So, closing DFID did not save the next day's headlines from being Rashford.
Who runs No.10 comms?
Never has 7% of GDP been sacrificed for so few.
Its remarkable that the idea that bringing the UK into line with all but one member of the OECD as far as this is concerned might have been done because it was viewed as the right thing to do doesn't even enter your mind.
I was being a bit flippant. Can't say I have a massive opinion one way or the other, but three ex-PMs have said its a bad idea. My point was more that why announce yesterday out of the blue? Seems to me that it was news management.
Three ex-PMs being the three ex-PMs who did the opposite. Well there's a shock.
PM reverses a previous PMs decision - previous PM is upset. How is that a news story?
A very impressive young man (and/or top class social media team - but having seen his interview, suspect it actually may be him) - on the headlines I suspect Downing St happier with
Rashford - 1 Johnson - 0
Than
Starmer - 1 Johnson - 0
Though again Starmer played this smarter than the Labour Party which tried to claim credit.
The score is actually something like:
Starmer / good guys 7 Johnson / liars 0
And like any good thrashing, it's good to see the goals shared around...
A great bit of commentary on the seventh goal from Motto would be something like "...the ball whipped into the box and Rashford lashes it in between the legs of the hapless overweight keeper..."
I can't even see a consolation goal for the liars anytime soon, can you?
Do you think this would have gone through without Rashford’s intervention?
It may have taken longer to u-turn without Rashford I guess so the boy did well. Classy guy!
That's probably right. It didnt seem like that many people were fighting hard against a u turn, but despite being busy and only vaguely following the news I for one knew of Rashford's take on the matter, it was clearly effective intervention.
So, closing DFID did not save the next day's headlines from being Rashford.
Who runs No.10 comms?
Never has 7% of GDP been sacrificed for so few.
Its remarkable that the idea that bringing the UK into line with all but one member of the OECD as far as this is concerned might have been done because it was viewed as the right thing to do doesn't even enter your mind.
I was being a bit flippant. Can't say I have a massive opinion one way or the other, but three ex-PMs have said its a bad idea. My point was more that why announce yesterday out of the blue? Seems to me that it was news management.
Three ex-PMs being the three ex-PMs who did the opposite. Well there's a shock.
PM reverses a previous PMs decision - previous PM is upset. How is that a news story?
Its news because previous PMs are not typically moaning all the time about their successors (except on Brexit). It's not unprecedented, and it might well be expected theyd be against it, but I think its reasonable to consider such interventions as newsworthy.
So, closing DFID did not save the next day's headlines from being Rashford.
Who runs No.10 comms?
Never has 7% of GDP been sacrificed for so few.
Its remarkable that the idea that bringing the UK into line with all but one member of the OECD as far as this is concerned might have been done because it was viewed as the right thing to do doesn't even enter your mind.
I was being a bit flippant. Can't say I have a massive opinion one way or the other, but three ex-PMs have said its a bad idea. My point was more that why announce yesterday out of the blue? Seems to me that it was news management.
Three ex-PMs being the three ex-PMs who did the opposite. Well there's a shock.
PM reverses a previous PMs decision - previous PM is upset. How is that a news story?
Its news because previous PMs are not typically moaning all the time about their successors (except on Brexit). It's not unprecedented, and it might well be expected theyd be against it, but I think its reasonable to consider such interventions as newsworthy.
They've certainly (post-Brexit) been moaning more regularly, which makes it easier to get involved again going forwards . . . the same thing happened with Thatcher she went through a period of relative silence then increasingly critical.
Furthermore this was a specific denunciation of something that Blair had done and that Brown and Cameron had kept. Someone yesterday queried Major's silence on the matter but of course despite the fact that Major has been quite willing to be critical of Johnson what Johnson has done is bring the system back into line with what the system was like under Major before Blair split the FCO in two.
Suspect a suspension for one year due to this technical anomaly wont be too damaging politically.
As long as it is clear it is restored the following year.
It would need to be a two year suspension.
How so?
Because its a two-year effect that the anomaly runs for.
In the first year there is a major drop in wages, triple lock ensures a 2.5% rise in pensions. In the second year there is a major increase in wages (but really a reversion), triple lock ensures a major increase in pensions.
To deal with the anomaly the lock needs to be suspended for two years, to cover both the fall and return back to where it was.
So they don't really need to announce anything until the second year - unless they don't want to put pensions up by 2.5% in the first year.
This is beyond pathetic. People are trying to plan. They have nothing to plan with. Breweries don’t know whether to start brewing. The grants are running out. Landlords are demanding rent. Furlough is running out. Costs are continuing. Losses continue to be made.
If July 4 is the date bloody tell us. If it isn’t also bloody tell us.
Long chat with Daughter last night and she is in despair. Her last throw of the dice is a GoFundMe appeal to see if that will help. If it doesn’t then she will be closing the doors for the last time, to add to the steady drip drip announcements round here of redundancies. There are families round here where both breadwinners are facing unemployment. Even Sellafield is cutting jobs.
Meanwhile the government’s big announcement is about DiFiD. FFS!
Suspect a suspension for one year due to this technical anomaly wont be too damaging politically.
As long as it is clear it is restored the following year.
It would need to be a two year suspension.
How so?
Because its a two-year effect that the anomaly runs for.
In the first year there is a major drop in wages, triple lock ensures a 2.5% rise in pensions. In the second year there is a major increase in wages (but really a reversion), triple lock ensures a major increase in pensions.
To deal with the anomaly the lock needs to be suspended for two years, to cover both the fall and return back to where it was.
So they don't really need to announce anything until the second year - unless they don't want to put pensions up by 2.5% in the first year.
Well a 2.5% increase while there's been a 20% decrease for most workers would be quite extraordinary. A freeze would make more sense - and if there is a 2.5% increase this year then that will be taken for granted by next year when a new increase would be expected.
This is beyond pathetic. People are trying to plan. They have nothing to plan with. Breweries don’t know whether to start brewing. The grants are running out. Landlords are demanding rent. Furlough is running out. Costs are continuing. Losses continue to be made.
If July 4 is the date bloody tell us. If it isn’t also bloody tell us.
Long chat with Daughter last night and she is in despair. Her last throw of the dice is a GoFundMe appeal to see if that will help. If it doesn’t then she will be closing the doors for the last time, to add to the steady drip drip announcements round here of redundancies. There are families round here where both breadwinners are facing unemployment. Even Sellafield is cutting jobs.
Meanwhile the government’s big announcement is about DiFiD. FFS!
Its possible they want to see what the consequences of the shops reopening are.
The last thing the government will want to do is say that hospitality can reopen and then a week later have to change its mind.
This is beyond pathetic. People are trying to plan. They have nothing to plan with. Breweries don’t know whether to start brewing. The grants are running out. Landlords are demanding rent. Furlough is running out. Costs are continuing. Losses continue to be made.
If July 4 is the date bloody tell us. If it isn’t also bloody tell us.
Long chat with Daughter last night and she is in despair. Her last throw of the dice is a GoFundMe appeal to see if that will help. If it doesn’t then she will be closing the doors for the last time, to add to the steady drip drip announcements round here of redundancies. There are families round here where both breadwinners are facing unemployment. Even Sellafield is cutting jobs.
Meanwhile the government’s big announcement is about DiFiD. FFS!
To be fair this is following the same timetabling system as previous lockdown lifts. The date has been announced as July 4 but subject to confirmation closer to the date depending upon the data closer to the date.
Final confirmation likely won't come in until days before - the equivalent date for shops was announced weeks ago but the final confirmation for shops being able to open on the announced date only came a few days before the opening.
Football tonight: You can get 30 with BF on a 0-0 draw MC v ARS. That seems way too high to me. Just had a nibble with BF, though I took the 28 on the " first goalscorer" market (to protect against own goals).
Interesting observation from James Forsyth on R4 - new Tory MPs are thinking more like US Congressmen “what’s in it for my constituents” than “what’s the party line” - hence the growing revolt over free school meals where lots of “red wall” Tory MPs have plenty of constituents who are in receipt of them. Which makes an ideologically driven No.10 even less fit for purpose.
This is beyond pathetic. People are trying to plan. They have nothing to plan with. Breweries don’t know whether to start brewing. The grants are running out. Landlords are demanding rent. Furlough is running out. Costs are continuing. Losses continue to be made.
If July 4 is the date bloody tell us. If it isn’t also bloody tell us.
Long chat with Daughter last night and she is in despair. Her last throw of the dice is a GoFundMe appeal to see if that will help. If it doesn’t then she will be closing the doors for the last time, to add to the steady drip drip announcements round here of redundancies. There are families round here where both breadwinners are facing unemployment. Even Sellafield is cutting jobs.
Meanwhile the government’s big announcement is about DiFiD. FFS!
As for the public the big announcement was schools meals
DIFID will only register in the political bubble, I doubt the public care
This is beyond pathetic. People are trying to plan. They have nothing to plan with. Breweries don’t know whether to start brewing. The grants are running out. Landlords are demanding rent. Furlough is running out. Costs are continuing. Losses continue to be made.
If July 4 is the date bloody tell us. If it isn’t also bloody tell us.
Long chat with Daughter last night and she is in despair. Her last throw of the dice is a GoFundMe appeal to see if that will help. If it doesn’t then she will be closing the doors for the last time, to add to the steady drip drip announcements round here of redundancies. There are families round here where both breadwinners are facing unemployment. Even Sellafield is cutting jobs.
Meanwhile the government’s big announcement is about DiFiD. FFS!
Its possible they want to see what the consequences of the shops reopening are.
The last thing the government will want to do is say that hospitality can reopen and then a week later have to change its mind.
Yes I think that's reasonable. Government has had plenty of failures in this but I think Cyclefree in some instances is expecting too much decisiveness from it, decisiveness which I dobt doubt would be criticised if the date were then changed by a single day. I dont doubt it as we've seen it happen before. This isnt a plea to go easy on government but our expectations of how definitive they can be is a bit skewed.
FPT: I'm no expert on US law, but ISTM that support from the following would be sufficient to force Trump out using the 25th amendment:
* Mike Pence * and 3-4 republican senators (not the 20 required for impeachment).
This is because what is needed is support from "the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide"...
...so majorities in both chambers would be enough to establish the said body, and a majority in the Senate would be constituted by 47 ~Dems plus 3 Reps plus Pence. Or if the number 50 is subject to quibble because of Pence who is not a senator getting two bites of the cherry, then 4 Rep senators would clinch it.
This is beyond pathetic. People are trying to plan. They have nothing to plan with. Breweries don’t know whether to start brewing. The grants are running out. Landlords are demanding rent. Furlough is running out. Costs are continuing. Losses continue to be made.
If July 4 is the date bloody tell us. If it isn’t also bloody tell us.
Long chat with Daughter last night and she is in despair. Her last throw of the dice is a GoFundMe appeal to see if that will help. If it doesn’t then she will be closing the doors for the last time, to add to the steady drip drip announcements round here of redundancies. There are families round here where both breadwinners are facing unemployment. Even Sellafield is cutting jobs.
Meanwhile the government’s big announcement is about DiFiD. FFS!
And being frit and pandering to rich celebrities.
My strong hunch is that your daughter can plan for July 4th with a high degree of confidence.
This is beyond pathetic. People are trying to plan. They have nothing to plan with. Breweries don’t know whether to start brewing. The grants are running out. Landlords are demanding rent. Furlough is running out. Costs are continuing. Losses continue to be made.
If July 4 is the date bloody tell us. If it isn’t also bloody tell us.
Long chat with Daughter last night and she is in despair. Her last throw of the dice is a GoFundMe appeal to see if that will help. If it doesn’t then she will be closing the doors for the last time, to add to the steady drip drip announcements round here of redundancies. There are families round here where both breadwinners are facing unemployment. Even Sellafield is cutting jobs.
Meanwhile the government’s big announcement is about DiFiD. FFS!
Sympathies - I'm not sure what I'd decide on pub reopening if I was the Government, but I'd get that I needed to decide something one way or the other. I hope she can pull through.
Messing about with DfID is displacement activity (like planning major local government reorganisation this autumn, as I said yesterday), and as Hancock said this morning it wasn't discussed with Cabinet as it's a reserve decision for the PM. So Johnson's focus over recent days has been departmental reshuffling, with a brief pause to absent-mindedly respond to a footballer's campaign that you may or may not have noticed the previous day. Oh, and having a Union Jack painted on your aircraft. Does that make sense, even if you actually agree with all these actions?
This is beyond pathetic. People are trying to plan. They have nothing to plan with. Breweries don’t know whether to start brewing. The grants are running out. Landlords are demanding rent. Furlough is running out. Costs are continuing. Losses continue to be made.
If July 4 is the date bloody tell us. If it isn’t also bloody tell us.
Long chat with Daughter last night and she is in despair. Her last throw of the dice is a GoFundMe appeal to see if that will help. If it doesn’t then she will be closing the doors for the last time, to add to the steady drip drip announcements round here of redundancies. There are families round here where both breadwinners are facing unemployment. Even Sellafield is cutting jobs.
Meanwhile the government’s big announcement is about DiFiD. FFS!
Its possible they want to see what the consequences of the shops reopening are.
The last thing the government will want to do is say that hospitality can reopen and then a week later have to change its mind.
An end to all the chopping and changing and erring and umming would certainly be an improvement.
This is beyond pathetic. People are trying to plan. They have nothing to plan with. Breweries don’t know whether to start brewing. The grants are running out. Landlords are demanding rent. Furlough is running out. Costs are continuing. Losses continue to be made.
If July 4 is the date bloody tell us. If it isn’t also bloody tell us.
Long chat with Daughter last night and she is in despair. Her last throw of the dice is a GoFundMe appeal to see if that will help. If it doesn’t then she will be closing the doors for the last time, to add to the steady drip drip announcements round here of redundancies. There are families round here where both breadwinners are facing unemployment. Even Sellafield is cutting jobs.
Meanwhile the government’s big announcement is about DiFiD. FFS!
To be fair this is following the same timetabling system as previous lockdown lifts. The date has been announced as July 4 but subject to confirmation closer to the date depending upon the data closer to the date.
Final confirmation likely won't come in until days before - the equivalent date for shops was announced weeks ago but the final confirmation for shops being able to open on the announced date only came a few days before the opening.
Interesting observation from James Forsyth on R4 - new Tory MPs are thinking more like US Congressmen “what’s in it for my constituents” than “what’s the party line” - hence the growing revolt over free school meals where lots of “red wall” Tory MPs have plenty of constituents who are in receipt of them. Which makes an ideologically driven No.10 even less fit for purpose.
I wonder if globaliser Conservatives such as Marcus Hannan have realised this yet.
Suspect a suspension for one year due to this technical anomaly wont be too damaging politically.
As long as it is clear it is restored the following year.
It would need to be a two year suspension.
How so?
Because its a two-year effect that the anomaly runs for.
In the first year there is a major drop in wages, triple lock ensures a 2.5% rise in pensions. In the second year there is a major increase in wages (but really a reversion), triple lock ensures a major increase in pensions.
To deal with the anomaly the lock needs to be suspended for two years, to cover both the fall and return back to where it was.
So they don't really need to announce anything until the second year - unless they don't want to put pensions up by 2.5% in the first year.
It would be better, and easier, to flag changes now.
Personally I would go the whole way and announce a merger of tax and NI, as well.
This is beyond pathetic. People are trying to plan. They have nothing to plan with. Breweries don’t know whether to start brewing. The grants are running out. Landlords are demanding rent. Furlough is running out. Costs are continuing. Losses continue to be made.
If July 4 is the date bloody tell us. If it isn’t also bloody tell us.
Long chat with Daughter last night and she is in despair. Her last throw of the dice is a GoFundMe appeal to see if that will help. If it doesn’t then she will be closing the doors for the last time, to add to the steady drip drip announcements round here of redundancies. There are families round here where both breadwinners are facing unemployment. Even Sellafield is cutting jobs.
Meanwhile the government’s big announcement is about DiFiD. FFS!
To be fair this is following the same timetabling system as previous lockdown lifts. The date has been announced as July 4 but subject to confirmation closer to the date depending upon the data closer to the date.
Final confirmation likely won't come in until days before - the equivalent date for shops was announced weeks ago but the final confirmation for shops being able to open on the announced date only came a few days before the opening.
Plan for July 4 is the statement as it stands.
As ever on message.
Not really. I've been very critical on certain aspects.
In particular I think its simply wrong that beer gardens aren't open yet. But as far as the announcement of a date is concerned that is following the prior guidance.
I remain unpersuaded by the wisdom of windfall taxes or taxing people on the basis of hitting groups/individuals for the crime of having a lot of income rather than trying to increase the revenue.
This is beyond pathetic. People are trying to plan. They have nothing to plan with. Breweries don’t know whether to start brewing. The grants are running out. Landlords are demanding rent. Furlough is running out. Costs are continuing. Losses continue to be made.
If July 4 is the date bloody tell us. If it isn’t also bloody tell us.
Long chat with Daughter last night and she is in despair. Her last throw of the dice is a GoFundMe appeal to see if that will help. If it doesn’t then she will be closing the doors for the last time, to add to the steady drip drip announcements round here of redundancies. There are families round here where both breadwinners are facing unemployment. Even Sellafield is cutting jobs.
Meanwhile the government’s big announcement is about DiFiD. FFS!
Its possible they want to see what the consequences of the shops reopening are.
The last thing the government will want to do is say that hospitality can reopen and then a week later have to change its mind.
An end to all the chopping and changing and erring and umming would certainly be an improvement.
A consequence of continuous media coverage - people are always under pressure to say something.
Suspect a suspension for one year due to this technical anomaly wont be too damaging politically.
As long as it is clear it is restored the following year.
It would need to be a two year suspension.
How so?
Because its a two-year effect that the anomaly runs for.
In the first year there is a major drop in wages, triple lock ensures a 2.5% rise in pensions. In the second year there is a major increase in wages (but really a reversion), triple lock ensures a major increase in pensions.
To deal with the anomaly the lock needs to be suspended for two years, to cover both the fall and return back to where it was.
So they don't really need to announce anything until the second year - unless they don't want to put pensions up by 2.5% in the first year.
It would be better, and easier, to flag changes now.
Personally I would go the whole way and announce a merger of tax and NI, as well.
No, NI was set up to fund state pensions and contributory unemployment benefits and healthcare only and should return to funding just that
So getting someone’s first name wrong is now a major mistake. Understood.
I’m going to be in real trouble.
It demonstrates a disrespectful disinterest. Dare I say, that would apply equally to Mr Hancock and a teacher who couldn't address their students appropriately.
If you teach ten classes, you might have over 300 names to memorise.
Good luck getting all of those right all the time.
I once had so much difficulty remembering the names of one very large class I wrote a detailed report for a student that was home schooled. Fortunately my then boss spotted it.
With the passion you demonstrate for education on here, I suspect errors are seldom made.
Back in my pre-PC schooldays the most disnterested and self-important teachers used devices to avoid remembering names, for example 'you, Ginger in the corner' or 'you, the girl at the back with the big jugs'. I recall a TV play where Paul Eddington's teacher character continually referred to a particular girl as Miss broad in the beam'. My favourite teachers were those who always prefixed ones correct surname with a title.
Back to Hancock. Getting the name wrong is a big deal. After yesterday's furore, one would have thought it burned into his brain.
This is beyond pathetic. People are trying to plan. They have nothing to plan with. Breweries don’t know whether to start brewing. The grants are running out. Landlords are demanding rent. Furlough is running out. Costs are continuing. Losses continue to be made.
If July 4 is the date bloody tell us. If it isn’t also bloody tell us.
Long chat with Daughter last night and she is in despair. Her last throw of the dice is a GoFundMe appeal to see if that will help. If it doesn’t then she will be closing the doors for the last time, to add to the steady drip drip announcements round here of redundancies. There are families round here where both breadwinners are facing unemployment. Even Sellafield is cutting jobs.
Meanwhile the government’s big announcement is about DiFiD. FFS!
Sympathies - I'm not sure what I'd decide on pub reopening if I was the Government, but I'd get that I needed to decide something one way or the other. I hope she can pull through.
Messing about with DfID is displacement activity (like planning major local government reorganisation this autumn, as I said yesterday), and as Hancock said this morning it wasn't discussed with Cabinet as it's a reserve decision for the PM. So Johnson's focus over recent days has been departmental reshuffling, with a brief pause to absent-mindedly respond to a footballer's campaign that you may or may not have noticed the previous day. Oh, and having a Union Jack painted on your aircraft. Does that make sense, even if you actually agree with all these actions?
He's only interested in how things look; anything else is detailed work he is happy to leave to others.
I recall a conversation I once heard him have behind the scenes with his mayoral advisers, which went along the lines of "I need to announce something on the environment; it doesn't matter what it is but I need to be seen doing more on green issues. Find me something to announce"
Interesting observation from James Forsyth on R4 - new Tory MPs are thinking more like US Congressmen “what’s in it for my constituents” than “what’s the party line” - hence the growing revolt over free school meals where lots of “red wall” Tory MPs have plenty of constituents who are in receipt of them. Which makes an ideologically driven No.10 even less fit for purpose.
That's not a bad move, unless it goes too far. Also suggests that they're thinking that, post-Brexit, their seats are not, by any means, 'safe'.
Interesting observation from James Forsyth on R4 - new Tory MPs are thinking more like US Congressmen “what’s in it for my constituents” than “what’s the party line” - hence the growing revolt over free school meals where lots of “red wall” Tory MPs have plenty of constituents who are in receipt of them. Which makes an ideologically driven No.10 even less fit for purpose.
I remain unpersuaded by the wisdom of windfall taxes or taxing people on the basis of hitting groups/individuals for the crime of having a lot of income rather than trying to increase the revenue.
Punitive taxation does not sit well with me.
I think it's time for footballers to put their money where their mouths are. It's one thing to be charitable, now they are asking for additional taxpayer spending, well that money needs to come from somewhere.
Suspect a suspension for one year due to this technical anomaly wont be too damaging politically.
As long as it is clear it is restored the following year.
It would need to be a two year suspension.
How so?
Because its a two-year effect that the anomaly runs for.
In the first year there is a major drop in wages, triple lock ensures a 2.5% rise in pensions. In the second year there is a major increase in wages (but really a reversion), triple lock ensures a major increase in pensions.
To deal with the anomaly the lock needs to be suspended for two years, to cover both the fall and return back to where it was.
So they don't really need to announce anything until the second year - unless they don't want to put pensions up by 2.5% in the first year.
It would be better, and easier, to flag changes now.
Personally I would go the whole way and announce a merger of tax and NI, as well.
No, NI was set up to fund state pensions and contributory unemployment benefits and healthcare only and should return to funding just that
Well, like so many of your predictions, we can all see immediately that that's never going to happen.
Interesting observation from James Forsyth on R4 - new Tory MPs are thinking more like US Congressmen “what’s in it for my constituents” than “what’s the party line” - hence the growing revolt over free school meals where lots of “red wall” Tory MPs have plenty of constituents who are in receipt of them. Which makes an ideologically driven No.10 even less fit for purpose.
I'm not sure the new Tory seats have proportionally that many more children in receipt of FSM:
Suspect a suspension for one year due to this technical anomaly wont be too damaging politically.
As long as it is clear it is restored the following year.
If there wasnt a triple lock in place can someone explain the need for one to be created? If we wanted to maintain the gap and keep pensioners richer than workers that could be done by linking pensions just with earnings. Why is there a need to make pensioners even richer than workers?
How is this good for society?
Why have it?
Pensioners vote. In a greater proportion than the young.
Politicians give those who vote in greater proportion more goodies.
Interesting observation from James Forsyth on R4 - new Tory MPs are thinking more like US Congressmen “what’s in it for my constituents” than “what’s the party line” - hence the growing revolt over free school meals where lots of “red wall” Tory MPs have plenty of constituents who are in receipt of them. Which makes an ideologically driven No.10 even less fit for purpose.
This is beyond pathetic. People are trying to plan. They have nothing to plan with. Breweries don’t know whether to start brewing. The grants are running out. Landlords are demanding rent. Furlough is running out. Costs are continuing. Losses continue to be made.
If July 4 is the date bloody tell us. If it isn’t also bloody tell us.
Long chat with Daughter last night and she is in despair. Her last throw of the dice is a GoFundMe appeal to see if that will help. If it doesn’t then she will be closing the doors for the last time, to add to the steady drip drip announcements round here of redundancies. There are families round here where both breadwinners are facing unemployment. Even Sellafield is cutting jobs.
Meanwhile the government’s big announcement is about DiFiD. FFS!
I have every sympathy with your daughter's situation but it does seem possible that the likes of pubs could prove risky.
This is beyond pathetic. People are trying to plan. They have nothing to plan with. Breweries don’t know whether to start brewing. The grants are running out. Landlords are demanding rent. Furlough is running out. Costs are continuing. Losses continue to be made.
If July 4 is the date bloody tell us. If it isn’t also bloody tell us.
Long chat with Daughter last night and she is in despair. Her last throw of the dice is a GoFundMe appeal to see if that will help. If it doesn’t then she will be closing the doors for the last time, to add to the steady drip drip announcements round here of redundancies. There are families round here where both breadwinners are facing unemployment. Even Sellafield is cutting jobs.
Meanwhile the government’s big announcement is about DiFiD. FFS!
The timetable remains, pubs and restaurants and cafes will reopen in July with social distancing. Your daughter should still be preparing on that basis.
Yet the government is still funding furlough for workers until October showing how benevolent it has been on this
Interesting observation from James Forsyth on R4 - new Tory MPs are thinking more like US Congressmen “what’s in it for my constituents” than “what’s the party line” - hence the growing revolt over free school meals where lots of “red wall” Tory MPs have plenty of constituents who are in receipt of them. Which makes an ideologically driven No.10 even less fit for purpose.
That's not a bad move, unless it goes too far. Also suggests that they're thinking that, post-Brexit, their seats are not, by any means, 'safe'.
It is not post Brexit that matters but post Corbyn. The big change in politics is that LAB now has a leader who appears electable.
I remain unpersuaded by the wisdom of windfall taxes or taxing people on the basis of hitting groups/individuals for the crime of having a lot of income rather than trying to increase the revenue.
Punitive taxation does not sit well with me.
I think it's time for footballers to put their money where their mouths are. It's one thing to be charitable, now they are asking for additional taxpayer spending, well that money needs to come from somewhere.
Just footballers? Or will you include Captains of Industry etc. in the equation?
Interesting observation from James Forsyth on R4 - new Tory MPs are thinking more like US Congressmen “what’s in it for my constituents” than “what’s the party line” - hence the growing revolt over free school meals where lots of “red wall” Tory MPs have plenty of constituents who are in receipt of them. Which makes an ideologically driven No.10 even less fit for purpose.
Misleading in the extreme. Middlesbrough (26.9%) and Darlington (17.0%) are both above the England average (14.1%), but the former is a lot more than the average.
FPT: I'm no expert on US law, but ISTM that support from the following would be sufficient to force Trump out using the 25th amendment:
* Mike Pence * and 3-4 republican senators (not the 20 required for impeachment).
This is because what is needed is support from "the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide"...
...so majorities in both chambers would be enough to establish the said body, and a majority in the Senate would be constituted by 47 ~Dems plus 3 Reps plus Pence. Or if the number 50 is subject to quibble because of Pence who is not a senator getting two bites of the cherry, then 4 Rep senators would clinch it.
I missed the italicised word "temporarily" after "force Trump out", because 20 Rep senators would be required once he had been out for 4 + 21 days or possibly 4 + a greater number of days if Congress depending on the scheduling of Congress sessions.
Suspect a suspension for one year due to this technical anomaly wont be too damaging politically.
As long as it is clear it is restored the following year.
If there wasnt a triple lock in place can someone explain the need for one to be created? If we wanted to maintain the gap and keep pensioners richer than workers that could be done by linking pensions just with earnings. Why is there a need to make pensioners even richer than workers?
How is this good for society?
The full state pension is £134.25 per week, seven grand a year, or equivalent to working 15.3 hours per week at minimum wage. Doesn’t sound like state pensioners are particularly rich.
Only 43% of British pensioners income now comes from the state pension as take up of private workplace pensions has increased significantly
Interesting observation from James Forsyth on R4 - new Tory MPs are thinking more like US Congressmen “what’s in it for my constituents” than “what’s the party line” - hence the growing revolt over free school meals where lots of “red wall” Tory MPs have plenty of constituents who are in receipt of them. Which makes an ideologically driven No.10 even less fit for purpose.
No 10 is more focus group driven than ideologically driven. That is why they spend their time worrying about things like the colour of a plane rather than tackle the real problems. It wont mind the piecemeal pork barrel approach at all.
So getting someone’s first name wrong is now a major mistake. Understood.
I’m going to be in real trouble.
It demonstrates a disrespectful disinterest. Dare I say, that would apply equally to Mr Hancock and a teacher who couldn't address their students appropriately.
If you teach ten classes, you might have over 300 names to memorise.
Good luck getting all of those right all the time.
I once had so much difficulty remembering the names of one very large class I wrote a detailed report for a student that was home schooled. Fortunately my then boss spotted it.
I have a school report with the wrong first name. (There were similarities in the family name, and no harm done.), I struggle with the students at Uni - by 4th year I might know about a third well, but total cohort of over 400 makes it tough.
On DfID - A lot of criticism levelled at the government. But personally I'd like to know why they have done this? Have I missed the explanation somewhere? The response, typically, appears to equate it with the slaughtering of the first born. But what is going on here? On the surface it's just an administrative move - do critics believe the foreign office cannot be trusted with the aid budget?
And what is the advantage to the government in this move. Will they tell us or is it up to the twitterati to deduce.
I remain unpersuaded by the wisdom of windfall taxes or taxing people on the basis of hitting groups/individuals for the crime of having a lot of income rather than trying to increase the revenue.
Punitive taxation does not sit well with me.
I think it's time for footballers to put their money where their mouths are. It's one thing to be charitable, now they are asking for additional taxpayer spending, well that money needs to come from somewhere.
Just footballers? Or will you include Captains of Industry etc. in the equation?
CEOs as well, I think £250k is a reasonable level which gets the actually very rich. My only worry is that it would be difficult to get rid of.
So getting someone’s first name wrong is now a major mistake. Understood.
I’m going to be in real trouble.
It demonstrates a disrespectful disinterest. Dare I say, that would apply equally to Mr Hancock and a teacher who couldn't address their students appropriately.
If you teach ten classes, you might have over 300 names to memorise.
Good luck getting all of those right all the time.
I once had so much difficulty remembering the names of one very large class I wrote a detailed report for a student that was home schooled. Fortunately my then boss spotted it.
I have a school report with the wrong first name. (There were similarities in the family name, and no harm done.), I struggle with the students at Uni - by 4th year I might know about a third well, but total cohort of over 400 makes it tough.
Telegraph: "The Prime Minister said Britain’s aid spending would no longer be “some giant cashpoint in the sky” "
I remain unpersuaded by the wisdom of windfall taxes or taxing people on the basis of hitting groups/individuals for the crime of having a lot of income rather than trying to increase the revenue.
Punitive taxation does not sit well with me.
I think it's time for footballers to put their money where their mouths are. It's one thing to be charitable, now they are asking for additional taxpayer spending, well that money needs to come from somewhere.
Just footballers? Or will you include Captains of Industry etc. in the equation?
CEOs as well, I think £250k is a reasonable level which gets the actually very rich. My only worry is that it would be difficult to get rid of.
If you want a 50%+ top rate of income tax then you should be voting Labour as it was a policy of Brown, Ed Miliband, Corbyn and now is a policy of Starmer.
Osborne cut the top rate of income tax back to 45% after Darling raised it to 50%
This is beyond pathetic. People are trying to plan. They have nothing to plan with. Breweries don’t know whether to start brewing. The grants are running out. Landlords are demanding rent. Furlough is running out. Costs are continuing. Losses continue to be made.
If July 4 is the date bloody tell us. If it isn’t also bloody tell us.
Long chat with Daughter last night and she is in despair. Her last throw of the dice is a GoFundMe appeal to see if that will help. If it doesn’t then she will be closing the doors for the last time, to add to the steady drip drip announcements round here of redundancies. There are families round here where both breadwinners are facing unemployment. Even Sellafield is cutting jobs.
Meanwhile the government’s big announcement is about DiFiD. FFS!
To be fair this is following the same timetabling system as previous lockdown lifts. The date has been announced as July 4 but subject to confirmation closer to the date depending upon the data closer to the date.
Final confirmation likely won't come in until days before - the equivalent date for shops was announced weeks ago but the final confirmation for shops being able to open on the announced date only came a few days before the opening.
I remain unpersuaded by the wisdom of windfall taxes or taxing people on the basis of hitting groups/individuals for the crime of having a lot of income rather than trying to increase the revenue.
Punitive taxation does not sit well with me.
I think it's time for footballers to put their money where their mouths are. It's one thing to be charitable, now they are asking for additional taxpayer spending, well that money needs to come from somewhere.
To be fair, the amount needed (if it is £140 million) equates to:
- 2 days of the contributions we have saved thanks to leaving the EU (assuming the £350 million per week figure was correct and appropriate)
or
- half a day of the annual spend on the State Pension
On DfID - A lot of criticism levelled at the government. But personally I'd like to know why they have done this? Have I missed the explanation somewhere? The response, typically, appears to equate it with the slaughtering of the first born. But what is going on here? On the surface it's just an administrative move - do critics believe the foreign office cannot be trusted with the aid budget?
And what is the advantage to the government in this move. Will they tell us or is it up to the twitterati to deduce.
Johnson gave a statement going into detail in Parliament yesterday.
Basically it is joining up and coordinating policy. Currently eg an Ambassador to a country isn't aware of or responsible for the aid to that country, but now it will all be co-ordinated together. Johnson gave an example in Parliament to a critical question that there is no point an Ambassador to a nation saying in one day that a government shouldn't execute a political opponent only to have another representative from the UK give hundreds of millions the next day in Aid.
I remain unpersuaded by the wisdom of windfall taxes or taxing people on the basis of hitting groups/individuals for the crime of having a lot of income rather than trying to increase the revenue.
Punitive taxation does not sit well with me.
I think it's time for footballers to put their money where their mouths are. It's one thing to be charitable, now they are asking for additional taxpayer spending, well that money needs to come from somewhere.
To be fair, the amount needed (if it is £140 million) equates to:
- 2 days of the contributions we have saved thanks to leaving the EU (assuming the £350 million per week figure was correct and appropriate)
or
- half a day of the annual spend on the State Pension
And it is less than the tax the government will raise this week from the Premier League alone.
Suspect a suspension for one year due to this technical anomaly wont be too damaging politically.
As long as it is clear it is restored the following year.
If there wasnt a triple lock in place can someone explain the need for one to be created? If we wanted to maintain the gap and keep pensioners richer than workers that could be done by linking pensions just with earnings. Why is there a need to make pensioners even richer than workers?
How is this good for society?
The full state pension is £134.25 per week, seven grand a year, or equivalent to working 15.3 hours per week at minimum wage. Doesn’t sound like state pensioners are particularly rich.
Not a pensioner so no expert. AgeUK says the full pension is £175.20. can anyone adjudicate?
I suppose new Tory seats v existing Tory seats might have a bigger gap in terms of FSM %, but those new seats aren't all that different. It's the inner cities where the big %s are.
Labour hold three seats in Cheshire West and Chester unitary authority. Admittedly Ellesmere Port & Neston, City of Chester, and Weaver Vale probably have a higher percentage of kids on FSM than Eddisbury, but even so it just shows how that part of the world is quite different.
I remain unpersuaded by the wisdom of windfall taxes or taxing people on the basis of hitting groups/individuals for the crime of having a lot of income rather than trying to increase the revenue.
Punitive taxation does not sit well with me.
I think it's time for footballers to put their money where their mouths are. It's one thing to be charitable, now they are asking for additional taxpayer spending, well that money needs to come from somewhere.
Just footballers? Or will you include Captains of Industry etc. in the equation?
CEOs as well, I think £250k is a reasonable level which gets the actually very rich. My only worry is that it would be difficult to get rid of.
If you want a 50% top rate of income tax then you should be voting Labour as it was a policy of Brown, Ed Miliband, Corbyn and now Starmer.
Osborne cut the top rate of income tax back to 45% after Darling raised it to 50%
I remain unpersuaded by the wisdom of windfall taxes or taxing people on the basis of hitting groups/individuals for the crime of having a lot of income rather than trying to increase the revenue.
Punitive taxation does not sit well with me.
I think it's time for footballers to put their money where their mouths are. It's one thing to be charitable, now they are asking for additional taxpayer spending, well that money needs to come from somewhere.
To be fair, the amount needed (if it is £140 million) equates to:
- 2 days of the contributions we have saved thanks to leaving the EU (assuming the £350 million per week figure was correct and appropriate)
or
- half a day of the annual spend on the State Pension
Indeed. If spending so little solves a hunger problem why doesn't the expenditure of eye watering billions already on the same group already solve it?
Suspect a suspension for one year due to this technical anomaly wont be too damaging politically.
As long as it is clear it is restored the following year.
If there wasnt a triple lock in place can someone explain the need for one to be created? If we wanted to maintain the gap and keep pensioners richer than workers that could be done by linking pensions just with earnings. Why is there a need to make pensioners even richer than workers?
How is this good for society?
The full state pension is £134.25 per week, seven grand a year, or equivalent to working 15.3 hours per week at minimum wage. Doesn’t sound like state pensioners are particularly rich.
Not a pensioner so no expert. AgeUK says the full pension is £175.20. can anyone adjudicate?
He has the old figure before the pension reforms came in?
I remain unpersuaded by the wisdom of windfall taxes or taxing people on the basis of hitting groups/individuals for the crime of having a lot of income rather than trying to increase the revenue.
Punitive taxation does not sit well with me.
I think it's time for footballers to put their money where their mouths are. It's one thing to be charitable, now they are asking for additional taxpayer spending, well that money needs to come from somewhere.
To be fair, the amount needed (if it is £140 million) equates to:
- 2 days of the contributions we have saved thanks to leaving the EU (assuming the £350 million per week figure was correct and appropriate)
or
- half a day of the annual spend on the State Pension
I remain unpersuaded by the wisdom of windfall taxes or taxing people on the basis of hitting groups/individuals for the crime of having a lot of income rather than trying to increase the revenue.
Punitive taxation does not sit well with me.
I think it's time for footballers to put their money where their mouths are. It's one thing to be charitable, now they are asking for additional taxpayer spending, well that money needs to come from somewhere.
Just footballers? Or will you include Captains of Industry etc. in the equation?
CEOs as well, I think £250k is a reasonable level which gets the actually very rich. My only worry is that it would be difficult to get rid of.
If you want a 50% top rate of income tax then you should be voting Labour as it was a policy of Brown, Ed Miliband, Corbyn and now Starmer.
Osborne cut the top rate of income tax back to 45% after Darling raised it to 50%
Thatcher had it at 60% for nine years.
Thatcher inherited a top income tax rate of 83% in 1979, she left office with the top rate of income tax slashed to just 40% by 1990.
No PM cut the top rate of income tax over their premiership more than Thatcher did
I remain unpersuaded by the wisdom of windfall taxes or taxing people on the basis of hitting groups/individuals for the crime of having a lot of income rather than trying to increase the revenue.
Punitive taxation does not sit well with me.
I think it's time for footballers to put their money where their mouths are. It's one thing to be charitable, now they are asking for additional taxpayer spending, well that money needs to come from somewhere.
Just footballers? Or will you include Captains of Industry etc. in the equation?
CEOs as well, I think £250k is a reasonable level which gets the actually very rich. My only worry is that it would be difficult to get rid of.
Would normally be against this as doubt it would raise tax revenue at those rates. But your 2 year windfall tax might work as if people had confidence it would only be for a short period, then the costs of dodging the tax probably outweigh the costs of paying it for many.
On DfID - A lot of criticism levelled at the government. But personally I'd like to know why they have done this? Have I missed the explanation somewhere? The response, typically, appears to equate it with the slaughtering of the first born. But what is going on here? On the surface it's just an administrative move - do critics believe the foreign office cannot be trusted with the aid budget?
And what is the advantage to the government in this move. Will they tell us or is it up to the twitterati to deduce.
Its just politics - the sort of stuff that in the old days Tory ministers liked to announce during their annual conference speech.
I remain unpersuaded by the wisdom of windfall taxes or taxing people on the basis of hitting groups/individuals for the crime of having a lot of income rather than trying to increase the revenue.
Punitive taxation does not sit well with me.
I think it's time for footballers to put their money where their mouths are. It's one thing to be charitable, now they are asking for additional taxpayer spending, well that money needs to come from somewhere.
Just footballers? Or will you include Captains of Industry etc. in the equation?
CEOs as well, I think £250k is a reasonable level which gets the actually very rich. My only worry is that it would be difficult to get rid of.
£134 state pension? I deal with this all the time and what I find is no two people's state pension are the same. Many women who have been housewives get a very small pension - could be £60 a week - but if the spouse dies it immediately gets uprated to about £160 per week. If you have a married couple at least one of them will be getting £7-8k per year. That's before the complication of pension credit.
I remain unpersuaded by the wisdom of windfall taxes or taxing people on the basis of hitting groups/individuals for the crime of having a lot of income rather than trying to increase the revenue.
Punitive taxation does not sit well with me.
I think it's time for footballers to put their money where their mouths are. It's one thing to be charitable, now they are asking for additional taxpayer spending, well that money needs to come from somewhere.
To be fair, the amount needed (if it is £140 million) equates to:
- 2 days of the contributions we have saved thanks to leaving the EU (assuming the £350 million per week figure was correct and appropriate)
or
- half a day of the annual spend on the State Pension
Indeed. If spending so little solves a hunger problem why doesn't the expenditure of eye watering billions already on the same group already solve it?
I don't think many people on the State Pension get free school meals.
“Ladies and gentlemen, it is with great pleasure that I introduce to you our star guest. We all love her, especially as she is our local girl. I therefore feel it right to introduce her by her real name.
“Ladies and gentlemen, please welcome the very lovely Miss Diana Clunt.”
I remain unpersuaded by the wisdom of windfall taxes or taxing people on the basis of hitting groups/individuals for the crime of having a lot of income rather than trying to increase the revenue.
Punitive taxation does not sit well with me.
I think it's time for footballers to put their money where their mouths are. It's one thing to be charitable, now they are asking for additional taxpayer spending, well that money needs to come from somewhere.
To be fair, the amount needed (if it is £140 million) equates to:
- 2 days of the contributions we have saved thanks to leaving the EU (assuming the £350 million per week figure was correct and appropriate)
or
- half a day of the annual spend on the State Pension
For me it's more about punishing the footballers.
I don't like the concept of Government by spite, attractive as it may sometimes seem.
On DfID - A lot of criticism levelled at the government. But personally I'd like to know why they have done this? Have I missed the explanation somewhere? The response, typically, appears to equate it with the slaughtering of the first born. But what is going on here? On the surface it's just an administrative move - do critics believe the foreign office cannot be trusted with the aid budget?
And what is the advantage to the government in this move. Will they tell us or is it up to the twitterati to deduce.
I remain unpersuaded by the wisdom of windfall taxes or taxing people on the basis of hitting groups/individuals for the crime of having a lot of income rather than trying to increase the revenue.
Punitive taxation does not sit well with me.
I think it's time for footballers to put their money where their mouths are. It's one thing to be charitable, now they are asking for additional taxpayer spending, well that money needs to come from somewhere.
To be fair, the amount needed (if it is £140 million) equates to:
- 2 days of the contributions we have saved thanks to leaving the EU (assuming the £350 million per week figure was correct and appropriate)
or
- half a day of the annual spend on the State Pension
For me it's more about punishing the footballers.
I don't like the concept of Government by spite, attractive as it may sometimes seem.
Indeed - the time to do something like this was early 2015 when the 2016-19 rights deal was announced. That was a huuuuuuuuuuuuge increase and probably would have justified a windfall tax ring-fenced for grassroots sports or something.
I remain unpersuaded by the wisdom of windfall taxes or taxing people on the basis of hitting groups/individuals for the crime of having a lot of income rather than trying to increase the revenue.
Punitive taxation does not sit well with me.
I think it's time for footballers to put their money where their mouths are. It's one thing to be charitable, now they are asking for additional taxpayer spending, well that money needs to come from somewhere.
To be fair, the amount needed (if it is £140 million) equates to:
- 2 days of the contributions we have saved thanks to leaving the EU (assuming the £350 million per week figure was correct and appropriate)
or
- half a day of the annual spend on the State Pension
Indeed. If spending so little solves a hunger problem why doesn't the expenditure of eye watering billions already on the same group already solve it?
Indeed. My own group of friends are probably the best example of how this will play out, almost everyone in favour of it. Then a few point out that vouchers are a bad idea, another few say the government will get the money back from changing the benefits system which will result in cash being replaced by vouchers. Suddenly everyone starts to realise that they're supporting something that had the potential to make the lives of poor people a lot worse.
Unsurprisingly the most in favour was the hard leftists who started raving on about how the government could introduce more vouchers for basic services instead of cash and that they could have a services voucher book delivered to each household.
After about 10 mins the conclusion was that this far and no further, longer term thinking is needed on the subject which includes better guidance for parents on child nutrition and it may be better to send weekly food parcels to households than give vouchers.
On DfID - A lot of criticism levelled at the government. But personally I'd like to know why they have done this? Have I missed the explanation somewhere? The response, typically, appears to equate it with the slaughtering of the first born. But what is going on here? On the surface it's just an administrative move - do critics believe the foreign office cannot be trusted with the aid budget?
And what is the advantage to the government in this move. Will they tell us or is it up to the twitterati to deduce.
Johnson gave a statement going into detail in Parliament yesterday.
Basically it is joining up and coordinating policy. Currently eg an Ambassador to a country isn't aware of or responsible for the aid to that country, but now it will all be co-ordinated together. Johnson gave an example in Parliament to a critical question that there is no point an Ambassador to a nation saying in one day that a government shouldn't execute a political opponent only to have another representative from the UK give hundreds of millions the next day in Aid.
It was such a dumb explanation, and classic Johnson, carrying a whif of plausibility to people who know nothing about the issue at hand. If the government has human rights criteria for aid them that should be reflected in DfID policy already. The more likely scenario would be DfID refusing to provide aid on human rights grounds while the ambassador turns up the next day with a representative of BAE offering to sell the opressive regime some nice shiny weapons. The point of a separate aid department was to allocate our hard earned tax money on the basis of evidence and need, not on the whim of an FCO mandarin or as an inducement to buy stuff from us (aka a wasteful industrial subsidy).
I remain unpersuaded by the wisdom of windfall taxes or taxing people on the basis of hitting groups/individuals for the crime of having a lot of income rather than trying to increase the revenue.
Punitive taxation does not sit well with me.
I think it's time for footballers to put their money where their mouths are. It's one thing to be charitable, now they are asking for additional taxpayer spending, well that money needs to come from somewhere.
Just footballers? Or will you include Captains of Industry etc. in the equation?
CEOs as well, I think £250k is a reasonable level which gets the actually very rich. My only worry is that it would be difficult to get rid of.
If you want a 50% top rate of income tax then you should be voting Labour as it was a policy of Brown, Ed Miliband, Corbyn and now Starmer.
Osborne cut the top rate of income tax back to 45% after Darling raised it to 50%
Thatcher had it at 60% for nine years.
Thatcher inherited a top income tax rate of 83% in 1979, she left office with the top rate of income tax slashed to just 40% by 1990.
No PM cut the top rate of income tax over their premiership more than Thatcher did
Thatcher also left office with government debt as a lower proportion of GDP and had the country running a trade surplus through most of her premiership.
This is beyond pathetic. People are trying to plan. They have nothing to plan with. Breweries don’t know whether to start brewing. The grants are running out. Landlords are demanding rent. Furlough is running out. Costs are continuing. Losses continue to be made.
If July 4 is the date bloody tell us. If it isn’t also bloody tell us.
Long chat with Daughter last night and she is in despair. Her last throw of the dice is a GoFundMe appeal to see if that will help. If it doesn’t then she will be closing the doors for the last time, to add to the steady drip drip announcements round here of redundancies. There are families round here where both breadwinners are facing unemployment. Even Sellafield is cutting jobs.
Meanwhile the government’s big announcement is about DiFiD. FFS!
The Government need to start fine-tuning support by sector.
Online shopping is minimally hit and should get the least help, for example.
The hospitality and entertainment sectors, together with the airline sector (much though many people may dislike individual owners or airlines) are unavoidably the most affected (I've seen estimates that this will have a similar affect to the airline industry as the Eighties had to the mining industry). And affected by a once-in-a-century natural disaster that no-one would have been sanely expected to prepare for.
The Government should aim to shoulder a significant amount of the ongoing and avoidable costs (including staff costs and rent) for these until social distancing can be safely and certainly eased. Which could be as soon as September/October if the Oxford vaccine comes off.
Otherwise we'll have gaping holes in our economy and society that will take a generation to recover from, together with a lot of avoidable human suffering. Yes, it's costly. Yes, it's going to have an impact on the finances. And yes, it's what the Government (pooling risk from us all that's impossible for individuals or companies to plausibly shoulder) is supposed to do - and should do.
I remain unpersuaded by the wisdom of windfall taxes or taxing people on the basis of hitting groups/individuals for the crime of having a lot of income rather than trying to increase the revenue.
Punitive taxation does not sit well with me.
I think it's time for footballers to put their money where their mouths are. It's one thing to be charitable, now they are asking for additional taxpayer spending, well that money needs to come from somewhere.
Just footballers? Or will you include Captains of Industry etc. in the equation?
CEOs as well, I think £250k is a reasonable level which gets the actually very rich. My only worry is that it would be difficult to get rid of.
If you want a 50% top rate of income tax then you should be voting Labour as it was a policy of Brown, Ed Miliband, Corbyn and now Starmer.
Osborne cut the top rate of income tax back to 45% after Darling raised it to 50%
Thatcher had it at 60% for nine years.
Thatcher inherited a top income tax rate of 83% in 1979, she left office with the top rate of income tax slashed to just 40% by 1990.
No PM cut the top rate of income tax over their premiership more than Thatcher did
Thatcher wanted to leave it at 50% I believe. Lawson convinced her to cut it to 40%.
I remain unpersuaded by the wisdom of windfall taxes or taxing people on the basis of hitting groups/individuals for the crime of having a lot of income rather than trying to increase the revenue.
Punitive taxation does not sit well with me.
I think it's time for footballers to put their money where their mouths are. It's one thing to be charitable, now they are asking for additional taxpayer spending, well that money needs to come from somewhere.
To be fair, the amount needed (if it is £140 million) equates to:
- 2 days of the contributions we have saved thanks to leaving the EU (assuming the £350 million per week figure was correct and appropriate)
or
- half a day of the annual spend on the State Pension
For me it's more about punishing the footballers.
I don't like the concept of Government by spite, attractive as it may sometimes seem.
Me neither, however, it's a group of extremely wealthy individuals asking for additional taxpayer spending. Time to show them what the cost of additional taxpayer spending actually means in practice.
A bigger problem for HMG is what they do if, as some monetary economists predict, inflation spikes quite severely in next few years. Pensions will have to match under the lock scheme.
The M3 money numbers are pretty dramatic, especially for USA. Monetarists are blowing whistles.
Which is why this is not going to be a one year or two year thing. The triple lock is gone for good. The reality is that UK plc has lost about a quarter of a years income and is going to be worse off for some considerable time to come. It is inconceivable that pensioners can be sheltered from that pain. In fairness most pensioners won't even expect to be.
If I was the government I would announce a one year increase in the top rate of tax to 50%.
It would be unofficially dubbed the Rashford tax.
A one year tax hike would raise very little because a whole industry exists to help people shift tax liabilities from one tax year to another. In my view it was a mistake to cut the top tax rate to 45%. Those with the broadest shoulders can easily afford to contribute more, the top rate should go back to 50% and stay there.
Prime ministers announce changes to government structures for one of two reasons. Either they are frustrated in pursuit of some cherished policy, or they are panicking that events are running away from them. Moving Whitehall furniture creates a comforting illusion of control.
Since Boris Johnson doesn’t cherish much beyond the idea of himself as a figure of greatness, the safe bet is that his plan to merge the Foreign Office with the Department for International Development belongs in the category of gestural distraction.
The rationale is that a hybrid ministry will more efficiently represent the interests of “global Britain”. Even if that were a feasible outcome, now is hardly the time. It calls to mind the late Denis Healey’s maxim that the moment to remove a man’s appendix is not when he is busy carrying a piano up a flight of stairs.
If I was the government I would announce a one year increase in the top rate of tax to 50%.
It would be unofficially dubbed the Rashford tax.
A one year tax hike would raise very little because a whole industry exists to help people shift tax liabilities from one tax year to another. In my view it was a mistake to cut the top tax rate to 45%. Those with the broadest shoulders can easily afford to contribute more, the top rate should go back to 50% and stay there.
Comments
BREAKING: Tory MP finds out they can't believe a word Johnson says.
Harry Potter and the Government U-turn.
PM reverses a previous PMs decision - previous PM is upset. How is that a news story?
At least I know Rashford's first name is Miles.
Furthermore this was a specific denunciation of something that Blair had done and that Brown and Cameron had kept. Someone yesterday queried Major's silence on the matter but of course despite the fact that Major has been quite willing to be critical of Johnson what Johnson has done is bring the system back into line with what the system was like under Major before Blair split the FCO in two.
No.
This is beyond pathetic. People are trying to plan. They have nothing to plan with. Breweries don’t know whether to start brewing. The grants are running out. Landlords are demanding rent. Furlough is running out. Costs are continuing. Losses continue to be made.
If July 4 is the date bloody tell us. If it isn’t also bloody tell us.
Long chat with Daughter last night and she is in despair. Her last throw of the dice is a GoFundMe appeal to see if that will help. If it doesn’t then she will be closing the doors for the last time, to add to the steady drip drip announcements round here of redundancies. There are families round here where both breadwinners are facing unemployment. Even Sellafield is cutting jobs.
Meanwhile the government’s big announcement is about DiFiD. FFS!
The weekly reach figures are interesting
BBC - 45%
Guardian -18%
Mail on line -15%
And Sky just 10%
The last thing the government will want to do is say that hospitality can reopen and then a week later have to change its mind.
Final confirmation likely won't come in until days before - the equivalent date for shops was announced weeks ago but the final confirmation for shops being able to open on the announced date only came a few days before the opening.
Plan for July 4 is the statement as it stands.
It would be unofficially dubbed the Rashford tax.
DIFID will only register in the political bubble, I doubt the public care
* Mike Pence
* and 3-4 republican senators (not the 20 required for impeachment).
This is because what is needed is support from "the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide"...
...so majorities in both chambers would be enough to establish the said body, and a majority in the Senate would be constituted by 47 ~Dems plus 3 Reps plus Pence. Or if the number 50 is subject to quibble because of Pence who is not a senator getting two bites of the cherry, then 4 Rep senators would clinch it.
My strong hunch is that your daughter can plan for July 4th with a high degree of confidence.
Messing about with DfID is displacement activity (like planning major local government reorganisation this autumn, as I said yesterday), and as Hancock said this morning it wasn't discussed with Cabinet as it's a reserve decision for the PM. So Johnson's focus over recent days has been departmental reshuffling, with a brief pause to absent-mindedly respond to a footballer's campaign that you may or may not have noticed the previous day. Oh, and having a Union Jack painted on your aircraft. Does that make sense, even if you actually agree with all these actions?
Personally I would go the whole way and announce a merger of tax and NI, as well.
In particular I think its simply wrong that beer gardens aren't open yet. But as far as the announcement of a date is concerned that is following the prior guidance.
Punitive taxation does not sit well with me.
Back in my pre-PC schooldays the most disnterested and self-important teachers used devices to avoid remembering names, for example 'you, Ginger in the corner' or 'you, the girl at the back with the big jugs'. I recall a TV play where Paul Eddington's teacher character continually referred to a particular girl as Miss broad in the beam'. My favourite teachers were those who always prefixed ones correct surname with a title.
Back to Hancock. Getting the name wrong is a big deal. After yesterday's furore, one would have thought it burned into his brain.
I recall a conversation I once heard him have behind the scenes with his mayoral advisers, which went along the lines of "I need to announce something on the environment; it doesn't matter what it is but I need to be seen doing more on green issues. Find me something to announce"
https://twitter.com/defencedailyuk/status/1272978310058905601?s=21
https://lginform.local.gov.uk/reports/lgastandard?mod-metric=2174&mod-area=E92000001&mod-type=namedComparisonGroup&mod-group=ADASSRegions_NorthEastern
The areas with the high numbers are still Labour seats.
Pensioners vote. In a greater proportion than the young.
Politicians give those who vote in greater proportion more goodies.
The rest is largely rationalisation.
Doing the right thing is
https://twitter.com/annehelen/status/1272909655321088001?s=20
Yet the government is still funding furlough for workers until October showing how benevolent it has been on this
Suspect that the amount would be small - though 60% is a good chunk more than 50%, which would just be symbolic.
If we follow normal principles, we are after 100bn a year. 100bn a year is about 13-15p on income tax across the board.
https://lginform.local.gov.uk/reports/lgastandard?mod-metric=2174&mod-area=E92000001&mod-type=namedComparisonGroup&mod-group=ADASSRegions_NorthEastern
https://fullfact.org/europe/pensioners-eu-uk/
And what is the advantage to the government in this move. Will they tell us or is it up to the twitterati to deduce.
Osborne cut the top rate of income tax back to 45% after Darling raised it to 50%
- 2 days of the contributions we have saved thanks to leaving the EU (assuming the £350 million per week figure was correct and appropriate)
or
- half a day of the annual spend on the State Pension
Basically it is joining up and coordinating policy. Currently eg an Ambassador to a country isn't aware of or responsible for the aid to that country, but now it will all be co-ordinated together. Johnson gave an example in Parliament to a critical question that there is no point an Ambassador to a nation saying in one day that a government shouldn't execute a political opponent only to have another representative from the UK give hundreds of millions the next day in Aid.
The NW is interesting:
https://lginform.local.gov.uk/reports/lgastandard?mod-metric=2174&mod-area=E92000001&mod-group=ADASSRegions_NorthWestern&mod-type=namedComparisonGroup
Labour hold three seats in Cheshire West and Chester unitary authority. Admittedly Ellesmere Port & Neston, City of Chester, and Weaver Vale probably have a higher percentage of kids on FSM than Eddisbury, but even so it just shows how that part of the world is quite different.
No PM cut the top rate of income tax over their premiership more than Thatcher did
I believe the Merseyside Derby is this weekend but not sure which other games are.
Search for pick or bbc.
“Ladies and gentlemen, it is with great pleasure that I introduce to you our star guest. We all love her, especially as she is our local girl. I therefore feel it right to introduce her by her real name.
“Ladies and gentlemen, please welcome the very lovely Miss Diana Clunt.”
https://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/8726435.vicars-diana-dors-clanger-church-fete/
https://twitter.com/MahfuzSadique/status/1273043877449084929
Unsurprisingly the most in favour was the hard leftists who started raving on about how the government could introduce more vouchers for basic services instead of cash and that they could have a services voucher book delivered to each household.
After about 10 mins the conclusion was that this far and no further, longer term thinking is needed on the subject which includes better guidance for parents on child nutrition and it may be better to send weekly food parcels to households than give vouchers.
The point of a separate aid department was to allocate our hard earned tax money on the basis of evidence and need, not on the whim of an FCO mandarin or as an inducement to buy stuff from us (aka a wasteful industrial subsidy).
Were those things not worth imitating as well ?
Online shopping is minimally hit and should get the least help, for example.
The hospitality and entertainment sectors, together with the airline sector (much though many people may dislike individual owners or airlines) are unavoidably the most affected (I've seen estimates that this will have a similar affect to the airline industry as the Eighties had to the mining industry). And affected by a once-in-a-century natural disaster that no-one would have been sanely expected to prepare for.
The Government should aim to shoulder a significant amount of the ongoing and avoidable costs (including staff costs and rent) for these until social distancing can be safely and certainly eased. Which could be as soon as September/October if the Oxford vaccine comes off.
Otherwise we'll have gaping holes in our economy and society that will take a generation to recover from, together with a lot of avoidable human suffering. Yes, it's costly. Yes, it's going to have an impact on the finances. And yes, it's what the Government (pooling risk from us all that's impossible for individuals or companies to plausibly shoulder) is supposed to do - and should do.
https://twitter.com/Cartoon4sale/status/1273176917043265538
Since Boris Johnson doesn’t cherish much beyond the idea of himself as a figure of greatness, the safe bet is that his plan to merge the Foreign Office with the Department for International Development belongs in the category of gestural distraction.
The rationale is that a hybrid ministry will more efficiently represent the interests of “global Britain”. Even if that were a feasible outcome, now is hardly the time. It calls to mind the late Denis Healey’s maxim that the moment to remove a man’s appendix is not when he is busy carrying a piano up a flight of stairs.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jun/17/incompetence-boris-johnson-government-cabinet-britain