two votes. Taxation without representation is tyranny.

    GE of course not - one vote only.
    You now pay a premium on council tax for second home i think it can be 50% or 100%
    nichomar said:

    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    From one of the previous threads:

    "Do they pay local council tax in both areas? If not, then yes, vote once. if they do, then they should be able to vote once in each council area they have to pay council tax in."

    Absolutely not. One person, one vote. We don't link the right to vote to how much tax we pay. Otherwise those who pay higher rate tax would get more votes than others.

    If students have - illegally - voted twice they should be prosecuted. Just like anyone else. And we should tighten up the rules, if necessary, not to suppress voting but to maintain the integrity of our voting system.

    Nope. If you live in two areas and pay council tax in each area you get two votes. Taxation without representation is tyranny.

    GE of course not - one vote only.
    You now pay a premium on council tax for second home i think it can be 50% or 100%
    Eh? Second homes can still get a discount, up to your local council, although most have of course withdrawn it as part of the cuts. There is no premium (except that you can't get single person discount) unless the property has been empty for two years, after which point it is up to your council whether to charge a premium or not.
    The ammendment passed in 2014 allows councils to charge up to 100% premium if it so chooses on 2nd homes.
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    IanB2 said:

    nichomar said:

    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    From one of the previous threads:

    "Do they pay local council tax in both areas? If not, then yes, vote once. if they do, then they should be able to vote once in each council area they have to pay council tax in."

    Absolutely not. One person, one vote. We don't link the right to vote to how much tax we pay. Otherwise those who pay higher rate tax would get more votes than others.

    If students have - illegally - voted twice they should be prosecuted. Just like anyone else. And we should tighten up the rules, if necessary, not to suppress voting but to maintain the integrity of our voting system.

    Nope. If you live in two areas and pay council tax in each area you get two votes. Taxation without representation is tyranny.

    GE of course not - one vote only.
    You now pay a premium on council tax for second home i think it can be 50% or 100%
    nichomar said:

    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    From one of the previous threads:

    "Do they pay local council tax in both areas? If not, then yes, vote once. if they do, then they should be able to vote once in each council area they have to pay council tax in."

    Absolutely not. One person, one vote. We don't link the right to vote to how much tax we pay. Otherwise those who pay higher rate tax would get more votes than others.

    If students have - illegally - voted twice they should be prosecuted. Just like anyone else. And we should tighten up the rules, if necessary, not to suppress voting but to maintain the integrity of our voting system.

    Nope. If you live in two areas and pay council tax in each area you get two votes. Taxation without representation is tyranny.

    GE of course not - one vote only.
    You now pay a premium on council tax for second home i think it can be 50% or 100%
    Eh? Second homes can still get a discount, up to your local council, although most have of course withdrawn it as part of the cuts. There is no premium (except that you can't get single person discount) unless the property has been empty for two years, after which point it is up to your council whether to charge a premium or not.
    Nichomar is correct. In some areas of the country (e.g., Ceredigion), this is an automatic premium on second homes.

  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 50,288
    edited July 2017
    nichomar said:

    IanB2 said:

    nichomar said:

    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    From one of the previous threads:

    "Do they pay local council tax in both areas? If not, then yes, vote once. if they do, then they should be able to vote once in each council area they have to pay council tax in."

    Absolutely not. One person, one vote. We don't link the right to vote to how much tax we pay. Otherwise those who pay higher rate tax would get more votes than others.

    If students have - illegally - voted twice they should be prosecuted. Just like anyone else. And we should tighten up the rules, if necessary, not to suppress voting but to maintain the integrity of our voting system.

    Nope. If you live in two areas and pay council tax in each area you get two votes. Taxation without representation is tyranny.

    GE of course not - one vote only.
    You now pay a premium on council tax for second home i think it can be 50% or 100%
    nichomar said:

    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    From one of the previous threads:

    "Do they pay local council tax in both areas? If not, then yes, vote once. if they do, then they should be able to vote once in each council area they have to pay council tax in."

    Absolutely not. One person, one vote. We don't link the right to vote to how much tax we pay. Otherwise those who pay higher rate tax would get more votes than others.

    If students have - illegally - voted twice they should be prosecuted. Just like anyone else. And we should tighten up the rules, if necessary, not to suppress voting but to maintain the integrity of our voting system.

    Nope. If you live in two areas and pay council tax in each area you get two votes. Taxation without representation is tyranny.

    GE of course not - one vote only.
    You now pay a premium on council tax for second home i think it can be 50% or 100%
    Eh? Second homes can still get a discount, up to your local council, although most have of course withdrawn it as part of the cuts. There is no premium (except that you can't get single person discount) unless the property has been empty for two years, after which point it is up to your council whether to charge a premium or not.
    The ammendment passed in 2014 allows councils to charge up to 100% premium if it so chooses on 2nd homes.
    Are you sure (other than the two-year empty provision I mentioned in my earlier post). The current government and local authority websites have no mention of it.

    Edit/ yes, I see the provisions come in as an option IN WALES. I know some West Country councils would like to do the same thing. As far as I know few councils have yet adopted?
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    nichomar said:

    IanB2 said:

    nichomar said:

    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    From one of the previous threads:

    "Do they pay local council tax in both areas? If not, then yes, vote once. if they do, then they should be able to vote once in each council area they have to pay council tax in."

    Absolutely not. One person, one vote. We don't link the right to vote to how much tax we pay. Otherwise those who pay higher rate tax would get more votes than others.

    If students have - illegally - voted twice they should be prosecuted. Just like anyone else. And we should tighten up the rules, if necessary, not to suppress voting but to maintain the integrity of our voting system.

    Nope. If you live in two areas and pay council tax in each area you get two votes. Taxation without representation is tyranny.

    GE of course not - one vote only.
    You now pay a premium on council tax for second home i think it can be 50% or 100%
    nichomar said:

    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    From one of the previous threads:

    "Do they pay local council tax in both areas? If not, then yes, vote once. if they do, then they should be able to vote once in each council area they have to pay council tax in."

    Absolutely not. One person, one vote. We don't link the right to vote to how much tax we pay. Otherwise those who pay higher rate tax would get more votes than others.

    If students have - illegally - voted twice they should be prosecuted. Just like anyone else. And we should tighten up the rules, if necessary, not to suppress voting but to maintain the integrity of our voting system.

    Nope. If you live in two areas and pay council tax in each area you get two votes. Taxation without representation is tyranny.

    GE of course not - one vote only.
    You now pay a premium on council tax for second home i think it can be 50% or 100%
    Eh? Second homes can still get a discount, up to your local council, although most have of course withdrawn it as part of the cuts. There is no premium (except that you can't get single person discount) unless the property has been empty for two years, after which point it is up to your council whether to charge a premium or not.
    The ammendment passed in 2014 allows councils to charge up to 100% premium if it so chooses on 2nd homes.
    That may only apply to Wales though will look deeper
  • PClippPClipp Posts: 2,138

    Students should have one vote in local elections. The default should be that they vote in their home town, where they have grown up & have some connection to the community.

    They are temporary residents in University towns, at least during their undergraduate days.

    One of the reasons why this is important is that it has a distorting effect on local elections in University towns. How many students are interested in footpath repairs, or waste collection, or street lighting, or pot holes, or fly tipping? The students who do vote are the party tribalists.
    In my ward at the last local election, we even had the misfortune to have a candidate (for the LibDems) who was a student. What did he want to do?
    He wanted us to vote for him to send a message to Donald Trump. Seriously, he wrote that as the reason why he should be elected to the local council.
    This is not what local elections should be about.
    They should be about choosing competent, fair-minded people, interested in their local community, who are willing to serve it honestly and fairly. In practise, this involves doing a lot of low-level, and fairly boring work.

    Seems fair enough to me. People can vote for candidates for whatever reason, and candidates can stand on the same basis.

    Presumably all the people who like and admire Donald Trump voted Conservative.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 63,523
    Scott_P said:

    @steve_hawkes: Rumours David Gauke may be about to signal that he wants to bring forward an increase in state retirement age. Would be a good day to do it

    Oh FFS. I was saying only the other day to a mate that the buggers would pull this stunt straight after the election, meaning I will have to wait another year.
  • PongPong Posts: 4,693
    I think I remember her.

    She used to be somebody important, didn't she?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,971
    Pong said:

    I think I remember her.

    She used to be somebody important, didn't she?
    Marginally.

  • Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 10,069

    Scott_P said:

    @steve_hawkes: Rumours David Gauke may be about to signal that he wants to bring forward an increase in state retirement age. Would be a good day to do it

    Oh FFS. I was saying only the other day to a mate that the buggers would pull this stunt straight after the election, meaning I will have to wait another year.
    Bollocks - catches me by a few months.....

    Can't get too worked up though as it'll be 70 at best... these are baby-steps towards that.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,971
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 63,523
    Have I missed something?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,111
    edited July 2017
    Cyclefree said:

    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    From one of the previous threads:

    "Do they pay local council tax in both areas? If not, then yes, vote once. if they do, then they should be able to vote once in each council area they have to pay council tax in."

    Absolutely not. One person, one vote. We don't link the right to vote to how much tax we pay. Otherwise those who pay higher rate tax would get more votes than others.

    If students have - illegally - voted twice they should be prosecuted. Just like anyone else. And we should tighten up the rules, if necessary, not to suppress voting but to maintain the integrity of our voting system.

    Nope. If you live in two areas and pay council tax in each area you get two votes. Taxation without representation is tyranny.

    GE of course not - one vote only.
    No. Your vote is not - and should not - be dependant on how much tax you pay. Should those on benefits or unemployed be denied the vote because they pay no tax? Of course not.

    And students don't pay council tax, in any case. They are exempt.
    What are you talking about? If I live in Sillyshire and also Islington I pay council tax in each of those places. The respective councils spend those taxes on roads, hospitals, whatever. As a resident of each place I have a right to vote in the council in each place which I think spends it in the way I want.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,111
    IanB2 said:

    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    From one of the previous threads:

    "Do they pay local council tax in both areas? If not, then yes, vote once. if they do, then they should be able to vote once in each council area they have to pay council tax in."

    Absolutely not. One person, one vote. We don't link the right to vote to how much tax we pay. Otherwise those who pay higher rate tax would get more votes than others.

    If students have - illegally - voted twice they should be prosecuted. Just like anyone else. And we should tighten up the rules, if necessary, not to suppress voting but to maintain the integrity of our voting system.

    Nope. If you live in two areas and pay council tax in each area you get two votes. Taxation without representation is tyranny.

    GE of course not - one vote only.
    No-one gets two votes. If you have two (genuine) homes, you get one vote for each council, if they are different; if the homes are in the same area you only get one vote.
    Yes. This is what I have been saying. Why is it difficult to understand? Am I having a mad typing moment?
  • ThreeQuidderThreeQuidder Posts: 6,133

    Scott_P said:

    @steve_hawkes: Rumours David Gauke may be about to signal that he wants to bring forward an increase in state retirement age. Would be a good day to do it

    Oh FFS. I was saying only the other day to a mate that the buggers would pull this stunt straight after the election, meaning I will have to wait another year.
    I was born in 1979. I don't expect to ever get a state pension.
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 5,383

    Scott_P said:

    @steve_hawkes: Rumours David Gauke may be about to signal that he wants to bring forward an increase in state retirement age. Would be a good day to do it

    Oh FFS. I was saying only the other day to a mate that the buggers would pull this stunt straight after the election, meaning I will have to wait another year.
    Bollocks - catches me by a few months.....

    Can't get too worked up though as it'll be 70 at best... these are baby-steps towards that.
    Yep, about 2.5 months on my pension age, assuming it is still going to be structured the same.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,882
    I think it would be eminently sensible to commit to the state pension age rising by six weeks every year.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @youngvulgarian: can't wait to retire at 87 and spend the last few years of my life picking fruit in honour of Brexit Britain x
  • ThreeQuidderThreeQuidder Posts: 6,133
    calum said:
    This was always the case because the extra funding for NI (not the DUP) was always conditional on the NI Assembly rejuvenating.
  • rural_voterrural_voter Posts: 2,038
    rcs1000 said:

    I think it would be eminently sensible to commit to the state pension age rising by six weeks every year.
    Not until this observation is explained:
    http://www.itv.com/news/2017-07-18/warnings-as-increases-in-life-expectancy-stagnates/
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,141
    Scott_P said:

    @youngvulgarian: can't wait to retire at 87 and spend the last few years of my life picking fruit in honour of Brexit Britain x

    I'm guessing this would have happened regardless of Brexit.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,882

    rcs1000 said:

    I think it would be eminently sensible to commit to the state pension age rising by six weeks every year.
    Not until this observation is explained:
    http://www.itv.com/news/2017-07-18/warnings-as-increases-in-life-expectancy-stagnates/
    My view is that the state should not be in the business of depressing the savings rate.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,074
    Good afternoon, everyone.

    Not at all surprised at the rising pension age. Will keep going, I imagine, to 72-3 or so.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,141
    IanB2 said:

    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    From one of the previous threads:

    "Do they pay local council tax in both areas? If not, then yes, vote once. if they do, then they should be able to vote once in each council area they have to pay council tax in."

    Absolutely not. One person, one vote. We don't link the right to vote to how much tax we pay. Otherwise those who pay higher rate tax would get more votes than others.

    If students have - illegally - voted twice they should be prosecuted. Just like anyone else. And we should tighten up the rules, if necessary, not to suppress voting but to maintain the integrity of our voting system.

    Nope. If you live in two areas and pay council tax in each area you get two votes. Taxation without representation is tyranny.

    GE of course not - one vote only.
    No-one gets two votes. If you have two (genuine) homes, you get one vote for each council, if they are different; if the homes are in the same area you only get one vote.
    No one gets two votes, except those that do. :D
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,141

    rcs1000 said:

    I think it would be eminently sensible to commit to the state pension age rising by six weeks every year.
    Not until this observation is explained:
    http://www.itv.com/news/2017-07-18/warnings-as-increases-in-life-expectancy-stagnates/
    The pension age has a lot of catching up to do...
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,971

    Good afternoon, everyone.

    Not at all surprised at the rising pension age. Will keep going, I imagine, to 72-3 or so.

    Good afternoon, Mr.D.

    Did you see the transcript of Kvyat's radio messages at Silverstone ?
    In some ways a minor masterpiece...
    This is [censored by FOM] Formula 1 it’s not [censored by FOM] [censored by FOM] racing. [Censored by FOM] [censored by FOM]....
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,180

    felix said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Scott_P said:

    @steve_hawkes: Rumours David Gauke may be about to signal that he wants to bring forward an increase in state retirement age. Would be a good day to do it

    A quick glance at the Conservative manifesto doesn't find any mention of raising the retirement age. Can anyone give me a page number?
    They say state pension will go up in line with life expectancy on page 66 online, 64 in document.

    "We will also ensure that the state pension age reflects increases in life expectancy, while protecting each generation fairly".

    I think that's the basis of it...
    Trouble is life expectancy is dropping.
    Wrong.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-40608256
    I take it you can't read a graph.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,074
    Who says HMRC don't have a sense of humour? They put the instruction to use black ink at the very back of the self-assessment guide.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,074
    Mr. B, I missed the Torpedo's expletives. He sounds very redacted.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,141
    felix said:

    felix said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Scott_P said:

    @steve_hawkes: Rumours David Gauke may be about to signal that he wants to bring forward an increase in state retirement age. Would be a good day to do it

    A quick glance at the Conservative manifesto doesn't find any mention of raising the retirement age. Can anyone give me a page number?
    They say state pension will go up in line with life expectancy on page 66 online, 64 in document.

    "We will also ensure that the state pension age reflects increases in life expectancy, while protecting each generation fairly".

    I think that's the basis of it...
    Trouble is life expectancy is dropping.
    Wrong.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-40608256
    I take it you can't read a graph.
    If only they had a graph showing the rate of change of the change in life expectancy per year... :D
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,520
    Pong said:

    I think I remember her.

    She used to be somebody important, didn't she?
    She was (briefly) my MP. Several days of door knocking I'll never get back, the ungrateful b***h!
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 5,383
    RobD said:

    felix said:

    felix said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Scott_P said:

    @steve_hawkes: Rumours David Gauke may be about to signal that he wants to bring forward an increase in state retirement age. Would be a good day to do it

    A quick glance at the Conservative manifesto doesn't find any mention of raising the retirement age. Can anyone give me a page number?
    They say state pension will go up in line with life expectancy on page 66 online, 64 in document.

    "We will also ensure that the state pension age reflects increases in life expectancy, while protecting each generation fairly".

    I think that's the basis of it...
    Trouble is life expectancy is dropping.
    Wrong.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-40608256
    I take it you can't read a graph.
    If only they had a graph showing the rate of change of the change in life expectancy per year... :D
    Given these stats can only be collated in arrears, and given the trend line, 'life expectancy is falling' could well be true at the present moment. Stick a 'probably' in there and you're covered.
  • OT Things are getting stinky here in sunny Birmingham as the binman strike shows no sign of ending. We are having our own summer of discontent as rubbish begins to pile up in the streets. Expect a dent in the popularity of the Labour-run council!
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,111

    OT Things are getting stinky here in sunny Birmingham as the binman strike shows no sign of ending. We are having our own summer of discontent as rubbish begins to pile up in the streets. Expect a dent in the popularity of the Labour-run council!

    pay and conditions? What's the reason?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,141
    edited July 2017
    Pro_Rata said:

    RobD said:

    felix said:

    felix said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Scott_P said:

    @steve_hawkes: Rumours David Gauke may be about to signal that he wants to bring forward an increase in state retirement age. Would be a good day to do it

    A quick glance at the Conservative manifesto doesn't find any mention of raising the retirement age. Can anyone give me a page number?
    They say state pension will go up in line with life expectancy on page 66 online, 64 in document.

    "We will also ensure that the state pension age reflects increases in life expectancy, while protecting each generation fairly".

    I think that's the basis of it...
    Trouble is life expectancy is dropping.
    Wrong.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-40608256
    I take it you can't read a graph.
    If only they had a graph showing the rate of change of the change in life expectancy per year... :D
    Given these stats can only be collated in arrears, and given the trend line, 'life expectancy is falling' could well be true at the present moment. Stick a 'probably' in there and you're covered.
    That graph shows it has gone up as many times as it has gone down in recent years. So probably not 'probably'.
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    RobD said:

    IanB2 said:

    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    From one of the previous threads:

    "Do they pay local council tax in both areas? If not, then yes, vote once. if they do, then they should be able to vote once in each council area they have to pay council tax in."

    Absolutely not. One person, one vote. We don't link the right to vote to how much tax we pay. Otherwise those who pay higher rate tax would get more votes than others.

    If students have - illegally - voted twice they should be prosecuted. Just like anyone else. And we should tighten up the rules, if necessary, not to suppress voting but to maintain the integrity of our voting system.

    Nope. If you live in two areas and pay council tax in each area you get two votes. Taxation without representation is tyranny.

    GE of course not - one vote only.
    No-one gets two votes. If you have two (genuine) homes, you get one vote for each council, if they are different; if the homes are in the same area you only get one vote.
    No one gets two votes, except those that do. :D
    I got 823 recently, and used them all!

    [buffs nails]
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,074
    edited July 2017
    Mr. Enjineeya, my sympathies, we had one of those in this part of the world a few years ago.

    The current conditions won't be helping matters.

    Edited extra bit: checked my records and, alas, whilst I'm green on Cable it's rather less than I'd imagined. Ah well. Odd how misconceptions can form.
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    Scott_P said:

    @youngvulgarian: can't wait to retire at 87 and spend the last few years of my life picking fruit in honour of Brexit Britain x

    It'll all be picked by robots within a few years.

    He'll have to do the jobs that robots refuse to do.
  • TOPPING said:

    OT Things are getting stinky here in sunny Birmingham as the binman strike shows no sign of ending. We are having our own summer of discontent as rubbish begins to pile up in the streets. Expect a dent in the popularity of the Labour-run council!

    pay and conditions? What's the reason?
    As fas as I can tell, the council wants to save money by redefining the roles of some of the binmen, effectively resulting in a pay cut for some of them. Unison claims that this will affect safety, but I'm not sure whether there's any evidence for this.
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071

    TOPPING said:

    OT Things are getting stinky here in sunny Birmingham as the binman strike shows no sign of ending. We are having our own summer of discontent as rubbish begins to pile up in the streets. Expect a dent in the popularity of the Labour-run council!

    pay and conditions? What's the reason?
    As fas as I can tell, the council wants to save money by redefining the roles of some of the binmen, effectively resulting in a pay cut for some of them. Unison claims that this will affect safety, but I'm not sure whether there's any evidence for this.
    "safety" is always a safe bet if you can't use "racism" or "climate change".
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,849
    GeoffM said:

    RobD said:

    IanB2 said:

    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    From one of the previous threads:

    "Do they pay local council tax in both areas? If not, then yes, vote once. if they do, then they should be able to vote once in each council area they have to pay council tax in."

    Absolutely not. One person, one vote. We don't link the right to vote to how much tax we pay. Otherwise those who pay higher rate tax would get more votes than others.

    If students have - illegally - voted twice they should be prosecuted. Just like anyone else. And we should tighten up the rules, if necessary, not to suppress voting but to maintain the integrity of our voting system.

    Nope. If you live in two areas and pay council tax in each area you get two votes. Taxation without representation is tyranny.

    GE of course not - one vote only.
    No-one gets two votes. If you have two (genuine) homes, you get one vote for each council, if they are different; if the homes are in the same area you only get one vote.
    No one gets two votes, except those that do. :D
    I got 823 recently, and used them all!

    [buffs nails]
    And she still lost her majority! :smile:
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,074
    Mr. Eagles, many swear words within this:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxSlzCEmFhI
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,141

    GeoffM said:

    RobD said:

    IanB2 said:

    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    From one of the previous threads:

    "Do they pay local council tax in both areas? If not, then yes, vote once. if they do, then they should be able to vote once in each council area they have to pay council tax in."

    Absolutely not. One person, one vote. We don't link the right to vote to how much tax we pay. Otherwise those who pay higher rate tax would get more votes than others.

    If students have - illegally - voted twice they should be prosecuted. Just like anyone else. And we should tighten up the rules, if necessary, not to suppress voting but to maintain the integrity of our voting system.

    Nope. If you live in two areas and pay council tax in each area you get two votes. Taxation without representation is tyranny.

    GE of course not - one vote only.
    No-one gets two votes. If you have two (genuine) homes, you get one vote for each council, if they are different; if the homes are in the same area you only get one vote.
    No one gets two votes, except those that do. :D
    I got 823 recently, and used them all!

    [buffs nails]
    And she still lost her majority! :smile:
    GeoffM's referring to his votes in the EU referendum :D
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,726
    Scott_P said:

    @youngvulgarian: can't wait to retire at 87 and spend the last few years of my life picking fruit in honour of Brexit Britain x

    Only if she's lucky.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,849
    RobD said:

    GeoffM said:

    RobD said:

    IanB2 said:

    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    From one of the previous threads:

    "Do they pay local council tax in both areas? If not, then yes, vote once. if they do, then they should be able to vote once in each council area they have to pay council tax in."

    Absolutely not. One person, one vote. We don't link the right to vote to how much tax we pay. Otherwise those who pay higher rate tax would get more votes than others.

    If students have - illegally - voted twice they should be prosecuted. Just like anyone else. And we should tighten up the rules, if necessary, not to suppress voting but to maintain the integrity of our voting system.

    Nope. If you live in two areas and pay council tax in each area you get two votes. Taxation without representation is tyranny.

    GE of course not - one vote only.
    No-one gets two votes. If you have two (genuine) homes, you get one vote for each council, if they are different; if the homes are in the same area you only get one vote.
    No one gets two votes, except those that do. :D
    I got 823 recently, and used them all!

    [buffs nails]
    And she still lost her majority! :smile:
    GeoffM's referring to his votes in the EU referendum :D
    Ah right dammit - I demand a recount!
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,520
    Okay, another brief delurk to laugh at the BBC. Given that the media in general love nothing more than talking about themselves this is going to run for days as everyone compares their salaries.

    A few notes on the list:

    The worst excesses, as always, are in radio. BBC are top of the tree in this medium, the biggest earners have been there for decades and are less likely to get poached by commercial media. They could probably cut every one of those on the list to under £150k and they wouldn't complain.

    Graham Norton - this published salary is for his radio and Eurovision work - his TV show is made by his own production company (So Television) who pay him separately.

    Chris Evans - this may include some Top Gear salary from last year, although most of his earnings from that show will come from Worldwide royalties. Ditto why Matt Le Blanc doesn't appear on the list.

    There will be loads of others they've managed to get 'off the books' in similar ways, by subcontracting production or paying a basic 'salary' and a large bonus from Worldwide. Also people who are genuine contractors, working for a number of media outlets.

    Lineker - I know footballer salaries are mad, but does he really deserve nearly 12,000 licence fees? People are going to watch MOTD no matter who presents it.

    Don't recognise most of the entertainment names, I guess mainly from Eastenders and the dancing show. What did we pay Emilia Clarke £200k for, she's the young actress from Game of Thrones who can't act but can get naked?!

    Alex Jones must have a really good agent, she was a regional TV nobody five years ago when the One Show picked her up - can only guess that someone tried to poach her and the Beeb matched the offer to avoid changing the lineup of the show twice in quick succession.

    News - this is obviously where most of the media attention will be, as 20 people there earn more than the PM, plus the original 'autocutie' Fiona Bruce. The only salary justified there is Andrew Neil, but does even he really deserve to earn twice as much as the ministers he holds to account? An interesting side effect will be if people in other TV news organisations (ITV, C4, Sky) get asked about their salaries. I'd guess Adam Boulton is probably on close to £1m at Sky for example.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,726

    rkrkrk said:

    Scott_P said:

    @steve_hawkes: Rumours David Gauke may be about to signal that he wants to bring forward an increase in state retirement age. Would be a good day to do it

    A quick glance at the Conservative manifesto doesn't find any mention of raising the retirement age. Can anyone give me a page number?
    They say state pension will go up in line with life expectancy on page 66 online, 64 in document.

    "We will also ensure that the state pension age reflects increases in life expectancy, while protecting each generation fairly".

    I think that's the basis of it...
    Trouble is life expectancy is dropping.
    No it isn't.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,849
    RobD said:

    Pro_Rata said:

    RobD said:

    felix said:

    felix said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Scott_P said:

    @steve_hawkes: Rumours David Gauke may be about to signal that he wants to bring forward an increase in state retirement age. Would be a good day to do it

    A quick glance at the Conservative manifesto doesn't find any mention of raising the retirement age. Can anyone give me a page number?
    They say state pension will go up in line with life expectancy on page 66 online, 64 in document.

    "We will also ensure that the state pension age reflects increases in life expectancy, while protecting each generation fairly".

    I think that's the basis of it...
    Trouble is life expectancy is dropping.
    Wrong.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-40608256
    I take it you can't read a graph.
    If only they had a graph showing the rate of change of the change in life expectancy per year... :D
    Given these stats can only be collated in arrears, and given the trend line, 'life expectancy is falling' could well be true at the present moment. Stick a 'probably' in there and you're covered.
    That graph shows it has gone up as many times as it has gone down in recent years. So probably not 'probably'.
    Another wonderful result for 7 years of austerity!
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,726
    Sensible and necessary. Norway has had it at 67 for many years.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,141

    RobD said:

    Pro_Rata said:

    RobD said:

    felix said:

    felix said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Scott_P said:

    @steve_hawkes: Rumours David Gauke may be about to signal that he wants to bring forward an increase in state retirement age. Would be a good day to do it

    A quick glance at the Conservative manifesto doesn't find any mention of raising the retirement age. Can anyone give me a page number?
    They say state pension will go up in line with life expectancy on page 66 online, 64 in document.

    "We will also ensure that the state pension age reflects increases in life expectancy, while protecting each generation fairly".

    I think that's the basis of it...
    Trouble is life expectancy is dropping.
    Wrong.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-40608256
    I take it you can't read a graph.
    If only they had a graph showing the rate of change of the change in life expectancy per year... :D
    Given these stats can only be collated in arrears, and given the trend line, 'life expectancy is falling' could well be true at the present moment. Stick a 'probably' in there and you're covered.
    That graph shows it has gone up as many times as it has gone down in recent years. So probably not 'probably'.
    Another wonderful result for 7 years of austerity!
    Hm, would like to see evidence of that link.
  • felix said:

    felix said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Scott_P said:

    @steve_hawkes: Rumours David Gauke may be about to signal that he wants to bring forward an increase in state retirement age. Would be a good day to do it

    A quick glance at the Conservative manifesto doesn't find any mention of raising the retirement age. Can anyone give me a page number?
    They say state pension will go up in line with life expectancy on page 66 online, 64 in document.

    "We will also ensure that the state pension age reflects increases in life expectancy, while protecting each generation fairly".

    I think that's the basis of it...
    Trouble is life expectancy is dropping.
    Wrong.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-40608256
    I take it you can't read a graph.
    The graph shows the rise trending downwards before hitting zero in 2015. I take it you can't extrapolate.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,141

    felix said:

    felix said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Scott_P said:

    @steve_hawkes: Rumours David Gauke may be about to signal that he wants to bring forward an increase in state retirement age. Would be a good day to do it

    A quick glance at the Conservative manifesto doesn't find any mention of raising the retirement age. Can anyone give me a page number?
    They say state pension will go up in line with life expectancy on page 66 online, 64 in document.

    "We will also ensure that the state pension age reflects increases in life expectancy, while protecting each generation fairly".

    I think that's the basis of it...
    Trouble is life expectancy is dropping.
    Wrong.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-40608256
    I take it you can't read a graph.
    The graph shows the rise trending downwards before hitting zero in 2015. I take it you can't extrapolate.
    It's trended down before and gone up again. No evidence here that it is dropping.. not yet!
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,635
    On the BBC.
    Andrew Neil seems v good value at 250k to me. God knows why alot of them are paid what they are though
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,726
    The man who punched the Dalai Lama and told Picasso he couldn't draw.

    I could listen to his stories all day.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,726

    felix said:

    felix said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Scott_P said:

    @steve_hawkes: Rumours David Gauke may be about to signal that he wants to bring forward an increase in state retirement age. Would be a good day to do it

    A quick glance at the Conservative manifesto doesn't find any mention of raising the retirement age. Can anyone give me a page number?
    They say state pension will go up in line with life expectancy on page 66 online, 64 in document.

    "We will also ensure that the state pension age reflects increases in life expectancy, while protecting each generation fairly".

    I think that's the basis of it...
    Trouble is life expectancy is dropping.
    Wrong.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-40608256
    I take it you can't read a graph.
    The graph shows the rise trending downwards before hitting zero in 2015. I take it you can't extrapolate.
    I take it you can't read graphs that go back more than a few years.
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071

    RobD said:

    GeoffM said:

    RobD said:

    IanB2 said:

    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    From one of the previous threads:

    "Do they pay local council tax in both areas? If not, then yes, vote once. if they do, then they should be able to vote once in each council area they have to pay council tax in."

    Absolutely not. One person, one vote. We don't link the right to vote to how much tax we pay. Otherwise those who pay higher rate tax would get more votes than others.

    If students have - illegally - voted twice they should be prosecuted. Just like anyone else. And we should tighten up the rules, if necessary, not to suppress voting but to maintain the integrity of our voting system.

    Nope. If you live in two areas and pay council tax in each area you get two votes. Taxation without representation is tyranny.

    GE of course not - one vote only.
    No-one gets two votes. If you have two (genuine) homes, you get one vote for each council, if they are different; if the homes are in the same area you only get one vote.
    No one gets two votes, except those that do. :D
    I got 823 recently, and used them all!

    [buffs nails]
    And she still lost her majority! :smile:
    GeoffM's referring to his votes in the EU referendum :D
    Ah right dammit - I demand a recount!
    Apologies for the rather niche in-joke.

    823 Leave votes here in an area where 96% voted Remain.
    Nobody else will admit voting Leave around here for fear of losing their job or being lynched. So I am the Only Leaver In The Village and I'm standing up and taking the flak for the shy ones.

    That, plus MI5 really *did* drop a stuffed ballot box of blank voting papers outside my door.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,849
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Pro_Rata said:

    RobD said:

    felix said:

    felix said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Scott_P said:

    @steve_hawkes: Rumours David Gauke may be about to signal that he wants to bring forward an increase in state retirement age. Would be a good day to do it

    A quick glance at the Conservative manifesto doesn't find any mention of raising the retirement age. Can anyone give me a page number?
    They say state pension will go up in line with life expectancy on page 66 online, 64 in document.

    "We will also ensure that the state pension age reflects increases in life expectancy, while protecting each generation fairly".

    I think that's the basis of it...
    Trouble is life expectancy is dropping.
    Wrong.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-40608256
    I take it you can't read a graph.
    If only they had a graph showing the rate of change of the change in life expectancy per year... :D
    Given these stats can only be collated in arrears, and given the trend line, 'life expectancy is falling' could well be true at the present moment. Stick a 'probably' in there and you're covered.
    That graph shows it has gone up as many times as it has gone down in recent years. So probably not 'probably'.
    Another wonderful result for 7 years of austerity!
    Hm, would like to see evidence of that link.
    And I would love to be able to provide it, but that's going to be very tricky. The evidence is circumstantial but it's at least conceivable that austerity has had an effect.

    In the article Sir Michael Marmot, director of the Institute of Health Equity at UCL, said:
    it was "entirely possible" austerity had played a role. He explained social factors such as education, employment and working conditions and poverty all affected life expectancy by influencing lifestyles. And as austerity was placing pressures on these, they may in turn be influencing life expectancy. He also highlighted what he said was "miserly" funding settlements for the NHS and social care, which meant the quality of life for older people would have deteriorated and could well affect their life expectancy.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,141

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Pro_Rata said:

    RobD said:

    felix said:

    felix said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Scott_P said:

    @steve_hawkes: Rumours David Gauke may be about to signal that he wants to bring forward an increase in state retirement age. Would be a good day to do it

    A quick glance at the Conservative manifesto doesn't find any mention of raising the retirement age. Can anyone give me a page number?
    They say state pension will go up in line with life expectancy on page 66 online, 64 in document.

    "We will also ensure that the state pension age reflects increases in life expectancy, while protecting each generation fairly".

    I think that's the basis of it...
    Trouble is life expectancy is dropping.
    Wrong.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-40608256
    I take it you can't read a graph.
    If only they had a graph showing the rate of change of the change in life expectancy per year... :D
    Given these stats can only be collated in arrears, and given the trend line, 'life expectancy is falling' could well be true at the present moment. Stick a 'probably' in there and you're covered.
    That graph shows it has gone up as many times as it has gone down in recent years. So probably not 'probably'.
    Another wonderful result for 7 years of austerity!
    Hm, would like to see evidence of that link.
    And I would love to be able to provide it, but that's going to be very tricky. The evidence is circumstantial but it's at least conceivable that austerity has had an effect.

    In the article Sir Michael Marmot, director of the Institute of Health Equity at UCL, said:
    it was "entirely possible" austerity had played a role. He explained social factors such as education, employment and working conditions and poverty all affected life expectancy by influencing lifestyles. And as austerity was placing pressures on these, they may in turn be influencing life expectancy. He also highlighted what he said was "miserly" funding settlements for the NHS and social care, which meant the quality of life for older people would have deteriorated and could well affect their life expectancy.
    So why did it go down between 2004-2008?
  • felix said:

    felix said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Scott_P said:

    @steve_hawkes: Rumours David Gauke may be about to signal that he wants to bring forward an increase in state retirement age. Would be a good day to do it

    A quick glance at the Conservative manifesto doesn't find any mention of raising the retirement age. Can anyone give me a page number?
    They say state pension will go up in line with life expectancy on page 66 online, 64 in document.

    "We will also ensure that the state pension age reflects increases in life expectancy, while protecting each generation fairly".

    I think that's the basis of it...
    Trouble is life expectancy is dropping.
    Wrong.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-40608256
    I take it you can't read a graph.
    The graph shows the rise trending downwards before hitting zero in 2015. I take it you can't extrapolate.
    I take it you can't read graphs that go back more than a few years.
    Don't know wtf you're on about.
    The change in retirement age won't come with the caveat that it will go back to 67 if life expectancy doesn't rise, that's for sure.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 29,459
    Sandpit said:

    Okay, another brief delurk to laugh at the BBC. Given that the media in general love nothing more than talking about themselves this is going to run for days as everyone compares their salaries.

    A few notes on the list:

    The worst excesses, as always, are in radio. BBC are top of the tree in this medium, the biggest earners have been there for decades and are less likely to get poached by commercial media. They could probably cut every one of those on the list to under £150k and they wouldn't complain.

    Graham Norton - this published salary is for his radio and Eurovision work - his TV show is made by his own production company (So Television) who pay him separately.

    Chris Evans - this may include some Top Gear salary from last year, although most of his earnings from that show will come from Worldwide royalties. Ditto why Matt Le Blanc doesn't appear on the list.

    There will be loads of others they've managed to get 'off the books' in similar ways, by subcontracting production or paying a basic 'salary' and a large bonus from Worldwide. Also people who are genuine contractors, working for a number of media outlets.

    Lineker - I know footballer salaries are mad, but does he really deserve nearly 12,000 licence fees? People are going to watch MOTD no matter who presents it.

    Don't recognise most of the entertainment names, I guess mainly from Eastenders and the dancing show. What did we pay Emilia Clarke £200k for, she's the young actress from Game of Thrones who can't act but can get naked?!

    Alex Jones must have a really good agent, she was a regional TV nobody five years ago when the One Show picked her up - can only guess that someone tried to poach her and the Beeb matched the offer to avoid changing the lineup of the show twice in quick succession.

    News - this is obviously where most of the media attention will be, as 20 people there earn more than the PM, plus the original 'autocutie' Fiona Bruce. The only salary justified there is Andrew Neil, but does even he really deserve to earn twice as much as the ministers he holds to account? An interesting side effect will be if people in other TV news organisations (ITV, C4, Sky) get asked about their salaries. I'd guess Adam Boulton is probably on close to £1m at Sky for example.

    Purnell was justifying salaries on a cost per viewer/listener basis. That being the case the Victoria Derbyshire Programme must cost around £200,000 per viewer to make!
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,718
    RobD said:

    felix said:

    felix said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Scott_P said:

    @steve_hawkes: Rumours David Gauke may be about to signal that he wants to bring forward an increase in state retirement age. Would be a good day to do it

    A quick glance at the Conservative manifesto doesn't find any mention of raising the retirement age. Can anyone give me a page number?
    They say state pension will go up in line with life expectancy on page 66 online, 64 in document.

    "We will also ensure that the state pension age reflects increases in life expectancy, while protecting each generation fairly".

    I think that's the basis of it...
    Trouble is life expectancy is dropping.
    Wrong.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-40608256
    I take it you can't read a graph.
    The graph shows the rise trending downwards before hitting zero in 2015. I take it you can't extrapolate.
    It's trended down before and gone up again. No evidence here that it is dropping.. not yet!
    how can you trend down and not be dropping
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    Sandpit said:

    Okay, another brief delurk to laugh at the BBC. Given that the media in general love nothing more than talking about themselves this is going to run for days as everyone compares their salaries.

    A few notes on the list:

    The worst excesses, as always, are in radio. BBC are top of the tree in this medium, the biggest earners have been there for decades and are less likely to get poached by commercial media. They could probably cut every one of those on the list to under £150k and they wouldn't complain.

    Graham Norton - this published salary is for his radio and Eurovision work - his TV show is made by his own production company (So Television) who pay him separately.

    Chris Evans - this may include some Top Gear salary from last year, although most of his earnings from that show will come from Worldwide royalties. Ditto why Matt Le Blanc doesn't appear on the list.

    There will be loads of others they've managed to get 'off the books' in similar ways, by subcontracting production or paying a basic 'salary' and a large bonus from Worldwide. Also people who are genuine contractors, working for a number of media outlets.

    Lineker - I know footballer salaries are mad, but does he really deserve nearly 12,000 licence fees? People are going to watch MOTD no matter who presents it.

    Don't recognise most of the entertainment names, I guess mainly from Eastenders and the dancing show. What did we pay Emilia Clarke £200k for, she's the young actress from Game of Thrones who can't act but can get naked?!

    Alex Jones must have a really good agent, she was a regional TV nobody five years ago when the One Show picked her up - can only guess that someone tried to poach her and the Beeb matched the offer to avoid changing the lineup of the show twice in quick succession.

    News - this is obviously where most of the media attention will be, as 20 people there earn more than the PM, plus the original 'autocutie' Fiona Bruce. The only salary justified there is Andrew Neil, but does even he really deserve to earn twice as much as the ministers he holds to account? An interesting side effect will be if people in other TV news organisations (ITV, C4, Sky) get asked about their salaries. I'd guess Adam Boulton is probably on close to £1m at Sky for example.

    If Emilia Clarke is in GoT she is not on the BBC. Emilia Fox plays the lead in Silent Witness, a long-running BBC series about crime-fighting pathologists. Chris Evans has the biggest radio audience in the country and one imagines rival broadcasters would open their cheque books for popular entertainers like Evans or Graham Norton, who have established track records over more than one programme.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,726
    malcolmg said:

    RobD said:

    felix said:

    felix said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Scott_P said:

    @steve_hawkes: Rumours David Gauke may be about to signal that he wants to bring forward an increase in state retirement age. Would be a good day to do it

    A quick glance at the Conservative manifesto doesn't find any mention of raising the retirement age. Can anyone give me a page number?
    They say state pension will go up in line with life expectancy on page 66 online, 64 in document.

    "We will also ensure that the state pension age reflects increases in life expectancy, while protecting each generation fairly".

    I think that's the basis of it...
    Trouble is life expectancy is dropping.
    Wrong.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-40608256
    I take it you can't read a graph.
    The graph shows the rise trending downwards before hitting zero in 2015. I take it you can't extrapolate.
    It's trended down before and gone up again. No evidence here that it is dropping.. not yet!
    how can you trend down and not be dropping
    Because the graph shows rate of increase of life expectancy not life expectancy itself. It can still be going up just more slowly than before.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,726

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Pro_Rata said:

    RobD said:

    felix said:

    felix said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Scott_P said:

    @steve_hawkes: Rumours David Gauke may be about to signal that he wants to bring forward an increase in state retirement age. Would be a good day to do it

    A quick glance at the Conservative manifesto doesn't find any mention of raising the retirement age. Can anyone give me a page number?
    They say state pension will go up in line with life expectancy on page 66 online, 64 in document.

    "We will also ensure that the state pension age reflects increases in life expectancy, while protecting each generation fairly".

    I think that's the basis of it...
    Trouble is life expectancy is dropping.
    Wrong.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-40608256
    I take it you can't read a graph.
    If only they had a graph showing the rate of change of the change in life expectancy per year... :D
    Given these stats can only be collated in arrears, and given the trend line, 'life expectancy is falling' could well be true at the present moment. Stick a 'probably' in there and you're covered.
    That graph shows it has gone up as many times as it has gone down in recent years. So probably not 'probably'.
    Another wonderful result for 7 years of austerity!
    Hm, would like to see evidence of that link.
    And I would love to be able to provide it, but that's going to be very tricky. The evidence is circumstantial but it's at least conceivable that austerity has had an effect.

    In the article Sir Michael Marmot, director of the Institute of Health Equity at UCL, said:
    it was "entirely possible" austerity had played a role. He explained social factors such as education, employment and working conditions and poverty all affected life expectancy by influencing lifestyles. And as austerity was placing pressures on these, they may in turn be influencing life expectancy. He also highlighted what he said was "miserly" funding settlements for the NHS and social care, which meant the quality of life for older people would have deteriorated and could well affect their life expectancy.
    It's "entirely possible" that many things can play a role.

    In any case, the report does not say life expectancy has fallen, rather the rate of increase has slowed.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,849
    GeoffM said:

    RobD said:

    GeoffM said:

    RobD said:

    IanB2 said:

    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    From one of the previous threads:

    "Do they pay local council tax in both areas? If not, then yes, vote once. if they do, then they should be able to vote once in each council area they have to pay council tax in."

    Absolutely not. One person, one vote. We don't link the right to vote to how much tax we pay. Otherwise those who pay higher rate tax would get more votes than others.

    If students have - illegally - voted twice they should be prosecuted. Just like anyone else. And we should tighten up the rules, if necessary, not to suppress voting but to maintain the integrity of our voting system.

    Nope. If you live in two areas and pay council tax in each area you get two votes. Taxation without representation is tyranny.

    GE of course not - one vote only.
    No-one gets two votes. If you have two (genuine) homes, you get one vote for each council, if they are different; if the homes are in the same area you only get one vote.
    No one gets two votes, except those that do. :D
    I got 823 recently, and used them all!

    [buffs nails]
    And she still lost her majority! :smile:
    GeoffM's referring to his votes in the EU referendum :D
    Ah right dammit - I demand a recount!
    Apologies for the rather niche in-joke.

    823 Leave votes here in an area where 96% voted Remain.
    Nobody else will admit voting Leave around here for fear of losing their job or being lynched. So I am the Only Leaver In The Village and I'm standing up and taking the flak for the shy ones.

    That, plus MI5 really *did* drop a stuffed ballot box of blank voting papers outside my door.
    Haha thanks for enlightening me. I thought there must some significance to the 823.

    Well done for sticking to your principles (even though you are totally wrong obv!)
This discussion has been closed.