Help - I want to look back at my posts from a year ago. When I click on "comments" in my record you can page back in time one page at a time. This would take ages to go back 12 months. Is there a faster way?
Put that link into your bar, that loads the 4th page of your posts. Now change that number, eg p40 loads the 40th page which is November last year. p100 loads April last year.
You can search by changing the number in leaps until you get close to what you want, then narrow it down by going a page at a time once you're close.
Ah ha. That allows me to check certain things and confirm certain suspicions about certain posters. I wonder if I can be bothered? I do hope not.
Quite funny she is wearing the same jacket, makes the transition between the two clips look even better. Only thing to do now is claim it is a deepfake.
Your membership of the Fraternity of PB Scotch Experts is hereby withdrawn.
Uniondivvie - please explain the word 'Scotch'? My grandmother - who was as Scottish as they come - always used the word 'Scots', and suggested in her very Morningside way that 'Scotch', unless one was discussing whiskey, was a word generally used by ignorant Englishmen. But this was a) one person, and b) many years ago and possibly imperfectly remembered. I'd always steered clear of the word, but not actually being Scottish I'd be interested in any nuances you could provide?
North East: Middlesbrough, Thornaby-On-Tees 46 North West: Preston, Workington, Bolton, Cheadle, Carlisle, Leyland, Southport, Staveley, Rochdale 211 Yorkshire and the Humber: Wakefield, Whitby, Scarborough, Grimsby, Castleford, Goldthorpe, Scunthorpe, Morley, Stocksbridge 199 East Midlands: Newark, Clay Cross, Skegness, Mablethorpe, Boston, Lincoln, Northampton, Mansfield 175 West Midlands: Wolverhampton, Kidsgrove, Rowley Regis, Smethwick, West Bromwich, Burton-on-Trent, Nuneaton 155 East of England: Lowestoft, Colchester, Stevenage, Great Yarmouth, Ipswich, Milton Keynes 148 South East: Crawley, Margate 43 South West: Swindon, Bournemouth 41
Isn't that because almost towns are marginals? The cities are Labour, the rural areas Tory and the towns are the marginals?
That's how I'd spin it, yes ;-)
The reality is that places like Fareham, Gosport, Alton, Wellington etc. could really use this money too. But, they're not key marginals.
I get it, but it's a bit obvious (I have a bit of inside info on this btw, because I know there was a shortlisting)
And that gets to the heart of the matter.
All politicians with any sense have balanced wise, principled governance with down'n'dirty electoral pragmatism. If you don't have power, you don't have the chance to change things.
What depresses about the current government is the impression that winning power isn't only a means to an end, but the end in itself.
Coupled with the realisation that, if you take that approach, winning elections is remarkably easy.
TBF to them - which is hard but one should try - the pandemic was a black swan event and their mandate from GE19 is simply to govern rather than to do anything in particular. They were elected to implement Leave and for the PM to be "Boris" and not Jeremy Corbyn. That's the extent of it. And it's all done. We should have an election really, once the vaccine rollout is finished.
I think if I was Labour that probably isn't the line I'd be taking. The vaccine rollout will see the Tories at the zenith of their popularity, and for Labour, Brexit really needs to be as far in the past as possible. Labour don't want to risk another election on Brexit (particularly as Europe's star hasn't exactly shined of late).
True. I didn't really have my Labour hat on there. I was more thinking of how it's better for a government if they have a vision and a mandate to deliver it. If they don't the risk is it becomes all soundbites and media spin and the energy of the key players is diverted into ego servicing and grift.
Digging into the EFO a bit more, the monthly stats for 2023 look awful, I wonder whether this is related to the effect of turning off the gigantic investment tax break and also raising CT on big business at the same time. Either way, it needs to be addressed in next year's budget. The economy won't be able to take both of these at the same time and it shows in the OBR numbers.
I cannot deny that I am looking forward to seeing footage of Sturgeon facing difficulties, but I fear the level of excitement promised by people on here may not be met.
It's slow burn stuff, and I do not think it will have much immediate cut through in the way of brief soundbites on the news. And it's really dull process stuff if you don't care about the separation of powers.
But some of the exchanges were indeed compelling. Baillie - who has no legal background - is genuinely brilliant in the examination of a witness, in a way Starmer simply isn't.
It’s a big mistake for her to keep attacking Salmond
Is it, in terms of retaining party and public support? People are pretty forgiving of what might be termed procedural cockups or even deliberate behaviour, if they think people were doing the 'right thing'.
I cannot deny that I am looking forward to seeing footage of Sturgeon facing difficulties, but I fear the level of excitement promised by people on here may not be met.
It’s a big mistake for her to keep attacking Salmond
Is it, in terms of retaining party and public support? People are pretty forgiving of what might be termed procedural cockups or even deliberate behaviour, if they think people were doing the 'right thing'.
To me, it looks personally vindictive. Like she has an agenda against Salmond. Which, of course, is exactly what she’s accused of. So, yes, a mistake
It may not matter: except that it also ensures Salmond will never give this up
Budget: the CPI inflation assumption (that it stays at or below 2.0% until 2026) looks rocky to me. A 1% increase in RPI increases debt costs by £7bn, and 1% in gilts by £9 billion. Rather sensitive. This could budget could be out by £50-60bn by FY2025/26.
The corp tax and income tax freezes yield £25bn a year by 2025, so that's big money. IHT also frozen for an extra 0.4bn yield. If it gets desperate he could up VAT to 22%, I guess to give an extra £10-12bn per year.
Also, has he factored in a progressive degradation of fuel duty? I think he's just TBC'ed it in this. I'd have thought it'd be 10-15% below current levels by 2025, 25-35% by 2030 and 60-70% by 2040. That's probably a £3-4bn hole by 2026 alone.
Carbon neutrality will have a serious fiscal cost, although cheaper than the environmental one of course.
I think this is another area where he has to bite the bullet sooner rather than later. There is no longer a need to encourage drivers to take up electric cars - they are going to be forced to do so within 9 years anyway. So he should now look to move to payment per mile for driving with all cars being classed the same. Replace fuel duty and road tax with a completely new system based on how much you drive. If you are worried about the impact on rural areas then you can tinker with rates but basically it will be one system for all with perhaps some regional variation.
If my clock is read once a year at MOT time, to reconcile my road tax bill for the next year, fine.
But, I do not want to be satellite tracked and monitored for real-time road pricing.
No way do I want any part of the Government knowing where I'm going, when or why, or for how long. Nor do I expect to have to explain myself to anyone: the prospects for abuse are legion.
The fuzz would have dug all over it during this latest lockdown.
You do know that when you buy a new car, and you turn it on, and there's that big screen about Terms & Conditions for using the in car systems (without which your car will basically not work), that you are agreeing they have the right to sell your location data to whoever they want, right?
Anyone buying a new Ford, Tesla, GM, etc., today has already agreed to let Google and Amazon look at your location history so as to work out what things to sell you.
I don't have any of those cars but, yes, I do, and I have similar concerns about the use of my data by private companies too. I'd like to see that regulated by primary legislation.
I don't see why I should "accept" the government - who have the power to arrest, detain or fine me - having access to all of my data in real-time just because it's increasingly a feature in the private commercial space.
I want both regulatory spheres dealt with.
Many seem to make the assumption that because they do all these things like carry a mobile, use gps, use facebook, twitter, always pay electronically, use loyalty cards etc that everyone does it. However a lot of us choose to opt to not doing these things because we are aware of the tracking and do our best to minimize it
You don't carry a phone or use a debit card for fear of being tracked?
It’s a big mistake for her to keep attacking Salmond
Is it, in terms of retaining party and public support? People are pretty forgiving of what might be termed procedural cockups or even deliberate behaviour, if they think people were doing the 'right thing'.
I think it's a strategic error in that she's declared a fight to the death. Hard to see anyway out for Salmond now than through and he's not going to stop. Maybe this won't have cut through in time for May 2021 but I think today is the day Nicola's dream of being Scotland's first Prime Minister died.
Problem for Sturgeon is that she told so many whoppers, or ‘contradictory statements’ the Committee is obliged to scrutinize them. Moreover, Salmond’s team will be all over them. This is just going to carry on, and on. It’s that kind of thing that does, in the end, lead to a resignation
Can they call back Salmond to add, er, clarifications to the evidence they have heard today?
Problem is they are running out of time, pissed about for 2 years waiting on documents to arrive
I cannot deny that I am looking forward to seeing footage of Sturgeon facing difficulties, but I fear the level of excitement promised by people on here may not be met.
It's more of a test match than a T20 knockabout.
Very good analogy. And it was the session after lunch that saw the wickets tumble
North East: Middlesbrough, Thornaby-On-Tees 46 North West: Preston, Workington, Bolton, Cheadle, Carlisle, Leyland, Southport, Staveley, Rochdale 211 Yorkshire and the Humber: Wakefield, Whitby, Scarborough, Grimsby, Castleford, Goldthorpe, Scunthorpe, Morley, Stocksbridge 199 East Midlands: Newark, Clay Cross, Skegness, Mablethorpe, Boston, Lincoln, Northampton, Mansfield 175 West Midlands: Wolverhampton, Kidsgrove, Rowley Regis, Smethwick, West Bromwich, Burton-on-Trent, Nuneaton 155 East of England: Lowestoft, Colchester, Stevenage, Great Yarmouth, Ipswich, Milton Keynes 148 South East: Crawley, Margate 43 South West: Swindon, Bournemouth 41
Isn't that because almost towns are marginals? The cities are Labour, the rural areas Tory and the towns are the marginals?
That's how I'd spin it, yes ;-)
The reality is that places like Fareham, Gosport, Alton, Wellington etc. could really use this money too. But, they're not key marginals.
I get it, but it's a bit obvious (I have a bit of inside info on this btw, because I know there was a shortlisting)
And that gets to the heart of the matter.
All politicians with any sense have balanced wise, principled governance with down'n'dirty electoral pragmatism. If you don't have power, you don't have the chance to change things.
What depresses about the current government is the impression that winning power isn't only a means to an end, but the end in itself.
Coupled with the realisation that, if you take that approach, winning elections is remarkably easy.
TBF to them - which is hard but one should try - the pandemic was a black swan event and their mandate from GE19 is simply to govern rather than to do anything in particular. They were elected to implement Leave and for the PM to be "Boris" and not Jeremy Corbyn. That's the extent of it. And it's all done. We should have an election really, once the vaccine rollout is finished.
I think if I was Labour that probably isn't the line I'd be taking. The vaccine rollout will see the Tories at the zenith of their popularity, and for Labour, Brexit really needs to be as far in the past as possible. Labour don't want to risk another election on Brexit (particularly as Europe's star hasn't exactly shined of late).
True. I didn't really have my Labour hat on there. I was more thinking of how it's better for a government if they have a vision and a mandate to deliver it. If they don't the risk is it becomes all soundbites and media spin and the energy of the key players is diverted into ego servicing and grift.
I'd say the government's vision is: 1) Get Brexit done - on which whatever your views on the desirability of doing so, they've made big strides since December 2019 - but this issue isn't going to go away or be 'settled' any time soon. This will still take up a lot of government focus. 2) Levelling up - clearly high on the government's to-do list. Too broad a target to hit in one parliament, really, but it is at least a focus to work towards.
1 has been progressed despite the pandemic, 2 may be completely derailed by it.
The Converner seems v impressive to me.. far more impressive than the rambling rubbish the other woman got chopped off for.
She's not been too bad - the least worst of the SNP MPs. I'd rate Jackie Baillie (Lab) best, followed by Murdo Fraser (Con). The rest a very mixed bunch. The Lib Dem (Cole-Hamilton) Independent Green (Wightman) and Mitchell (Con) had their moments when they were concise and to the point - which often wasn't often enough, as was demonstrated in the final exchange.
Budget: the CPI inflation assumption (that it stays at or below 2.0% until 2026) looks rocky to me. A 1% increase in RPI increases debt costs by £7bn, and 1% in gilts by £9 billion. Rather sensitive. This could budget could be out by £50-60bn by FY2025/26.
The corp tax and income tax freezes yield £25bn a year by 2025, so that's big money. IHT also frozen for an extra 0.4bn yield. If it gets desperate he could up VAT to 22%, I guess to give an extra £10-12bn per year.
Also, has he factored in a progressive degradation of fuel duty? I think he's just TBC'ed it in this. I'd have thought it'd be 10-15% below current levels by 2025, 25-35% by 2030 and 60-70% by 2040. That's probably a £3-4bn hole by 2026 alone.
Carbon neutrality will have a serious fiscal cost, although cheaper than the environmental one of course.
I think this is another area where he has to bite the bullet sooner rather than later. There is no longer a need to encourage drivers to take up electric cars - they are going to be forced to do so within 9 years anyway. So he should now look to move to payment per mile for driving with all cars being classed the same. Replace fuel duty and road tax with a completely new system based on how much you drive. If you are worried about the impact on rural areas then you can tinker with rates but basically it will be one system for all with perhaps some regional variation.
If my clock is read once a year at MOT time, to reconcile my road tax bill for the next year, fine.
But, I do not want to be satellite tracked and monitored for real-time road pricing.
No way do I want any part of the Government knowing where I'm going, when or why, or for how long. Nor do I expect to have to explain myself to anyone: the prospects for abuse are legion.
The fuzz would have dug all over it during this latest lockdown.
You do know that when you buy a new car, and you turn it on, and there's that big screen about Terms & Conditions for using the in car systems (without which your car will basically not work), that you are agreeing they have the right to sell your location data to whoever they want, right?
Anyone buying a new Ford, Tesla, GM, etc., today has already agreed to let Google and Amazon look at your location history so as to work out what things to sell you.
I don't have any of those cars but, yes, I do, and I have similar concerns about the use of my data by private companies too. I'd like to see that regulated by primary legislation.
I don't see why I should "accept" the government - who have the power to arrest, detain or fine me - having access to all of my data in real-time just because it's increasingly a feature in the private commercial space.
I want both regulatory spheres dealt with.
Many seem to make the assumption that because they do all these things like carry a mobile, use gps, use facebook, twitter, always pay electronically, use loyalty cards etc that everyone does it. However a lot of us choose to opt to not doing these things because we are aware of the tracking and do our best to minimize it
You don't carry a phone or use a debit card for fear of being tracked?
I have a mobile but I see no need to take it with me when I go out, I pay cash mostly. Its not just about tracking. That is merely one reason. Frankly I don't want people ringing me when I am out and about so my mobile stays on the desk. I use cash rather than debit card also for the reason I find it easier to keep track of how much I am spending. Not being trackable are merely additional reasons to do so.
People complain about the amount of tracking companies and governments do....take responsibilty and if you think its too much data they collect stop allowing them to collect data seems far more sensible than trying to get watertight privacy laws as we know they will be got round
I cannot deny that I am looking forward to seeing footage of Sturgeon facing difficulties, but I fear the level of excitement promised by people on here may not be met.
The third session of the day (the one before this) - is the one to watch
But you need to watch it all. The tv snippets won’t capture it
Nothing could be as thrilling as your breathless commentary of it – why bother with the real thing?
I visited Alton once because a family member is a big Jane Austen fan. Personally I've never been able to get beyond about 5 pages of any of her books so I was just going along for the ride.
I think it's a strategic error in that she's declared a fight to the death. Hard to see anyway out for Salmond now than through and he's not going to stop. Maybe this won't have cut through in time for May 2021 but I think today is the day Nicola's dream of being Scotland's first Prime Minister died.
Yes, probably. Anyone hoping for Sturgeon to be gone before the election will be disappointed, but no politician recovers from damage of this severity. The aura of invincibility is gone and the moral high ground is a place she'll never visit again.
In a normal political party the men in grey suits would metaphorically give her a pearl-handled revolver and invite her to make use of it. But I think the SNP is simply too much of a personality cult, so Sturgeon will remain in place and the damage will continue to accrue.
Is that really an accurate summary of what she said? That would be remarkable, if he did not know the basis why did he answer that he did? That would be no defence.
Pretty well, yes. But with a great deal more padding.
Budget: the CPI inflation assumption (that it stays at or below 2.0% until 2026) looks rocky to me. A 1% increase in RPI increases debt costs by £7bn, and 1% in gilts by £9 billion. Rather sensitive. This could budget could be out by £50-60bn by FY2025/26.
The corp tax and income tax freezes yield £25bn a year by 2025, so that's big money. IHT also frozen for an extra 0.4bn yield. If it gets desperate he could up VAT to 22%, I guess to give an extra £10-12bn per year.
Also, has he factored in a progressive degradation of fuel duty? I think he's just TBC'ed it in this. I'd have thought it'd be 10-15% below current levels by 2025, 25-35% by 2030 and 60-70% by 2040. That's probably a £3-4bn hole by 2026 alone.
Carbon neutrality will have a serious fiscal cost, although cheaper than the environmental one of course.
I think this is another area where he has to bite the bullet sooner rather than later. There is no longer a need to encourage drivers to take up electric cars - they are going to be forced to do so within 9 years anyway. So he should now look to move to payment per mile for driving with all cars being classed the same. Replace fuel duty and road tax with a completely new system based on how much you drive. If you are worried about the impact on rural areas then you can tinker with rates but basically it will be one system for all with perhaps some regional variation.
If my clock is read once a year at MOT time, to reconcile my road tax bill for the next year, fine.
But, I do not want to be satellite tracked and monitored for real-time road pricing.
No way do I want any part of the Government knowing where I'm going, when or why, or for how long. Nor do I expect to have to explain myself to anyone: the prospects for abuse are legion.
The fuzz would have dug all over it during this latest lockdown.
You do know that when you buy a new car, and you turn it on, and there's that big screen about Terms & Conditions for using the in car systems (without which your car will basically not work), that you are agreeing they have the right to sell your location data to whoever they want, right?
Anyone buying a new Ford, Tesla, GM, etc., today has already agreed to let Google and Amazon look at your location history so as to work out what things to sell you.
I don't have any of those cars but, yes, I do, and I have similar concerns about the use of my data by private companies too. I'd like to see that regulated by primary legislation.
I don't see why I should "accept" the government - who have the power to arrest, detain or fine me - having access to all of my data in real-time just because it's increasingly a feature in the private commercial space.
I want both regulatory spheres dealt with.
Many seem to make the assumption that because they do all these things like carry a mobile, use gps, use facebook, twitter, always pay electronically, use loyalty cards etc that everyone does it. However a lot of us choose to opt to not doing these things because we are aware of the tracking and do our best to minimize it
You don't carry a phone or use a debit card for fear of being tracked?
Having the option not to is enough. I might take my phone with me when I pop to the shop for a pint of milk. And use a debit card for the purchase, I am very happy I have nothing to hide there. But it's reassuring to know that I'm not compelled to do so: I could, if I wanted, leave it at home; and pay with cash at the shop.
I don't NEED to be off-grid. But I very much don't want to be denied the possibility of being off grid.
I cannot deny that I am looking forward to seeing footage of Sturgeon facing difficulties, but I fear the level of excitement promised by people on here may not be met.
The third session of the day (the one before this) - is the one to watch
But you need to watch it all. The tv snippets won’t capture it
Nothing could be as thrilling as your breathless commentary of it – why bother with the real thing?
The morning session was largely boring. I almost skipped the rest. I am very glad i didn’t.
Budget: the CPI inflation assumption (that it stays at or below 2.0% until 2026) looks rocky to me. A 1% increase in RPI increases debt costs by £7bn, and 1% in gilts by £9 billion. Rather sensitive. This could budget could be out by £50-60bn by FY2025/26.
The corp tax and income tax freezes yield £25bn a year by 2025, so that's big money. IHT also frozen for an extra 0.4bn yield. If it gets desperate he could up VAT to 22%, I guess to give an extra £10-12bn per year.
Also, has he factored in a progressive degradation of fuel duty? I think he's just TBC'ed it in this. I'd have thought it'd be 10-15% below current levels by 2025, 25-35% by 2030 and 60-70% by 2040. That's probably a £3-4bn hole by 2026 alone.
Carbon neutrality will have a serious fiscal cost, although cheaper than the environmental one of course.
I think this is another area where he has to bite the bullet sooner rather than later. There is no longer a need to encourage drivers to take up electric cars - they are going to be forced to do so within 9 years anyway. So he should now look to move to payment per mile for driving with all cars being classed the same. Replace fuel duty and road tax with a completely new system based on how much you drive. If you are worried about the impact on rural areas then you can tinker with rates but basically it will be one system for all with perhaps some regional variation.
If my clock is read once a year at MOT time, to reconcile my road tax bill for the next year, fine.
But, I do not want to be satellite tracked and monitored for real-time road pricing.
No way do I want any part of the Government knowing where I'm going, when or why, or for how long. Nor do I expect to have to explain myself to anyone: the prospects for abuse are legion.
The fuzz would have dug all over it during this latest lockdown.
You do know that when you buy a new car, and you turn it on, and there's that big screen about Terms & Conditions for using the in car systems (without which your car will basically not work), that you are agreeing they have the right to sell your location data to whoever they want, right?
Anyone buying a new Ford, Tesla, GM, etc., today has already agreed to let Google and Amazon look at your location history so as to work out what things to sell you.
I don't have any of those cars but, yes, I do, and I have similar concerns about the use of my data by private companies too. I'd like to see that regulated by primary legislation.
I don't see why I should "accept" the government - who have the power to arrest, detain or fine me - having access to all of my data in real-time just because it's increasingly a feature in the private commercial space.
I want both regulatory spheres dealt with.
Many seem to make the assumption that because they do all these things like carry a mobile, use gps, use facebook, twitter, always pay electronically, use loyalty cards etc that everyone does it. However a lot of us choose to opt to not doing these things because we are aware of the tracking and do our best to minimize it
You don't carry a phone or use a debit card for fear of being tracked?
Having the option not to is enough. I might take my phone with me when I pop to the shop for a pint of milk. And use a debit card for the purchase, I am very happy I have nothing to hide there. But it's reassuring to know that I'm not compelled to do so: I could, if I wanted, leave it at home; and pay with cash at the shop.
I don't NEED to be off-grid. But I very much don't want to be denied the possibility of being off grid.
On the subject we were talking about mind, I'm quite torn. I'm a libertarian, but also a transport planner. And road pricing is a very attractive way of solving a lot of the strategic problems we face as a profession.
Budget: the CPI inflation assumption (that it stays at or below 2.0% until 2026) looks rocky to me. A 1% increase in RPI increases debt costs by £7bn, and 1% in gilts by £9 billion. Rather sensitive. This could budget could be out by £50-60bn by FY2025/26.
The corp tax and income tax freezes yield £25bn a year by 2025, so that's big money. IHT also frozen for an extra 0.4bn yield. If it gets desperate he could up VAT to 22%, I guess to give an extra £10-12bn per year.
Also, has he factored in a progressive degradation of fuel duty? I think he's just TBC'ed it in this. I'd have thought it'd be 10-15% below current levels by 2025, 25-35% by 2030 and 60-70% by 2040. That's probably a £3-4bn hole by 2026 alone.
Carbon neutrality will have a serious fiscal cost, although cheaper than the environmental one of course.
I think this is another area where he has to bite the bullet sooner rather than later. There is no longer a need to encourage drivers to take up electric cars - they are going to be forced to do so within 9 years anyway. So he should now look to move to payment per mile for driving with all cars being classed the same. Replace fuel duty and road tax with a completely new system based on how much you drive. If you are worried about the impact on rural areas then you can tinker with rates but basically it will be one system for all with perhaps some regional variation.
If my clock is read once a year at MOT time, to reconcile my road tax bill for the next year, fine.
But, I do not want to be satellite tracked and monitored for real-time road pricing.
No way do I want any part of the Government knowing where I'm going, when or why, or for how long. Nor do I expect to have to explain myself to anyone: the prospects for abuse are legion.
The fuzz would have dug all over it during this latest lockdown.
You do know that when you buy a new car, and you turn it on, and there's that big screen about Terms & Conditions for using the in car systems (without which your car will basically not work), that you are agreeing they have the right to sell your location data to whoever they want, right?
Anyone buying a new Ford, Tesla, GM, etc., today has already agreed to let Google and Amazon look at your location history so as to work out what things to sell you.
I don't have any of those cars but, yes, I do, and I have similar concerns about the use of my data by private companies too. I'd like to see that regulated by primary legislation.
I don't see why I should "accept" the government - who have the power to arrest, detain or fine me - having access to all of my data in real-time just because it's increasingly a feature in the private commercial space.
I want both regulatory spheres dealt with.
Many seem to make the assumption that because they do all these things like carry a mobile, use gps, use facebook, twitter, always pay electronically, use loyalty cards etc that everyone does it. However a lot of us choose to opt to not doing these things because we are aware of the tracking and do our best to minimize it
You don't carry a phone or use a debit card for fear of being tracked?
Having the option not to is enough. I might take my phone with me when I pop to the shop for a pint of milk. And use a debit card for the purchase, I am very happy I have nothing to hide there. But it's reassuring to know that I'm not compelled to do so: I could, if I wanted, leave it at home; and pay with cash at the shop.
I don't NEED to be off-grid. But I very much don't want to be denied the possibility of being off grid.
On the subject we were talking about mind, I'm quite torn. I'm a libertarian, but also a transport planner. And road pricing is a very attractive way of solving a lot of the strategic problems we face as a profession.
You are pretty much tracked everywhere you go in a car anyway at least on major roads due to the proliferation of anpr cameras
I have a good friend in Prague. He says that the populace is behaving completely irresponsibly: ignoring lockdown, visiting elderly relatives, going on holiday, not wearing masks, and many suspicious of the idea of vaccination. He was pretty scathing and thinks that they -- and he is Czech himself -- deserve what's happening. A sad tale indeed.
Some of the most enthusiastic buy-to-lettors I know are leftwing. Wasn't Tyson, firebrand lefty ex of this parish, thus remunerated?
Greed is not a rightwing *thing*. It is a human thing. You'd be amazed how many lefties lose ALL their principles the moment a large amount of money hoves into view.
English Toryism is composed of many strands, from Scruton-esque thoughtful patriotism to libertarian Borisovian hedonism, with a large dash of boring nanny state be-careful TMayism. Dismissing them all as rentiers is pitiful. It's like looking at a garden and saying "it's just a load of things growing".
It would, moreover, be like looking at the history of Labour/leftwingery in the UK and saying "it's just envious workers". I know that the leftwing tradition in Britain is much richer and nobler than that, from the Putney Debates to the Levellers to Kier Hardie and on - the political voice of the common people in Britain has done wonderful things, but has also been warped and hijacked to do bad things.
Much like their patriotic rightwing twin.
Isn't that just a fancy way of saying that with parties that get 35-40% in the polls, the idea for either Labour or the Tories that their voters and members are all ideologues of the same type is completely bonkers, even if certain strands of thinking predominate?
Yeah, but I quite like fancy ways of saying things.
Confession: I am a frustrated and thwarted writer reduced to flint-knapping
I listened to Nicola and I found her credible intelligent and impressive. I've got a lot of time for the Sottish posters on this site from all sides. That's what's confusing. The English drama queens like Leon and Big G and the Guidoistas can be ignored. They don't have a vote and any interest they might show is in hoping the Nats fail.
It's obvious to even his most fervent supporters that Salmond is finished. Whatever happens to Nicola that's a given. My question to the Nats is how can crucifying Nicola do anything to advance the Nationalist cause? Is Sturgeon's defenestration really worth collapsing the movement?
Budget: the CPI inflation assumption (that it stays at or below 2.0% until 2026) looks rocky to me. A 1% increase in RPI increases debt costs by £7bn, and 1% in gilts by £9 billion. Rather sensitive. This could budget could be out by £50-60bn by FY2025/26.
The corp tax and income tax freezes yield £25bn a year by 2025, so that's big money. IHT also frozen for an extra 0.4bn yield. If it gets desperate he could up VAT to 22%, I guess to give an extra £10-12bn per year.
Also, has he factored in a progressive degradation of fuel duty? I think he's just TBC'ed it in this. I'd have thought it'd be 10-15% below current levels by 2025, 25-35% by 2030 and 60-70% by 2040. That's probably a £3-4bn hole by 2026 alone.
Carbon neutrality will have a serious fiscal cost, although cheaper than the environmental one of course.
I think this is another area where he has to bite the bullet sooner rather than later. There is no longer a need to encourage drivers to take up electric cars - they are going to be forced to do so within 9 years anyway. So he should now look to move to payment per mile for driving with all cars being classed the same. Replace fuel duty and road tax with a completely new system based on how much you drive. If you are worried about the impact on rural areas then you can tinker with rates but basically it will be one system for all with perhaps some regional variation.
If my clock is read once a year at MOT time, to reconcile my road tax bill for the next year, fine.
But, I do not want to be satellite tracked and monitored for real-time road pricing.
No way do I want any part of the Government knowing where I'm going, when or why, or for how long. Nor do I expect to have to explain myself to anyone: the prospects for abuse are legion.
The fuzz would have dug all over it during this latest lockdown.
You do know that when you buy a new car, and you turn it on, and there's that big screen about Terms & Conditions for using the in car systems (without which your car will basically not work), that you are agreeing they have the right to sell your location data to whoever they want, right?
Anyone buying a new Ford, Tesla, GM, etc., today has already agreed to let Google and Amazon look at your location history so as to work out what things to sell you.
I don't have any of those cars but, yes, I do, and I have similar concerns about the use of my data by private companies too. I'd like to see that regulated by primary legislation.
I don't see why I should "accept" the government - who have the power to arrest, detain or fine me - having access to all of my data in real-time just because it's increasingly a feature in the private commercial space.
I want both regulatory spheres dealt with.
Many seem to make the assumption that because they do all these things like carry a mobile, use gps, use facebook, twitter, always pay electronically, use loyalty cards etc that everyone does it. However a lot of us choose to opt to not doing these things because we are aware of the tracking and do our best to minimize it
You don't carry a phone or use a debit card for fear of being tracked?
Having the option not to is enough. I might take my phone with me when I pop to the shop for a pint of milk. And use a debit card for the purchase, I am very happy I have nothing to hide there. But it's reassuring to know that I'm not compelled to do so: I could, if I wanted, leave it at home; and pay with cash at the shop.
I don't NEED to be off-grid. But I very much don't want to be denied the possibility of being off grid.
On the subject we were talking about mind, I'm quite torn. I'm a libertarian, but also a transport planner. And road pricing is a very attractive way of solving a lot of the strategic problems we face as a profession.
You are pretty much tracked everywhere you go in a car anyway at least on major roads due to the proliferation of anpr cameras
Worrying about being tracked is getting more and more futile. Rather, we ought to be concerned about putting easily understood and managed legal (or coded) constraints on the use of our information. The GDPR is in no way a useful solution.
Budget: the CPI inflation assumption (that it stays at or below 2.0% until 2026) looks rocky to me. A 1% increase in RPI increases debt costs by £7bn, and 1% in gilts by £9 billion. Rather sensitive. This could budget could be out by £50-60bn by FY2025/26.
The corp tax and income tax freezes yield £25bn a year by 2025, so that's big money. IHT also frozen for an extra 0.4bn yield. If it gets desperate he could up VAT to 22%, I guess to give an extra £10-12bn per year.
Also, has he factored in a progressive degradation of fuel duty? I think he's just TBC'ed it in this. I'd have thought it'd be 10-15% below current levels by 2025, 25-35% by 2030 and 60-70% by 2040. That's probably a £3-4bn hole by 2026 alone.
Carbon neutrality will have a serious fiscal cost, although cheaper than the environmental one of course.
I think this is another area where he has to bite the bullet sooner rather than later. There is no longer a need to encourage drivers to take up electric cars - they are going to be forced to do so within 9 years anyway. So he should now look to move to payment per mile for driving with all cars being classed the same. Replace fuel duty and road tax with a completely new system based on how much you drive. If you are worried about the impact on rural areas then you can tinker with rates but basically it will be one system for all with perhaps some regional variation.
If my clock is read once a year at MOT time, to reconcile my road tax bill for the next year, fine.
But, I do not want to be satellite tracked and monitored for real-time road pricing.
No way do I want any part of the Government knowing where I'm going, when or why, or for how long. Nor do I expect to have to explain myself to anyone: the prospects for abuse are legion.
The fuzz would have dug all over it during this latest lockdown.
You do know that when you buy a new car, and you turn it on, and there's that big screen about Terms & Conditions for using the in car systems (without which your car will basically not work), that you are agreeing they have the right to sell your location data to whoever they want, right?
Anyone buying a new Ford, Tesla, GM, etc., today has already agreed to let Google and Amazon look at your location history so as to work out what things to sell you.
I don't have any of those cars but, yes, I do, and I have similar concerns about the use of my data by private companies too. I'd like to see that regulated by primary legislation.
I don't see why I should "accept" the government - who have the power to arrest, detain or fine me - having access to all of my data in real-time just because it's increasingly a feature in the private commercial space.
I want both regulatory spheres dealt with.
Many seem to make the assumption that because they do all these things like carry a mobile, use gps, use facebook, twitter, always pay electronically, use loyalty cards etc that everyone does it. However a lot of us choose to opt to not doing these things because we are aware of the tracking and do our best to minimize it
Good luck finding a car without built in GPS and cellular.
So what did I miss? Any exciting bits in Nicola's evidence or all too complex to really have a gotcha point?
And did Sunak do anything interesting?
You missed an extraordinary spectacle. If you want to see the best of it, check the third session after lunch. Worth viewing in its entirety if you’re a politics geek. Which you are
If you’re pushed for time fast forward to any bit where Baillie was interrogating. But don’t miss Sturgeon nearly blubbing
No gotcha moment. She will survive. But the committee’s conclusions might be interesting
She lied enough and made enough mistakes to ensure the story isn’t going anywhere
Budget: the CPI inflation assumption (that it stays at or below 2.0% until 2026) looks rocky to me. A 1% increase in RPI increases debt costs by £7bn, and 1% in gilts by £9 billion. Rather sensitive. This could budget could be out by £50-60bn by FY2025/26.
The corp tax and income tax freezes yield £25bn a year by 2025, so that's big money. IHT also frozen for an extra 0.4bn yield. If it gets desperate he could up VAT to 22%, I guess to give an extra £10-12bn per year.
Also, has he factored in a progressive degradation of fuel duty? I think he's just TBC'ed it in this. I'd have thought it'd be 10-15% below current levels by 2025, 25-35% by 2030 and 60-70% by 2040. That's probably a £3-4bn hole by 2026 alone.
Carbon neutrality will have a serious fiscal cost, although cheaper than the environmental one of course.
I think this is another area where he has to bite the bullet sooner rather than later. There is no longer a need to encourage drivers to take up electric cars - they are going to be forced to do so within 9 years anyway. So he should now look to move to payment per mile for driving with all cars being classed the same. Replace fuel duty and road tax with a completely new system based on how much you drive. If you are worried about the impact on rural areas then you can tinker with rates but basically it will be one system for all with perhaps some regional variation.
If my clock is read once a year at MOT time, to reconcile my road tax bill for the next year, fine.
But, I do not want to be satellite tracked and monitored for real-time road pricing.
No way do I want any part of the Government knowing where I'm going, when or why, or for how long. Nor do I expect to have to explain myself to anyone: the prospects for abuse are legion.
The fuzz would have dug all over it during this latest lockdown.
You do know that when you buy a new car, and you turn it on, and there's that big screen about Terms & Conditions for using the in car systems (without which your car will basically not work), that you are agreeing they have the right to sell your location data to whoever they want, right?
Anyone buying a new Ford, Tesla, GM, etc., today has already agreed to let Google and Amazon look at your location history so as to work out what things to sell you.
I don't have any of those cars but, yes, I do, and I have similar concerns about the use of my data by private companies too. I'd like to see that regulated by primary legislation.
I don't see why I should "accept" the government - who have the power to arrest, detain or fine me - having access to all of my data in real-time just because it's increasingly a feature in the private commercial space.
I want both regulatory spheres dealt with.
Many seem to make the assumption that because they do all these things like carry a mobile, use gps, use facebook, twitter, always pay electronically, use loyalty cards etc that everyone does it. However a lot of us choose to opt to not doing these things because we are aware of the tracking and do our best to minimize it
You don't carry a phone or use a debit card for fear of being tracked?
Having the option not to is enough. I might take my phone with me when I pop to the shop for a pint of milk. And use a debit card for the purchase, I am very happy I have nothing to hide there. But it's reassuring to know that I'm not compelled to do so: I could, if I wanted, leave it at home; and pay with cash at the shop.
I don't NEED to be off-grid. But I very much don't want to be denied the possibility of being off grid.
On the subject we were talking about mind, I'm quite torn. I'm a libertarian, but also a transport planner. And road pricing is a very attractive way of solving a lot of the strategic problems we face as a profession.
You are pretty much tracked everywhere you go in a car anyway at least on major roads due to the proliferation of anpr cameras
Worrying about being tracked is getting more and more futile. Rather, we ought to be concerned about putting easily understood and managed legal (or coded) constraints on the use of our information. The GDPR is in no way a useful solution.
Doesn't mean in the meantime people shouldn't take responsibility.
Anyone who says "I am worried about the data big tech/governments collect" and then says I use facebook always carry a mobile always pay electronically etc. Well look in the mirror they collect it because you throw it at them.
Budget: the CPI inflation assumption (that it stays at or below 2.0% until 2026) looks rocky to me. A 1% increase in RPI increases debt costs by £7bn, and 1% in gilts by £9 billion. Rather sensitive. This could budget could be out by £50-60bn by FY2025/26.
The corp tax and income tax freezes yield £25bn a year by 2025, so that's big money. IHT also frozen for an extra 0.4bn yield. If it gets desperate he could up VAT to 22%, I guess to give an extra £10-12bn per year.
Also, has he factored in a progressive degradation of fuel duty? I think he's just TBC'ed it in this. I'd have thought it'd be 10-15% below current levels by 2025, 25-35% by 2030 and 60-70% by 2040. That's probably a £3-4bn hole by 2026 alone.
Carbon neutrality will have a serious fiscal cost, although cheaper than the environmental one of course.
I think this is another area where he has to bite the bullet sooner rather than later. There is no longer a need to encourage drivers to take up electric cars - they are going to be forced to do so within 9 years anyway. So he should now look to move to payment per mile for driving with all cars being classed the same. Replace fuel duty and road tax with a completely new system based on how much you drive. If you are worried about the impact on rural areas then you can tinker with rates but basically it will be one system for all with perhaps some regional variation.
If my clock is read once a year at MOT time, to reconcile my road tax bill for the next year, fine.
But, I do not want to be satellite tracked and monitored for real-time road pricing.
No way do I want any part of the Government knowing where I'm going, when or why, or for how long. Nor do I expect to have to explain myself to anyone: the prospects for abuse are legion.
The fuzz would have dug all over it during this latest lockdown.
You do know that when you buy a new car, and you turn it on, and there's that big screen about Terms & Conditions for using the in car systems (without which your car will basically not work), that you are agreeing they have the right to sell your location data to whoever they want, right?
Anyone buying a new Ford, Tesla, GM, etc., today has already agreed to let Google and Amazon look at your location history so as to work out what things to sell you.
I don't have any of those cars but, yes, I do, and I have similar concerns about the use of my data by private companies too. I'd like to see that regulated by primary legislation.
I don't see why I should "accept" the government - who have the power to arrest, detain or fine me - having access to all of my data in real-time just because it's increasingly a feature in the private commercial space.
I want both regulatory spheres dealt with.
Many seem to make the assumption that because they do all these things like carry a mobile, use gps, use facebook, twitter, always pay electronically, use loyalty cards etc that everyone does it. However a lot of us choose to opt to not doing these things because we are aware of the tracking and do our best to minimize it
Good luck finding a car without built in GPS and cellular.
So what did I miss? Any exciting bits in Nicola's evidence or all too complex to really have a gotcha point?
And did Sunak do anything interesting?
You missed an extraordinary spectacle. If you want to see the best of it, check the third session after lunch. Worth viewing in its entirety if you’re a politics geek. Which you are
If you’re pushed for time fast forward to any bit where Baillie was interrogating. But don’t miss Sturgeon nearly blubbing
No gotcha moment. She will survive. But the committee’s conclusions might be interesting
She lied enough and made enough mistakes to ensure the story isn’t going anywhere
I was gutted to miss it but sometimes work gets in the way and today was one of those days. Bah.
Budget: the CPI inflation assumption (that it stays at or below 2.0% until 2026) looks rocky to me. A 1% increase in RPI increases debt costs by £7bn, and 1% in gilts by £9 billion. Rather sensitive. This could budget could be out by £50-60bn by FY2025/26.
The corp tax and income tax freezes yield £25bn a year by 2025, so that's big money. IHT also frozen for an extra 0.4bn yield. If it gets desperate he could up VAT to 22%, I guess to give an extra £10-12bn per year.
Also, has he factored in a progressive degradation of fuel duty? I think he's just TBC'ed it in this. I'd have thought it'd be 10-15% below current levels by 2025, 25-35% by 2030 and 60-70% by 2040. That's probably a £3-4bn hole by 2026 alone.
Carbon neutrality will have a serious fiscal cost, although cheaper than the environmental one of course.
I think this is another area where he has to bite the bullet sooner rather than later. There is no longer a need to encourage drivers to take up electric cars - they are going to be forced to do so within 9 years anyway. So he should now look to move to payment per mile for driving with all cars being classed the same. Replace fuel duty and road tax with a completely new system based on how much you drive. If you are worried about the impact on rural areas then you can tinker with rates but basically it will be one system for all with perhaps some regional variation.
If my clock is read once a year at MOT time, to reconcile my road tax bill for the next year, fine.
But, I do not want to be satellite tracked and monitored for real-time road pricing.
No way do I want any part of the Government knowing where I'm going, when or why, or for how long. Nor do I expect to have to explain myself to anyone: the prospects for abuse are legion.
The fuzz would have dug all over it during this latest lockdown.
You do know that when you buy a new car, and you turn it on, and there's that big screen about Terms & Conditions for using the in car systems (without which your car will basically not work), that you are agreeing they have the right to sell your location data to whoever they want, right?
Anyone buying a new Ford, Tesla, GM, etc., today has already agreed to let Google and Amazon look at your location history so as to work out what things to sell you.
I don't have any of those cars but, yes, I do, and I have similar concerns about the use of my data by private companies too. I'd like to see that regulated by primary legislation.
I don't see why I should "accept" the government - who have the power to arrest, detain or fine me - having access to all of my data in real-time just because it's increasingly a feature in the private commercial space.
I want both regulatory spheres dealt with.
Many seem to make the assumption that because they do all these things like carry a mobile, use gps, use facebook, twitter, always pay electronically, use loyalty cards etc that everyone does it. However a lot of us choose to opt to not doing these things because we are aware of the tracking and do our best to minimize it
Good luck finding a car without built in GPS and cellular.
I listened to Nicola and I found her credible intelligent and impressive. I've got a lot of time for the Sottish posters on this site from all sides. That's what's confusing. The English drama queens like Leon and Big G and the Guidoistas can be ignored. They don't have a vote and any interest they might show is in hoping the Nats fail.
It's obvious to even his most fervent supporters that Salmond is finished. Whatever happens to Nicola that's a given. My question to the Nats is how can crucifying Nicola do anything to advance the Nationalist cause? Is Sturgeon's defenestration really worth collapsing the movement?
You probably think this is all happening in Cardiff
Budget: the CPI inflation assumption (that it stays at or below 2.0% until 2026) looks rocky to me. A 1% increase in RPI increases debt costs by £7bn, and 1% in gilts by £9 billion. Rather sensitive. This could budget could be out by £50-60bn by FY2025/26.
The corp tax and income tax freezes yield £25bn a year by 2025, so that's big money. IHT also frozen for an extra 0.4bn yield. If it gets desperate he could up VAT to 22%, I guess to give an extra £10-12bn per year.
Also, has he factored in a progressive degradation of fuel duty? I think he's just TBC'ed it in this. I'd have thought it'd be 10-15% below current levels by 2025, 25-35% by 2030 and 60-70% by 2040. That's probably a £3-4bn hole by 2026 alone.
Carbon neutrality will have a serious fiscal cost, although cheaper than the environmental one of course.
I think this is another area where he has to bite the bullet sooner rather than later. There is no longer a need to encourage drivers to take up electric cars - they are going to be forced to do so within 9 years anyway. So he should now look to move to payment per mile for driving with all cars being classed the same. Replace fuel duty and road tax with a completely new system based on how much you drive. If you are worried about the impact on rural areas then you can tinker with rates but basically it will be one system for all with perhaps some regional variation.
If my clock is read once a year at MOT time, to reconcile my road tax bill for the next year, fine.
But, I do not want to be satellite tracked and monitored for real-time road pricing.
No way do I want any part of the Government knowing where I'm going, when or why, or for how long. Nor do I expect to have to explain myself to anyone: the prospects for abuse are legion.
The fuzz would have dug all over it during this latest lockdown.
The problem is that all polling on the matter has shown that road pricing is a Fuel Strike moment. No one trusts the government on this.
This is one of the reasons that hydrogen was the promoted clean fuel solution - when the time was right, you would shift the fuel taxes to hydrogen.
Problem is that electricity is everywhere.
The resistance to rebalancing the anti-road structural plans in the light of ZEVs being universal is strong. But it is needed - and it is quite interesting to see some public transport plans in that light....
You get billed for KWH in your home. The Government doesn't snoop to see what you're using it on, or when, except at a very macro level - and it's wholly commercial.
The thing is Governments have different policy agendas, supreme power, aren't in competition with anyone, so you can't choose, are able to join lots of dots and are this perfectly corruptable: they could also use this to do you for speeding, as much as pricing per mile, and you could be blackmailed. Or petty personal vendettas could be pursued with it.
I will be making my thoughts known on it to my MP.
In theory smart meters could be used to work out what people use their electricity for. Most devices have a recognisable signature.
They could even work out which TV channel you are watching.
I want to see an open-book top-to-toe regulatory review of all of this. All of it.
Private. Public. How it works. Checks and balances. Accessibility. Destruction date. Everything.
Far too many of us don't know or understand it, and that includes policymakers as well as consumers.
While that is all theoretically possible with a hand crafted device snuck into someone's house, it's not reality.
A typical house would have a gas meter, electric meter, home display and a communications hub. Often the hub combines with the electricity meter because it has power. Typically they will periodically take power usage readings say every 5 minutes. This gets saved up and sent out when requested typically via a mobile phone network link from the comms hub.
To ensure security they use the same security model/technology as for banking, basically a pki based architecture. To ensure that meters can transfer when the supplier changes, there is an industry entity called the data collection company that controls all of the meters on behalf of the utility companies.
So all a utility company will get is a series of meter readings which they use to work out the bill, possible using the usage profile with time of use tariffs.
No-one can work out what TV channel you are watching from that, though they might work out when you used a kettle or when you were in. Anything else is paranoia.
I listened to Nicola and I found her credible intelligent and impressive. I've got a lot of time for the Sottish posters on this site from all sides. That's what's confusing. The English drama queens like Leon and Big G and the Guidoistas can be ignored. They don't have a vote and any interest they might show is in hoping the Nats fail.
It's obvious to even his most fervent supporters that Salmond is finished. Whatever happens to Nicola that's a given. My question to the Nats is how can crucifying Nicola do anything to advance the Nationalist cause? Is Sturgeon's defenestration really worth collapsing the movement?
But have you worked out if she's a man or a woman yet?
I listened to Nicola and I found her credible intelligent and impressive. I've got a lot of time for the Sottish posters on this site from all sides. That's what's confusing. The English drama queens like Leon and Big G and the Guidoistas can be ignored. They don't have a vote and any interest is in hoping the Nats fail.
It's obvious to even his most fervent supporters that Salmond is finished. Whatever happens to Nicola that's a given. My question to the Nats is how can crucifying Nicola do anything to advance the Nationalist cause? Is Sturgeon's defenestration really worth collapsing the cause?
I have far more connections to Scotland and it's politics including a large family in the North East than your superficial nonsense.
I am not English as Big_G_NorthWales indicates
I cannot stand Salmond, nor Sturgeon and have opposed independence since I lived in Bewick on Tweed in the 1950's
You have little or no knowledge of Scotland and neither our families deep love of the Country and Scots
I listened to Nicola and I found her credible intelligent and impressive. I've got a lot of time for the Sottish posters on this site from all sides. That's what's confusing. The English drama queens like Leon and Big G and the Guidoistas can be ignored. They don't have a vote and any interest they might show is in hoping the Nats fail.
It's obvious to even his most fervent supporters that Salmond is finished. Whatever happens to Nicola that's a given. My question to the Nats is how can crucifying Nicola do anything to advance the Nationalist cause? Is Sturgeon's defenestration really worth collapsing the movement?
It's very difficult for movements concentrated on a mad goal, like removing the Tsars and installing a dictatorship of the proletariat, or securing votes for women, or Home Rule for Ireland, or ending Apartheid, to hold themselves together for as long as those movements had to. They usually fail because they split, or get fat and comfortable with government jobs that the change they wanted would threaten their nice comfortable positions. It's kind of expected that the SNP would somehow not achieve their goal and getting fat and splitting is the sort of outcome one might expect.
I do think devolution was a mistake, partly because of the structure of the parliament - it was botched - and partly because it's a threat to the Union but was sold as saving the Union from the same threat that at the time barely existed.
All us scotsmen will have nice new grievances soon though!
Budget: the CPI inflation assumption (that it stays at or below 2.0% until 2026) looks rocky to me. A 1% increase in RPI increases debt costs by £7bn, and 1% in gilts by £9 billion. Rather sensitive. This could budget could be out by £50-60bn by FY2025/26.
The corp tax and income tax freezes yield £25bn a year by 2025, so that's big money. IHT also frozen for an extra 0.4bn yield. If it gets desperate he could up VAT to 22%, I guess to give an extra £10-12bn per year.
Also, has he factored in a progressive degradation of fuel duty? I think he's just TBC'ed it in this. I'd have thought it'd be 10-15% below current levels by 2025, 25-35% by 2030 and 60-70% by 2040. That's probably a £3-4bn hole by 2026 alone.
Carbon neutrality will have a serious fiscal cost, although cheaper than the environmental one of course.
I think this is another area where he has to bite the bullet sooner rather than later. There is no longer a need to encourage drivers to take up electric cars - they are going to be forced to do so within 9 years anyway. So he should now look to move to payment per mile for driving with all cars being classed the same. Replace fuel duty and road tax with a completely new system based on how much you drive. If you are worried about the impact on rural areas then you can tinker with rates but basically it will be one system for all with perhaps some regional variation.
If my clock is read once a year at MOT time, to reconcile my road tax bill for the next year, fine.
But, I do not want to be satellite tracked and monitored for real-time road pricing.
No way do I want any part of the Government knowing where I'm going, when or why, or for how long. Nor do I expect to have to explain myself to anyone: the prospects for abuse are legion.
The fuzz would have dug all over it during this latest lockdown.
You do know that when you buy a new car, and you turn it on, and there's that big screen about Terms & Conditions for using the in car systems (without which your car will basically not work), that you are agreeing they have the right to sell your location data to whoever they want, right?
Anyone buying a new Ford, Tesla, GM, etc., today has already agreed to let Google and Amazon look at your location history so as to work out what things to sell you.
I don't have any of those cars but, yes, I do, and I have similar concerns about the use of my data by private companies too. I'd like to see that regulated by primary legislation.
I don't see why I should "accept" the government - who have the power to arrest, detain or fine me - having access to all of my data in real-time just because it's increasingly a feature in the private commercial space.
I want both regulatory spheres dealt with.
Many seem to make the assumption that because they do all these things like carry a mobile, use gps, use facebook, twitter, always pay electronically, use loyalty cards etc that everyone does it. However a lot of us choose to opt to not doing these things because we are aware of the tracking and do our best to minimize it
Good luck finding a car without built in GPS and cellular.
There needs to be a global rebellion against technology companies "accidentally on purpose" harvesting data from things like cars, phones, laptops, etc. Of course governments should have done something about it first, but they're always about 20 years behind the latest technological developments.
That's not their highest. Their highest was 17,766 on 7 January after which it fell back a bit and is now rising again. They were well north of 15,000 a couple of days in late October as well. They are having a camel shaped outbreak having largely dodged the first wave.
So what did I miss? Any exciting bits in Nicola's evidence or all too complex to really have a gotcha point?
And did Sunak do anything interesting?
You missed an extraordinary spectacle. If you want to see the best of it, check the third session after lunch. Worth viewing in its entirety if you’re a politics geek. Which you are
If you’re pushed for time fast forward to any bit where Baillie was interrogating. But don’t miss Sturgeon nearly blubbing
No gotcha moment. She will survive. But the committee’s conclusions might be interesting
She lied enough and made enough mistakes to ensure the story isn’t going anywhere
I was gutted to miss it but sometimes work gets in the way and today was one of those days. Bah.
There needs to be a global rebellion against technology companies "accidentally on purpose" harvesting data from things like cars, phones, laptops, etc. Of course governments should have done something about it first, but they're always about 20 years behind the latest technological developments.
Governments and law enforcement like that data though as they can get access to it. It is now common practise in the us for example for investigations to ask for a list of all mobile phones that were within an area
I listened to Nicola and I found her credible intelligent and impressive. I've got a lot of time for the Sottish posters on this site from all sides. That's what's confusing. The English drama queens like Leon and Big G and the Guidoistas can be ignored. They don't have a vote and any interest they might show is in hoping the Nats fail.
It's obvious to even his most fervent supporters that Salmond is finished. Whatever happens to Nicola that's a given. My question to the Nats is how can crucifying Nicola do anything to advance the Nationalist cause? Is Sturgeon's defenestration really worth collapsing the movement?
You probably think this is all happening in Cardiff
I did think it was impossible for Roger to get onto Scottish Politics without being waylayed in Hartlepool en route. Or maybe you are taking your cue from Oddschecker!
I cannot deny that I am looking forward to seeing footage of Sturgeon facing difficulties, but I fear the level of excitement promised by people on here may not be met.
The third session of the day (the one before this) - is the one to watch
But you need to watch it all. The tv snippets won’t capture it
Nothing could be as thrilling as your breathless commentary of it – why bother with the real thing?
The morning session was largely boring. I almost skipped the rest. I am very glad i didn’t.
Compulsive viewing
I diagnose a severe case of lockdown locked in syndrome...
Whatever you think of the two Salmond stuck to facts and documents. Sturgeon was ephemeral, evasive, unclear on many of the key points and relied on a sense of emotion, and she spent far too much time on general airy-fairy monologues and conjecture that really should have been cut off earlier.
Salmond presented a case. It might not be the reality, but Sturgeon did not provide anything concrete to truly refute it, and indeed whenever there were any moments of the committee explaining how they had documents corroborating Salmond's account, Sturgeon had no real answer.
Then highest tax burden in since the 1960s and Roy Jenkins apparently.
And for a long time to come. For ever, basically.
Good luck with that Rishi. Seriously mate. Good luck.
And how would you pay for covid
By clicking his heels twice to make the whole thing go away.
Well let's be honest. Punters are being sold the line that we must "pay back" everything borrowed for furlough and covid support loans. Which is a giant porkie pie. Because all that debt has instead been monetised by QE.
It's all just political stage management to try and mark the Tories out as "fiscally responsible". When in reality they've jumped on the China model MMT harder than anyone.
So what did I miss? Any exciting bits in Nicola's evidence or all too complex to really have a gotcha point?
And did Sunak do anything interesting?
You missed an extraordinary spectacle. If you want to see the best of it, check the third session after lunch. Worth viewing in its entirety if you’re a politics geek. Which you are
If you’re pushed for time fast forward to any bit where Baillie was interrogating. But don’t miss Sturgeon nearly blubbing
No gotcha moment. She will survive. But the committee’s conclusions might be interesting
She lied enough and made enough mistakes to ensure the story isn’t going anywhere
I was gutted to miss it but sometimes work gets in the way and today was one of those days. Bah.
Your membership of the Fraternity of PB Scotch Experts is hereby withdrawn.
I always thought Scotch referred only to the alcoholic spirit, not to the Scottish people?
Also pies, eggs, pancakes and mist.
Actually it's just another spelling of the adjective Scottish, which happens to annoy Scots. (Which is a plural noun, but also another variant of Scottish)
Whatever you think of the two Salmond stuck to facts and documents. Sturgeon was ephemeral, evasive, unclear on many of the key points and relied on a sense of emotion, and she spent far too much time on general airy-fairy monologues and conjecture that really should have been cut off earlier.
Salmond presented a case. It might not be the reality, but Sturgeon did not provide anything concrete to truly refute it, and indeed whenever there were any moments of the committee explaining how they had documents corroborating Salmond's account, Sturgeon had no real answer.
So what did I miss? Any exciting bits in Nicola's evidence or all too complex to really have a gotcha point?
And did Sunak do anything interesting?
You missed an extraordinary spectacle. If you want to see the best of it, check the third session after lunch. Worth viewing in its entirety if you’re a politics geek. Which you are
If you’re pushed for time fast forward to any bit where Baillie was interrogating. But don’t miss Sturgeon nearly blubbing
No gotcha moment. She will survive. But the committee’s conclusions might be interesting
She lied enough and made enough mistakes to ensure the story isn’t going anywhere
I was gutted to miss it but sometimes work gets in the way and today was one of those days. Bah.
On the position of Ms Sturgeon, it's worth bearing in mind that there is already a complex civil war going on within the SNP, largely incomprehensible to the outsider, but based on a strange mixture of Salmond vs Sturgeon, battles over what to do when Boris disallows a second referendum, and a side war of quite incredible ferocity on trans rights. So her hegemony over the party isn't quite as solid as it seems.
Then highest tax burden in since the 1960s and Roy Jenkins apparently.
And for a long time to come. For ever, basically.
Good luck with that Rishi. Seriously mate. Good luck.
And how would you pay for covid
By clicking his heels twice to make the whole thing go away.
Well let's be honest. Punters are being sold the line that we must "pay back" everything borrowed for furlough and covid support loans. Which is a giant porkie pie. Because all that debt has instead been monetised by QE.
It's all just political stage management to try and mark the Tories out as "fiscally responsible". When in reality they've jumped on the China model MMT harder than anyone.
That's not true. This isn't "paying back" everything borrowed nor has anyone claimed it is.
This is closing the deficit.
People need to learn the difference between debt and deficit.
Comments
https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1367154751201308672?s=20
https://twitter.com/BBCJLandale/status/1367125639048871936?s=20
The highest figure the UK has recorded so far was 68,053 on 8th January.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/uk/
But what a drama
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/daily-tests-per-thousand-people-smoothed-7-day?tab=chart&stackMode=absolute&time=earliest..latest&country=GBR~CZE®ion=World
And it's really dull process stuff if you don't care about the separation of powers.
But some of the exchanges were indeed compelling.
Baillie - who has no legal background - is genuinely brilliant in the examination of a witness, in a way Starmer simply isn't.
It may not matter: except that it also ensures Salmond will never give this up
1) Get Brexit done - on which whatever your views on the desirability of doing so, they've made big strides since December 2019 - but this issue isn't going to go away or be 'settled' any time soon. This will still take up a lot of government focus.
2) Levelling up - clearly high on the government's to-do list. Too broad a target to hit in one parliament, really, but it is at least a focus to work towards.
1 has been progressed despite the pandemic, 2 may be completely derailed by it.
People complain about the amount of tracking companies and governments do....take responsibilty and if you think its too much data they collect stop allowing them to collect data seems far more sensible than trying to get watertight privacy laws as we know they will be got round
https://twitter.com/rcolvile/status/1367075223661662209?s=20
In a normal political party the men in grey suits would metaphorically give her a pearl-handled revolver and invite her to make use of it. But I think the SNP is simply too much of a personality cult, so Sturgeon will remain in place and the damage will continue to accrue.
But with a great deal more padding.
I might take my phone with me when I pop to the shop for a pint of milk. And use a debit card for the purchase, I am very happy I have nothing to hide there. But it's reassuring to know that I'm not compelled to do so: I could, if I wanted, leave it at home; and pay with cash at the shop.
I don't NEED to be off-grid. But I very much don't want to be denied the possibility of being off grid.
Compulsive viewing
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/live/bbcnews
Started 17.00
It's a bit Jackanory.....
And did Sunak do anything interesting?
--AS
Not sure how interesting that is.
It's obvious to even his most fervent supporters that Salmond is finished. Whatever happens to Nicola that's a given. My question to the Nats is how can crucifying Nicola do anything to advance the Nationalist cause? Is Sturgeon's defenestration really worth collapsing the movement?
Rather, we ought to be concerned about putting easily understood and managed legal (or coded) constraints on the use of our information. The GDPR is in no way a useful solution.
You missed an extraordinary spectacle. If you want to see the best of it, check the third session after lunch. Worth viewing in its entirety if you’re a politics geek. Which you are
If you’re pushed for time fast forward to any bit where Baillie was interrogating. But don’t miss Sturgeon nearly blubbing
No gotcha moment. She will survive. But the committee’s conclusions might be interesting
She lied enough and made enough mistakes to ensure the story isn’t going anywhere
Anyone who says "I am worried about the data big tech/governments collect" and then says I use facebook always carry a mobile always pay electronically etc. Well look in the mirror they collect it because you throw it at them.
You probably think this is all happening in Cardiff
A typical house would have a gas meter, electric meter, home display and a communications hub. Often the hub combines with the electricity meter because it has power. Typically they will periodically take power usage readings say every 5 minutes. This gets saved up and sent out when requested typically via a mobile phone network link from the comms hub.
To ensure security they use the same security model/technology as for banking, basically a pki based architecture. To ensure that meters can transfer when the supplier changes, there is an industry entity called the data collection company that controls all of the meters on behalf of the utility companies.
So all a utility company will get is a series of meter readings which they use to work out the bill, possible using the usage profile with time of use tariffs.
No-one can work out what TV channel you are watching from that, though they might work out when you used a kettle or when you were in. Anything else is paranoia.
All of this is public information.
I am not English as Big_G_NorthWales indicates
I cannot stand Salmond, nor Sturgeon and have opposed independence since I lived in Bewick on Tweed in the 1950's
You have little or no knowledge of Scotland and neither our families deep love of the Country and Scots
I do think devolution was a mistake, partly because of the structure of the parliament - it was botched - and partly because it's a threat to the Union but was sold as saving the Union from the same threat that at the time barely existed.
All us scotsmen will have nice new grievances soon though!
And for a long time to come. For ever, basically.
Good luck with that Rishi. Seriously mate. Good luck.
https://twitter.com/mvmccu/status/1367147995087712260?s=21
https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/scottish-politics/2021-tees-valley-mayoral-election-winner
Salmond presented a case. It might not be the reality, but Sturgeon did not provide anything concrete to truly refute it, and indeed whenever there were any moments of the committee explaining how they had documents corroborating Salmond's account, Sturgeon had no real answer.
She certainly impressed me today and would be a vast improvement on Starmer
It's all just political stage management to try and mark the Tories out as "fiscally responsible". When in reality they've jumped on the China model MMT harder than anyone.
Actually it's just another spelling of the adjective Scottish, which happens to annoy Scots. (Which is a plural noun, but also another variant of Scottish)
I'm not sure there is a way of paying for what has been done and retaining living standards at anywhere near what they were.
Either now, or in the future
This is closing the deficit.
People need to learn the difference between debt and deficit.