Corbyn and the Govt have support from a major Union.
GMB union suggests curbing free movement is more important than retaining single market membership
The leader of the GMB union, the third largest in the UK, has suggested that curbing free movement of people is a more important priority that remaining in the single market. Tim Roache, General Secretary of GMB, told the Today programme on BBC Radio 4 that the outcome of the Brexit referendum was due to frustration at high levels of migration which had driven down wages. He also suggested that it may be possible to negotiate ongoing membership of the single market while tackling freedom of movement. However, he said that the UK did not need to remain in the single market to retain many of the benefits, adding, “People, companies, countries in the EU want to trade with the UK — there’s no doubt about that. What we need to do if we’re out of the single market is use that as an opportunity for positive investment.” The Times
Tim Roache and Jacob Rees-Mogg on the same side then - what an alliance!
Corbyn and the Govt have support from a major Union.
GMB union suggests curbing free movement is more important than retaining single market membership
The leader of the GMB union, the third largest in the UK, has suggested that curbing free movement of people is a more important priority that remaining in the single market. Tim Roache, General Secretary of GMB, told the Today programme on BBC Radio 4 that the outcome of the Brexit referendum was due to frustration at high levels of migration which had driven down wages. He also suggested that it may be possible to negotiate ongoing membership of the single market while tackling freedom of movement. However, he said that the UK did not need to remain in the single market to retain many of the benefits, adding, “People, companies, countries in the EU want to trade with the UK — there’s no doubt about that. What we need to do if we’re out of the single market is use that as an opportunity for positive investment.” The Times
Tim Roache and Jacob Rees-Mogg on the same side then - what an alliance!
On this issue Tim Roache is closer to the views of working class voters than most Labour MPs. In line with the comments from SeanF earlier.
The best form of tax system is that one everyone feels is fair, and is simple enough to be administered cheaply without lots of loopholes for evasion. .. snip ..
For economic efficiency – i.e. welfare maximising – the best form of tax system is one that does not distort efficient resource allocation. That means that it should not hinder prices signalling scarcity, which entails inter alia that it should not affect production or consumption decisions at the margin.
Therefore do not encourage the 55+ year olds to spend their inheritance or give it away or hide it rather than provide for their dotage? Anyone for equity release to reduce their assets ahead of the 40% chance of a care home for a 80+ year old female?
Councils may consider that an attempt to avoid care charges and will act if the 80 year old needs care in the short or even medium term future.
A single 80 year old is typically too late. People 60+ are already taking out equity release and blowing it on fast cars, funding housing for the kids etc etc. LA's have no ability to come after much of this especially if it happened 10+ years before the assessment. Also downsizing from a £500k house to a £300k one and then a split of house via tenants in common to 2 wills with a right to reside for survivor (usually female) cuts the risk down to maybe £150k of assets at risk to care home fees, lower if there is an equity release earlier which has impaired it with a mortgage.....
Equity release is taxed as income though right? So someone equity-releasing £100k in a year would raise at least £28k in tax - more if it's on top of another income.
I do agree though it was a stupid policy since it will add more burden onto the state for those who irresponsibly spend their pension early.
Equity release is a loan, and usually secured by your primary residence. I don't think that is taxed.
Ah yes sorry - I was mixing up equity release with pension drawdown doh!
Please ignore previous post!
Between 2015 and 2017 I was using all sorts of 'equity release' to my offset interest only mortgage (Which is pretty much paid off now) in order to 'invest' in Betfair, Ladbrokes, Bet365 and others...
Here's an idea... when a child is abandoned, financially, by its father the state steps in with an attachment of earnings and asserts the primacy of the "family" to look after its own... so when an elderly person is abandoned, financially, by their children, the same should happen. Taxpayers should not be paying a penny to care for an elderly person if they have immediate family who are having overseas holidays, Sky subscriptions, eating out etc.
Isn't there a significant legal difference between children and adults though... In that the parents of children are legally responsible for the welfare of their children until they are 18 where-as children have no such legal responsibilities to their parents (they may have a moral responsibility to their parents but that's a different issue...)
If the children are interested in their parents' inheritance then the least they can do is take an interest in their parents and their needs at the end of their lives.
There is something fundamentally selfish about expecting others (often less well off) to pay more tax so that you can get your hands on your parents' wealth and, indeed, expecting others to look after them without first considering what you can do for your own parents.
Number of voters who give a toss and are not Tory activists? Number of voters who could even point to Venezuela on a map?
You are confusing electoral effectiveness (likely to be zero) with the moral value of the position adopted by Corbyn on this (also zero, IMO).
A position can be morally repellent even if it is popular. And it is no less repellent just because very few care about it. Whether pointing it out will get you anywhere with the voters is quite another question.
Number of voters who give a toss and are not Tory activists? Number of voters who could even point to Venezuela on a map?
You are confusing electoral effectiveness (likely to be zero) with the moral value of the position adopted by Corbyn on this (also zero, IMO).
A position can be morally repellent even if it is popular. And it is no less repellent just because very few care about it. Whether pointing it out will get you anywhere with the voters is quite another question.
I think CCHQ's shiny new media team is pumping out these stories because ... well, it might be for their higher moral purpose but we can agree to differ on that.
Number of voters who give a toss and are not Tory activists? Number of voters who could even point to Venezuela on a map?
You are confusing electoral effectiveness (likely to be zero) with the moral value of the position adopted by Corbyn on this (also zero, IMO).
A position can be morally repellent even if it is popular. And it is no less repellent just because very few care about it. Whether pointing it out will get you anywhere with the voters is quite another question.
I think CCHQ's shiny new media team is pumping out these stories because ... well, it might be for their higher moral purpose but we can agree to differ on that.
Trump should receive an award for services to comedy. He has been a gift to US late night talk shows, who might have struggled talking about reality TV stars each night.
The question is whether the Trump circus is just a distraction and he is making changes without media spotlight. While media is concerned with Trumps latest Tweet or Russian link, Trump is signing off executive orders making changes he would not otherwise get away with ?
This newsweek article and cover seem to have it right. Trumps executive orders are often over trivial things. Trump is Ted Bundy:
Trump has done bugger all apart from golf and twitter in 6 months. He has been West of the Mississippi just once, and that to a rally. He hasnt even nominated candidates for hundreds of posts, let alone got them starting work. He is a classic egotistical slacker.
On the other hand his incompetence and laziness probably limits the harm he can do, apart from to his country's reputation.
This place is getting worse, to call Trump incompetent is a widely held opinion, to call him lazy or a slacker is plain nonsense.
For clarification, how many times has he played golf in the last 6 months?
Did you read the Newsweek article?
I believe it comes to 35 golfing days, 20% of his days as president.
When you add in the 5 hours of TV each day, it doesn't leave much work time, which is probably a good thing.
"He has visited a golf club 40 times since taking office in January,"
A round of golf, assuming he plays 18, takes 3-4 hours. How on earth does that equate to 35 golfing days?
And, to be fair, it was a mistake for Labour to oppose that.
(Although, I think it was friendly fire that did for the Tories on social care, rather than the Labour attacks.)
If ever an issue needed an all-party review, perhaps a Royal Commission, this is it. It'll never happens unless everyone's fingerprints are on it at the same time, yet it's an issue where most people recognise that Something Must Be Done.
The problem is that even proposing a commission will have a political cost - "party X reopens Death Tax idea".
Where do you stand on Venezuela Dr Nick?
Is the main problem that Chavez didn't have the elites murdered would you say?
"Speaking of all-party review of care provision, what do you think about Venezuala?" I agree with most Labour people who've commented (I'm sympathetic to historical movement under Chavez and not keen on the current opposition leaders, but Maduro's actions are indefensible), and disagree with Livingstone, as per usual these days.
I also don't agree with the Tory meme demanding that Corbyn makes a statement about Venezuala from his cycling holiday in Croatia - it's one of the curses of politics that you're always expected to comment on everything 24/7/52.
Trump should receive an award for services to comedy. He has been a gift to US late night talk shows, who might have struggled talking about reality TV stars each night.
The question is whether the Trump circus is just a distraction and he is making changes without media spotlight. While media is concerned with Trumps latest Tweet or Russian link, Trump is signing off executive orders making changes he would not otherwise get away with ?
This newsweek article and cover seem to have it right. Trumps executive orders are often over trivial things. Trump is Ted Bundy:
Trump has done bugger all apart from golf and twitter in 6 months. He has been West of the Mississippi just once, and that to a rally. He hasnt even nominated candidates for hundreds of posts, let alone got them starting work. He is a classic egotistical slacker.
On the other hand his incompetence and laziness probably limits the harm he can do, apart from to his country's reputation.
This place is getting worse, to call Trump incompetent is a widely held opinion, to call him lazy or a slacker is plain nonsense.
For clarification, how many times has he played golf in the last 6 months?
Did you read the Newsweek article?
I believe it comes to 35 golfing days, 20% of his days as president.
When you add in the 5 hours of TV each day, it doesn't leave much work time, which is probably a good thing.
"He has visited a golf club 40 times since taking office in January,"
A round of golf, assuming he plays 18, takes 3-4 hours. How on earth does that equate to 35 golfing days?
You simply make things up to suit your agenda.
You are obviously a better golfer than I am!
Well, Trump is officially a 2.8 handicap, apparently.
Most of the economic indicators in the US are reasonable
That's not actually true.
US median income is barely above the levels of the late 1970s. While the coasts (and I'm sitting in LA right now) have done very well from globalisation, much of the internals have not. A combination of rising automation, foreign competition and short-sighted private equity owners, have decimated small town across America. In a lot of communities there was one, or maybe a couple of, factories. If they go from employing 1,000 to employing 100 (or, indeed, no-one at all), then these communities get hammered. Add in an opioid epidemic, and local government with severe money problems (resulting in education spending being slashed), and you have pretty horrible outcomes.
The problem is that leaving NAFTA and enacting the Border Tax Adjustment will not bring back those jobs. But Donald Trump understood many of the problems in America - which Hillary Clinton did not.
Most of the economic indicators in the US are reasonable
The problem is that leaving NAFTA and enacting the Border Tax Adjustment will not bring back those jobs. But Donald Trump understood many of the problems in America - which Hillary Clinton did not.
Apologies for snipping part of your response, Robert.
It's easy to diagnose and identify problems and that in turn creates a degree of empathy with those affected.
The problem is coming up with credible and sustainable answers - not wild promises or scapegoating other social groups or foreigners or other groups who can't respond.
Trump doesn't have any - agreed, he emotes sympathy better than HRC ever did but the promises he made are not credible and the scapegoating of foreigners and others inexcusable.
More thoughtful political people recognise the complexity of problems and the inability to come up with an answers that don't end up costing other sections of the economy heavily or other areas of society disproportionately.
Most of the economic indicators in the US are reasonable
That's not actually true.
US median income is barely above the levels of the late 1970s. While the coasts (and I'm sitting in LA right now) have done very well from globalisation, much of the internals have not. A combination of rising automation, foreign competition and short-sighted private equity owners, have decimated small town across America. In a lot of communities there was one, or maybe a couple of, factories. If they go from employing 1,000 to employing 100 (or, indeed, no-one at all), then these communities get hammered. Add in an opioid epidemic, and local government with severe money problems (resulting in education spending being slashed), and you have pretty horrible outcomes.
The problem is that leaving NAFTA and enacting the Border Tax Adjustment will not bring back those jobs. But Donald Trump understood many of the problems in America - which Hillary Clinton did not.
Isn't there a significant legal difference bete...)
Simple enough. You change the law.....
That would be a very fundamental change between the rights and responsibilities of parents, children and the State
I'm not sure we should be providing incentives for children to top their parent's off either.
Indeed. I mean, don't get me wrong I do think grown up children have moral responsibilities and a duty of care to their parents...
It's a disgrace really that so many old people are sitting on NHS wards (when they aren't actually "sick" they are just "old") because there's nobody to look after them when they may have 2-3 adult children, adult grandchildren and even adult great grandchildren, etc...
Morally its appalling and I could never abandon my mother like that... But changing the law to make children responsible for parents seems fraught with problems and dangers.
The problem is often that on .
Just start charging the Local Authority for any delay after 7 days of notice at a high daily rate. £1,000 a day would get the elderly shifted out very quickly.
Nice in principle but some of the arrangements, for example when patients are under MDTs, or getting prescriptions, or need specialist equipment, is out of the hands of the local authority. All the LA would be able to do is to stand over the hospital and say "get a bloody move on..."
In any event the LA is funded by you and me! Charging the LA is charging us.
Yes and they would prefer to pay under £100 a day than £1,000 a day. At present the longer they delay the more days at zero cost the L.A. has.
Shows the wisdom of the LD proposal to integrate Health and social care, or the Labour National Care Service. One public sector beggaring another with fines is fairly fruitless and requires more pen pushers to manage.
Frail elderly are mostly looked after by family, but few relatives do not try to help. Often distance, jobs and own health prevent much more being done. Indeed frail elderly often wind up in an acute bed when the informal familial care system reaches a crisis point, such as carer illness.
This proposal is very much in line with my thinking and would, I think, be something which could easily be sold to the British public:
◾A "deep free trade agreement" with the EU if the UK does not want to stay in the single market, with the possibility of its re-joining EFTA (European Free Trade Association)
Number of voters who give a toss and are not Tory activists? Number of voters who could even point to Venezuela on a map?
You are confusing electoral effectiveness (likely to be zero) with the moral value of the position adopted by Corbyn on this (also zero, IMO).
A position can be morally repellent even if it is popular. And it is no less repellent just because very few care about it. Whether pointing it out will get you anywhere with the voters is quite another question.
I think CCHQ's shiny new media team is pumping out these stories because ... well, it might be for their higher moral purpose but we can agree to differ on that.
I couldn't give a toss about CCHQ, but saw the Newsnight interview - and I was reminded of the Pinochet apologists back in Thatcher's time.
It might not be electorally salient, but it's fairly repulsive.
Corbyn and the Govt have support from a major Union.
GMB union suggests curbing free movement is more important than retaining single market membership
The leader of the GMB union, the third largest in the UK, has suggested that curbing free movement of people is a more important priority that remaining in the single market. Tim Roache, General Secretary of GMB, told the Today programme on BBC Radio 4 that the outcome of the Brexit referendum was due to frustration at high levels of migration which had driven down wages. He also suggested that it may be possible to negotiate ongoing membership of the single market while tackling freedom of movement. However, he said that the UK did not need to remain in the single market to retain many of the benefits, adding, “People, companies, countries in the EU want to trade with the UK — there’s no doubt about that. What we need to do if we’re out of the single market is use that as an opportunity for positive investment.” The Times
Tim Roache and Jacob Rees-Mogg on the same side then - what an alliance!
On this issue Tim Roache is closer to the views of working class voters than most Labour MPs. In line with the comments from SeanF earlier.
Trade Union leader more in tune with the working class than Oxford PPE wonks.
Number of voters who give a toss and are not Tory activists? Number of voters who could even point to Venezuela on a map?
You are confusing electoral effectiveness (likely to be zero) with the moral value of the position adopted by Corbyn on this (also zero, IMO).
A position can be morally repellent even if it is popular. And it is no less repellent just because very few care about it. Whether pointing it out will get you anywhere with the voters is quite another question.
I think CCHQ's shiny new media team is pumping out these stories because ... well, it might be for their higher moral purpose but we can agree to differ on that.
I couldn't give a toss about CCHQ, but saw the Newsnight interview - and I was reminded of the Pinochet apologists back in Thatcher's time.
It might not be electorally salient, but it's fairly repulsive.
To be fair, in Thatcher's time they had both Pinochet apologists and apartheid apologists.
Number of voters who give a toss and are not Tory activists? Number of voters who could even point to Venezuela on a map?
You are confusing electoral effectiveness (likely to be zero) with the moral value of the position adopted by Corbyn on this (also zero, IMO).
A position can be morally repellent even if it is popular. And it is no less repellent just because very few care about it. Whether pointing it out will get you anywhere with the voters is quite another question.
I think CCHQ's shiny new media team is pumping out these stories because ... well, it might be for their higher moral purpose but we can agree to differ on that.
I couldn't give a toss about CCHQ, but saw the Newsnight interview - and I was reminded of the Pinochet apologists back in Thatcher's time.
It might not be electorally salient, but it's fairly repulsive.
To be fair, in Thatcher's time they had both Pinochet apologists and apartheid apologists.
But Labour had IRA apologists such as....
A bit pointless in point scoring over matters 30+ years ago. Likewise I doubt many which did any of those things back in the day would defend it now.
Unless you're people like Ken Livingstone, or silent like Corbyn.
Off topic, the wifi on Great Northern trains blocks PB. No such problems with Greater Anglia.
Is TSE trying to make sure we can't see any of his Star Trek puns in his local area in case we laugh too much and embarrass him?
Further off topic but on the subject of utilities, I got a SMART meter put in on Wednesday. Since then I have:
Run two cycles of the washing machine Two cycles of the tumble dryer Used a computer with two 22-inch screens for much of the day Used my TV and DVD player for 2-3 hours each evening Charged all my electrical equipment Used the dishwasher
And used the princely sum of £1.16 in mains electricity.
I didn't quite appreciate how effective my solar panels are until now. Should have done so after my supplier asked why my meter was recording lower readings than it had before (turned out it was faulty and when my panels were feeding energy into the grid it ran backwards). But they are amazing.
Instead of Hinckley B, would that money be better spent putting free solar panels on every south-facing roof in Britain?
Off topic, the wifi on Great Northern trains blocks PB. No such problems with Greater Anglia.
Is TSE trying to make sure we can't see any of his Star Trek puns in his local area in case we laugh too much and embarrass him?
Further off topic but on the subject of utilities, I got a SMART meter put in on Wednesday. Since then I have:
Run two cycles of the washing machine Two cycles of the tumble dryer Used a computer with two 22-inch screens for much of the day Used my TV and DVD player for 2-3 hours each evening Charged all my electrical equipment Used the dishwasher
And used the princely sum of £1.16 in mains electricity.
I didn't quite appreciate how effective my solar panels are until now. Should have done so after my supplier asked why my meter was recording lower readings than it had before (turned out it was faulty and when my panels were feeding energy into the grid it ran backwards). But they are amazing.
Instead of Hinckley B, would that money be better spent putting free solar panels on every south-facing roof in Britain?
Hear, hear!
Although it's a bit late for Hinkley B as that opened in 1976 but instead of the massive waste of money that is Hinkley C would be a good idea. There was a brief moment during the early honeymoon period of Tessa's premiership when it looked like she might veto Hinkley C but alas she wobbled (a sign of things to come).
Most of the economic indicators in the US are reasonable
The problem is that leaving NAFTA and enacting the Border Tax Adjustment will not bring back those jobs. But Donald Trump understood many of the problems in America - which Hillary Clinton did not.
Apologies for snipping part of your response, Robert.
It's easy to diagnose and identify problems and that in turn creates a degree of empathy with those affected.
The problem is coming up with credible and sustainable answers - not wild promises or scapegoating other social groups or foreigners or other groups who can't respond.
Trump doesn't have any - agreed, he emotes sympathy better than HRC ever did but the promises he made are not credible and the scapegoating of foreigners and others inexcusable.
More thoughtful political people recognise the complexity of problems and the inability to come up with an answers that don't end up costing other sections of the economy heavily or other areas of society disproportionately.
I think at the end you are basically saying 'f**k you' to those who've lost out presumably because the winners want to hang on to their gains and probably can't stand the rednecks anyway. This is why the Trumps and their ilk are gonna keep on winning.
This proposal is very much in line with my thinking and would, I think, be something which could easily be sold to the British public:
◾A "deep free trade agreement" with the EU if the UK does not want to stay in the single market, with the possibility of its re-joining EFTA (European Free Trade Association)
Yes - I thought his suggestion was very helpful so I doubt it will get much coverage. Any hint of Brexit optimism does not interest Sky or the BBC.
Off topic, the wifi on Great Northern trains blocks PB. No such problems with Greater Anglia.
Is TSE trying to make sure we can't see any of his Star Trek puns in his local area in case we laugh too much and embarrass him?
Further off topic but on the subject of utilities, I got a SMART meter put in on Wednesday. Since then I have:
Run two cycles of the washing machine Two cycles of the tumble dryer Used a computer with two 22-inch screens for much of the day Used my TV and DVD player for 2-3 hours each evening Charged all my electrical equipment Used the dishwasher
And used the princely sum of £1.16 in mains electricity.
I didn't quite appreciate how effective my solar panels are until now. Should have done so after my supplier asked why my meter was recording lower readings than it had before (turned out it was faulty and when my panels were feeding energy into the grid it ran backwards). But they are amazing.
Instead of Hinckley B, would that money be better spent putting free solar panels on every south-facing roof in Britain?
I was going to get some till I realised I couldn't take them with me to a future new house and there is no way I'd recoup the capital expenditure on sale. Some definite future possibilities at my (Hopeful) onward house though..
Most of the economic indicators in the US are reasonable
That's not actually true.
US median income is barely above the levels of the late 1970s. While the coasts (and I'm sitting in LA right now) have done very well from globalisation, much of the internals have not. A combination of rising automation, foreign competition and short-sighted private equity owners, have decimated small town across America. In a lot of communities there was one, or maybe a couple of, factories. If they go from employing 1,000 to employing 100 (or, indeed, no-one at all), then these communities get hammered. Add in an opioid epidemic, and local government with severe money problems (resulting in education spending being slashed), and you have pretty horrible outcomes.
The problem is that leaving NAFTA and enacting the Border Tax Adjustment will not bring back those jobs. But Donald Trump understood many of the problems in America - which Hillary Clinton did not.
Most of the economic indicators in the US are reasonable
That's not actually true.
US median income is barely above the levels of the late 1970s. While the coasts (and I'm sitting in LA right now) have done very well from globalisation, much of the internals have not. A combination of rising automation, foreign competition and short-sighted private equity owners, have decimated small town across America. In a lot of communities there was one, or maybe a couple of, factories. If they go from employing 1,000 to employing 100 (or, indeed, no-one at all), then these communities get hammered. Add in an opioid epidemic, and local government with severe money problems (resulting in education spending being slashed), and you have pretty horrible outcomes.
The problem is that leaving NAFTA and enacting the Border Tax Adjustment will not bring back those jobs. But Donald Trump understood many of the problems in America - which Hillary Clinton did not.
Off topic, the wifi on Great Northern trains blocks PB. No such problems with Greater Anglia.
Is TSE trying to make sure we can't see any of his Star Trek puns in his local area in case we laugh too much and embarrass him?
Further off topic but on the subject of utilities, I got a SMART meter put in on Wednesday. Since then I have:
Run two cycles of the washing machine Two cycles of the tumble dryer Used a computer with two 22-inch screens for much of the day Used my TV and DVD player for 2-3 hours each evening Charged all my electrical equipment Used the dishwasher
And used the princely sum of £1.16 in mains electricity.
I didn't quite appreciate how effective my solar panels are until now. Should have done so after my supplier asked why my meter was recording lower readings than it had before (turned out it was faulty and when my panels were feeding energy into the grid it ran backwards). But they are amazing.
Instead of Hinckley B, would that money be better spent putting free solar panels on every south-facing roof in Britain?
I don't know if you've noticed, but it's currently summer...
More seriously: building codes will require integrated solar on new builds everywhere in the developed world* within a decade. If you design them in, the incremental cost is very low, and the benefits high.
Hinckley C is pointless because: (a) nuclear is not reliable baseload; (b) the grid needs inexpensive, rapid response power (CCGT); and (c) it is very expensive electricity relative to almost any other kind.
Off topic, the wifi on Great Northern trains blocks PB. No such problems with Greater Anglia.
Is TSE trying to make sure we can't see any of his Star Trek puns in his local area in case we laugh too much and embarrass him?
Further off topic but on the subject of utilities, I got a SMART meter put in on Wednesday. Since then I have:
Run two cycles of the washing machine Two cycles of the tumble dryer Used a computer with two 22-inch screens for much of the day Used my TV and DVD player for 2-3 hours each evening Charged all my electrical equipment Used the dishwasher
And used the princely sum of £1.16 in mains electricity.
I didn't quite appreciate how effective my solar panels are until now. Should have done so after my supplier asked why my meter was recording lower readings than it had before (turned out it was faulty and when my panels were feeding energy into the grid it ran backwards). But they are amazing.
Instead of Hinckley B, would that money be better spent putting free solar panels on every south-facing roof in Britain?
I was going to get some till I realised I couldn't take them with me to a future new house and there is no way I'd recoup the capital expenditure on sale. Some definite future possibilities at my (Hopeful) onward house though..
Been very please with ours, in 3 years now... predicted to generate 3,700 kWh per year but so far >4,000kWh in each of our first 3 years
Off topic, the wifi on Great Northern trains blocks PB. No such problems with Greater Anglia.
Is TSE trying to make sure we can't see any of his Star Trek puns in his local area in case we laugh too much and embarrass him?
Further off topic but on the subject of utilities, I got a SMART meter put in on Wednesday. Since then I have:
Run two cycles of the washing machine Two cycles of the tumble dryer Used a computer with two 22-inch screens for much of the day Used my TV and DVD player for 2-3 hours each evening Charged all my electrical equipment Used the dishwasher
And used the princely sum of £1.16 in mains electricity.
I didn't quite appreciate how effective my solar panels are until now. Should have done so after my supplier asked why my meter was recording lower readings than it had before (turned out it was faulty and when my panels were feeding energy into the grid it ran backwards). But they are amazing.
Instead of Hinckley B, would that money be better spent putting free solar panels on every south-facing roof in Britain?
I don't know if you've noticed, but it's currently summer...
More seriously: building codes will require integrated solar on new builds everywhere in the developed world* within a decade. If you design them in, the incremental cost is very low, and the benefits high.
Hinckley C is pointless because: (a) nuclear is not reliable baseload; (b) the grid needs inexpensive, rapid response power (CCGT); and (c) it is very expensive electricity relative to almost any other kind.
Yes it is summer isn't it? And our solar panels have pretty much paid for themselves in 5 years (with a sensible estimate for how much our bills have reduced by, as a result of using self-generated energy.) We were fortunate to get in (2 days) before the tariff rate was reduced in December 2011. So a superb investment for us overall, in both financial and energy terms. The inverter may conk out at any time (£1,500 replacement when it does) but in terms of ongoing savings if we stay, or asset value if we sell our house, it's been a real winner for us.
Here's an idea... when a child is abandoned, financially, by its father the state steps in with an attachment of earnings and asserts the primacy of the "family" to look after its own... so when an elderly person is abandoned, financially, by their children, the same should happen. Taxpayers should not be paying a penny to care for an elderly person if they have immediate family who are having overseas holidays, Sky subscriptions, eating out etc.
Isn't there a significant legal difference between children and adults though... In that the parents of children are legally responsible for the welfare of their children until they are 18 where-as children have no such legal responsibilities to their parents (they may have a moral responsibility to their parents but that's a different issue...)
Simple enough. You change the law.....
Isn't the the point that a parent child relationship occurs because of the choices and actions of the parents not the children? Parents therefore have an obligation to support their children, not the other way round.
i'd love to tell my mum ...no mum, you ARE NOT buying that new car, be responsible FFS.
:-) Yes and stop all those cruises.
"By all means go on the cruise, mother, but do remember that when you run out of money I'm next in line to pay your care fees"... seems perfectly reasonable to me.
Comments
GE2015, London Mayoralty, Brexit, Dutch elections, French elections, GE2017, Trump, Brexit, 2 Labour leader contests and a Tory leadership contest.
All great betting events with alot of different angles and liquid markets.
Even a few gaelic side dishes too.
There is something fundamentally selfish about expecting others (often less well off) to pay more tax so that you can get your hands on your parents' wealth and, indeed, expecting others to look after them without first considering what you can do for your own parents.
A position can be morally repellent even if it is popular. And it is no less repellent just because very few care about it. Whether pointing it out will get you anywhere with the voters is quite another question.
I see England's morning at Old Trafford has been about as much fun as my day at the airport!
Hopefully they'll have the new tyre on soon!
But yes, not high in the list of priorities.
I also don't agree with the Tory meme demanding that Corbyn makes a statement about Venezuala from his cycling holiday in Croatia - it's one of the curses of politics that you're always expected to comment on everything 24/7/52.
https://www.aol.co.uk/news/2017/08/03/fracking-support-hits-all-time-low-as-industry-urged-to-end-unw/
US median income is barely above the levels of the late 1970s. While the coasts (and I'm sitting in LA right now) have done very well from globalisation, much of the internals have not. A combination of rising automation, foreign competition and short-sighted private equity owners, have decimated small town across America. In a lot of communities there was one, or maybe a couple of, factories. If they go from employing 1,000 to employing 100 (or, indeed, no-one at all), then these communities get hammered. Add in an opioid epidemic, and local government with severe money problems (resulting in education spending being slashed), and you have pretty horrible outcomes.
The problem is that leaving NAFTA and enacting the Border Tax Adjustment will not bring back those jobs. But Donald Trump understood many of the problems in America - which Hillary Clinton did not.
It's easy to diagnose and identify problems and that in turn creates a degree of empathy with those affected.
The problem is coming up with credible and sustainable answers - not wild promises or scapegoating other social groups or foreigners or other groups who can't respond.
Trump doesn't have any - agreed, he emotes sympathy better than HRC ever did but the promises he made are not credible and the scapegoating of foreigners and others inexcusable.
More thoughtful political people recognise the complexity of problems and the inability to come up with an answers that don't end up costing other sections of the economy heavily or other areas of society disproportionately.
Frail elderly are mostly looked after by family, but few relatives do not try to help. Often distance, jobs and own health prevent much more being done. Indeed frail elderly often wind up in an acute bed when the informal familial care system reaches a crisis point, such as carer illness.
Some interesting comments by the Taoiseach on his visit to Belfast:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-40819687
This proposal is very much in line with my thinking and would, I think, be something which could easily be sold to the British public:
◾A "deep free trade agreement" with the EU if the UK does not want to stay in the single market, with the possibility of its re-joining EFTA (European Free Trade Association)
England lose two quick wickets in the test.
(Please insert your political analogy here)
It might not be electorally salient, but it's fairly repulsive.
Who'd have thunk it.
But Labour had IRA apologists such as....
Unless you're people like Ken Livingstone, or silent like Corbyn.
Further off topic but on the subject of utilities, I got a SMART meter put in on Wednesday. Since then I have:
Run two cycles of the washing machine
Two cycles of the tumble dryer
Used a computer with two 22-inch screens for much of the day
Used my TV and DVD player for 2-3 hours each evening
Charged all my electrical equipment
Used the dishwasher
And used the princely sum of £1.16 in mains electricity.
I didn't quite appreciate how effective my solar panels are until now. Should have done so after my supplier asked why my meter was recording lower readings than it had before (turned out it was faulty and when my panels were feeding energy into the grid it ran backwards). But they are amazing.
Instead of Hinckley B, would that money be better spent putting free solar panels on every south-facing roof in Britain?
Although it's a bit late for Hinkley B as that opened in 1976
More seriously: building codes will require integrated solar on new builds everywhere in the developed world* within a decade. If you design them in, the incremental cost is very low, and the benefits high.
Hinckley C is pointless because: (a) nuclear is not reliable baseload; (b) the grid needs inexpensive, rapid response power (CCGT); and (c) it is very expensive electricity relative to almost any other kind.
And why I am using far more electricity than normal because I'm not at school from eight in the morning to six in the evening...
(Actually, it's been sunny today, it was wet yesterday.)
https://twitter.com/spajw/status/893475522939953154