Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

As schools in England re-open CON members give EdSec Williamson a MINUS 44% rating – politicalbettin

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited March 8 in General
imageAs schools in England re-open CON members give EdSec Williamson a MINUS 44% rating – politicalbetting.com

ConsrrvativeHome

Read the full story here

«1345678

Comments

  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 702
    First
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 40,123
    How the hell did he get as high as -44%?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 92,251
    After the revelations last night I suspect Truss will be back to backing the abolition of the monarchy.

    That alone will win her a landslide.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 3,053
    He must be doing something right. The teachers loathe him. Good man !
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 92,251
    edited March 8
    FPT
    Charles said:

    The Queen's uncle was a Nazi sympathiser, Her Majesty herself used to do Nazi salutes, is it any surprise she didn't offer her first non white great-grandchild a title like she did for the Aryan looking Charlotte and Louis?

    That’s a very unpleasant smear

    Shame on you
    Sorry Charles, the royal family has made both Diana, Princess of Wales, and the Duchess of Sussex have suicidal thoughts (and in the former's case, attempt to kill herself.)

    This is a failing organisation led by an out of touch person, the Queen needs to go lest we do see an outsider end up killing themselves thanks to the rules of the 'firm.'

    If this was any other organisation it would be called a failing institution with the police involved.

    Edit - And I notice you've gone all Corbynite calling unimpeachable facts 'smears.'
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 92,251

    How the hell did he get as high as -44%?

    Gavin's family and SPADs repeatedly took part in this poll.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 7,277
    edited March 8
    8th.

    And FPT as I slept well last night.
    tlg86 said:

    MattW said:

    tlg86 said:

    MattW said:

    kyf_100 said:



    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/56294009

    It's a policy that has jacked up house prices and made it harder for people who actually need to buy houses to buy them (it's done a great job for those already owning them, which is pointless, they already own a home) vs a policy to pay our nursing staff properly for a job they've done superbly and without complaint over the last year and beyond.

    It's obvious to anyone what a better use of the money was.

    How does removing a tax on buyers make it harder for a buyer to buy their house? 🙄
    Because the sellers simply raise their prices, which they can. Because the buyers aren't buying with their own money, they're buying with a maxed out mortgage. Combine that with a reduction in interest rates and all you've done is raise the price of property while forcing new buyers to take on more debt. That is exactly what has happened.
    All of these government 'initiatives' - Help to Buy, LISAs and stamp duty cuts - simply push up prices as described previously.

    What we need is to 'encourage' the Buy To Let and other multiple home owner community to release their properties with a fair and equitable tax system on these people, who have had so many tax breaks in the past:
    - 5% stamp duty loading on acquisition of a second/BTL property (I know we have 3% now)
    - 3% capital charge PER YEAR
    - no tax relief on interest paid to buy BTL
    - double Council Tax on a second property
    - any capital gain taxed at 40%

    That will 'encourage' these people to release these properties! Lots more supply. Prices fall, chance for renters and other aspirant buyers to buy.

    Let's do it!
    We did this last week.

    As a policy, that will do untold damage to the marginal and less well-off members of the community, particularly very significant numbers who cannot access credit.

    And in favour of relatively richer people.

    It is crazy.

    The unholy alliance between the rich and the poor.

    The obvious solution has and always will be to increase interest rates slowly to c.3-4% to reduce the profitability of BTL.
    Where will the human beings you are proposing to make homeless live?
    Ummm, in houses/flats like they do now?

    For every BTL property sold to a first time buyer, that's one less person competing in the rental sector.
    You don't understand how housing occupation works.

    The rental sector is far more densely occupied than the Owner Occupied sector, so when you move X people from the rental sector to OO - by whatever mechanism you are using to close down rental - you need a lot more houses.

    I posted the stats the other day. These are in the English Housing Survey.

    Nearly Half of OO houses are underoccupied - the official stat is 2 or more spare bedrooms.

    For rental that is under 10%.

    Therefore you are creating a lot of people with nowhere to live - homeless.

    And you need to have a policy where you will put the people you are making homeless.
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 5,661

    I find 'Gav' Williamson tremendously reassuring & I do hope he stays in place.

    It is good to be reminded that the lowliest fool can rise to the very top with a mixture of bluff, fraud & luck.

    It is a bracing antidote to those sentimental stories of people who got to the top through merit, intelligence & hard work.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 17,385
    MattW said:

    8th.

    And FPT as I slept well last night.

    tlg86 said:

    MattW said:

    tlg86 said:

    MattW said:

    kyf_100 said:



    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/56294009

    It's a policy that has jacked up house prices and made it harder for people who actually need to buy houses to buy them (it's done a great job for those already owning them, which is pointless, they already own a home) vs a policy to pay our nursing staff properly for a job they've done superbly and without complaint over the last year and beyond.

    It's obvious to anyone what a better use of the money was.

    How does removing a tax on buyers make it harder for a buyer to buy their house? 🙄
    Because the sellers simply raise their prices, which they can. Because the buyers aren't buying with their own money, they're buying with a maxed out mortgage. Combine that with a reduction in interest rates and all you've done is raise the price of property while forcing new buyers to take on more debt. That is exactly what has happened.
    All of these government 'initiatives' - Help to Buy, LISAs and stamp duty cuts - simply push up prices as described previously.

    What we need is to 'encourage' the Buy To Let and other multiple home owner community to release their properties with a fair and equitable tax system on these people, who have had so many tax breaks in the past:
    - 5% stamp duty loading on acquisition of a second/BTL property (I know we have 3% now)
    - 3% capital charge PER YEAR
    - no tax relief on interest paid to buy BTL
    - double Council Tax on a second property
    - any capital gain taxed at 40%

    That will 'encourage' these people to release these properties! Lots more supply. Prices fall, chance for renters and other aspirant buyers to buy.

    Let's do it!
    We did this last week.

    As a policy, that will do untold damage to the marginal and less well-off members of the community, particularly very significant numbers who cannot access credit.

    And in favour of relatively richer people.

    It is crazy.

    The unholy alliance between the rich and the poor.

    The obvious solution has and always will be to increase interest rates slowly to c.3-4% to reduce the profitability of BTL.
    Where will the human beings you are proposing to make homeless live?
    Ummm, in houses/flats like they do now?

    For every BTL property sold to a first time buyer, that's one less person competing in the rental sector.
    You don't understand how housing occupation works.

    The rental sector is far more densely occupied than the Owner Occupied sector, so when you move X people from the rental sector to OO - by whatever mechanism you are using to close down rental - you need a lot more houses.

    I posted the stats the other day. These are in the English Housing Survey.

    Nearly Half of OO houses are underoccupied - the official stat is 2 or more spare bedrooms.

    For rental that is under 10%.

    Therefore you are creating a lot of people with nowhere to live - homeless.

    And you need to have a policy where you will put the people you are making homeless.
    Do you think, then, that we actually need more rental properties and should aim to have fewer people getting on the ladder?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 92,251

    FPT

    Charles said:

    The Queen's uncle was a Nazi sympathiser, Her Majesty herself used to do Nazi salutes, is it any surprise she didn't offer her first non white great-grandchild a title like she did for the Aryan looking Charlotte and Louis?

    That’s a very unpleasant smear

    Shame on you
    Sorry Charles, the royal family has made both Diana, Princess of Wales, and the Duchess of Sussex have suicidal thoughts (and in the former's case, attempt to kill herself.)

    This is a failing organisation led by an out of touch person, the Queen needs to go lest we do see an outsider end up killing themselves thanks to the rules of the 'firm.'

    If this was any other organisation it would be called a failing institution with the police involved.
    Far from it, the Institution is fine as long as you follow the rules. You know what you are getting yourself into at the start and I don't believe Megan's tears (faux )either. She just couldn't bear playing second fiddle.
    Prince Andrew never followed the rules and he was never punished.

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/12762748/prince-andrew-splashes-16k-on-private-jet/

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/theroyalfamily/11351404/Air-Miles-Andy-flies-again-Duke-of-York-visited-15-countries-and-clocked-up-67000-miles-in-2014.html

    Your taxes and mine pay for that rule breaker to have a great life.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 29,310
    Whether Archie Windsor gets to be called Prince, Duke or Earl seems to fall very much into the category of Rich Peoples' Problems.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 64,758
    Time to start prepping interview 2. 3 or 4 per year should be manageable.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 31,476

    FPT

    Charles said:

    The Queen's uncle was a Nazi sympathiser, Her Majesty herself used to do Nazi salutes, is it any surprise she didn't offer her first non white great-grandchild a title like she did for the Aryan looking Charlotte and Louis?

    That’s a very unpleasant smear

    Shame on you
    Sorry Charles, the royal family has made both Diana, Princess of Wales, and the Duchess of Sussex have suicidal thoughts (and in the former's case, attempt to kill herself.)

    This is a failing organisation led by an out of touch person, the Queen needs to go lest we do see an outsider end up killing themselves thanks to the rules of the 'firm.'

    If this was any other organisation it would be called a failing institution with the police involved.

    Edit - And I notice you've gone all Corbynite calling unimpeachable facts 'smears.'
    The smear was the implied motivation you ascribed for the Quern’s decision. That’s not a fact.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 84,095
    edited March 8

    FPT

    Charles said:

    The Queen's uncle was a Nazi sympathiser, Her Majesty herself used to do Nazi salutes, is it any surprise she didn't offer her first non white great-grandchild a title like she did for the Aryan looking Charlotte and Louis?

    That’s a very unpleasant smear

    Shame on you
    Sorry Charles, the royal family has made both Diana, Princess of Wales, and the Duchess of Sussex have suicidal thoughts (and in the former's case, attempt to kill herself.)

    This is a failing organisation led by an out of touch person, the Queen needs to go lest we do see an outsider end up killing themselves thanks to the rules of the 'firm.'

    If this was any other organisation it would be called a failing institution with the police involved.
    Utter rubbish, as to be expected by a non Tory republican like you.

    Never have I seen a more pathetic example of narcissism and self indulgence than from these 2 multi millionaires as seems to be the case with this disgraceful interview.

    Trashing in public the family who made them (with the exception of the Queen knowing full way if they attacked her that would destroy them), trashing Prince Charles despite all the funds they received from the Duchy of Cornwall. Factually wrong too, as Archie is not the son of an heir to the throne he by definition could not be a prince but he got a title as Earl of Dumbarton which they then renounced when they abandoned their royal duties.

    I wish never to see or hear from this pair ever again and may they be exiled from these shores never to set foot here again. They are the 21st century Duke and Duchess of Windsor without the class!
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 65,452
    Liz Truss is good value for next PM.
    The King (Or Queen) and by extension the royals are an institution as old as England/Britain itself. Markle won't derail it.
    Foie Gras is cruel.
    And @tlg86 is right about the housing market.

    Good morning everyone.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 32,492

    FPT

    Charles said:

    The Queen's uncle was a Nazi sympathiser, Her Majesty herself used to do Nazi salutes, is it any surprise she didn't offer her first non white great-grandchild a title like she did for the Aryan looking Charlotte and Louis?

    That’s a very unpleasant smear

    Shame on you
    Sorry Charles, the royal family has made both Diana, Princess of Wales, and the Duchess of Sussex have suicidal thoughts (and in the former's case, attempt to kill herself.)

    This is a failing organisation led by an out of touch person, the Queen needs to go lest we do see an outsider end up killing themselves thanks to the rules of the 'firm.'

    If this was any other organisation it would be called a failing institution with the police involved.
    Far from it, the Institution is fine as long as you follow the rules. You know what you are getting yourself into at the start and I don't believe Megan's tears (faux )either. She just couldn't bear playing second fiddle.
    Agree totally , a spoilt prima donna who was miffed at not being the centre of the universe. A two bit actor who thought she had hit the jackpot and is milking it big time. How many million did they get for their whinge fest.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 40,362
    Morning all,

    Two days after my AZ/Oxford jab and I am feeling dreadful. Had a real bad night - fever, chills, terrible muscle pains and severe headache.

    I knew there were some fever like effects for a day or so. But this has poleaxed me. Anyone else had a bad reaction? How many days does this last?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 92,251
    HYUFD said:

    FPT

    Charles said:

    The Queen's uncle was a Nazi sympathiser, Her Majesty herself used to do Nazi salutes, is it any surprise she didn't offer her first non white great-grandchild a title like she did for the Aryan looking Charlotte and Louis?

    That’s a very unpleasant smear

    Shame on you
    Sorry Charles, the royal family has made both Diana, Princess of Wales, and the Duchess of Sussex have suicidal thoughts (and in the former's case, attempt to kill herself.)

    This is a failing organisation led by an out of touch person, the Queen needs to go lest we do see an outsider end up killing themselves thanks to the rules of the 'firm.'

    If this was any other organisation it would be called a failing institution with the police involved.
    Utter rubbish, as to be expected by a non Tory republican like you.

    Never have a seen I more pathetic example of narcissism and self indulgence from these 2 multi millionaires than seems to be the case with this interview.

    Trashing in public the family who made them (with the exception of the Queen knowing full way if they attacked her that would destroy them), trashing Prince Charles despite all the funds they received from the Duchy of Cornwall. Factually wrong too, as Archie is not the son of an heir to the throne he by definition could not be a prince but he got a title as Earl of Dumbarton which they then renounced when they abandoned their royal duties.

    I wish never to see or hear from this pair ever again and may they be exiled from these shores never to set foot here again. They are the 21st century Duke and Duchess of Windsor without the class!
    BIB - I see you missed the Prince Andrew interview in 2019 then?

    Also, I noticed last week you said Boris Johnson was a social democrat, so in your head he's as much as a Tory as me!
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 22,138
    HYUFD said:

    FPT

    Charles said:

    The Queen's uncle was a Nazi sympathiser, Her Majesty herself used to do Nazi salutes, is it any surprise she didn't offer her first non white great-grandchild a title like she did for the Aryan looking Charlotte and Louis?

    That’s a very unpleasant smear

    Shame on you
    Sorry Charles, the royal family has made both Diana, Princess of Wales, and the Duchess of Sussex have suicidal thoughts (and in the former's case, attempt to kill herself.)

    This is a failing organisation led by an out of touch person, the Queen needs to go lest we do see an outsider end up killing themselves thanks to the rules of the 'firm.'

    If this was any other organisation it would be called a failing institution with the police involved.
    Utter rubbish, as to be expected by a non Tory republican like you.

    Never have a seen I more pathetic example of narcissism and self indulgence from these 2 multi millionaires than seems to be the case with this interview.

    Trashing in public the family who made them (with the exception of the Queen knowing full way if they attacked her that would destroy them), trashing Prince Charles despite all the funds they received from the Duchy of Cornwall. Factually wrong too, as Archie is not the son of an heir to the throne he by definition could not be a prince but he got a title as Earl of Dumbarton which they then renounced when they abandoned their royal duties.

    I wish never to see or hear from this pair ever again and may they be exiled from these shores never to set foot here again. They are the 21st century Duke and Duchess of Windsor without the class!
    One's cage has been rattled. Severely!
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 3,053

    FPT

    Charles said:

    The Queen's uncle was a Nazi sympathiser, Her Majesty herself used to do Nazi salutes, is it any surprise she didn't offer her first non white great-grandchild a title like she did for the Aryan looking Charlotte and Louis?

    That’s a very unpleasant smear

    Shame on you
    Sorry Charles, the royal family has made both Diana, Princess of Wales, and the Duchess of Sussex have suicidal thoughts (and in the former's case, attempt to kill herself.)

    This is a failing organisation led by an out of touch person, the Queen needs to go lest we do see an outsider end up killing themselves thanks to the rules of the 'firm.'

    If this was any other organisation it would be called a failing institution with the police involved.
    Far from it, the Institution is fine as long as you follow the rules. You know what you are getting yourself into at the start and I don't believe Megan's tears (faux )either. She just couldn't bear playing second fiddle.
    Prince Andrew never followed the rules and he was never punished.

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/12762748/prince-andrew-splashes-16k-on-private-jet/

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/theroyalfamily/11351404/Air-Miles-Andy-flies-again-Duke-of-York-visited-15-countries-and-clocked-up-67000-miles-in-2014.html

    Your taxes and mine pay for that rule breaker to have a great life.
    He has never bleated about it that I can recall.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 36,847
    HYUFD said:

    FPT

    Charles said:

    The Queen's uncle was a Nazi sympathiser, Her Majesty herself used to do Nazi salutes, is it any surprise she didn't offer her first non white great-grandchild a title like she did for the Aryan looking Charlotte and Louis?

    That’s a very unpleasant smear

    Shame on you
    Sorry Charles, the royal family has made both Diana, Princess of Wales, and the Duchess of Sussex have suicidal thoughts (and in the former's case, attempt to kill herself.)

    This is a failing organisation led by an out of touch person, the Queen needs to go lest we do see an outsider end up killing themselves thanks to the rules of the 'firm.'

    If this was any other organisation it would be called a failing institution with the police involved.
    Utter rubbish, as to be expected by a non Tory republican like you.

    Never have I seen a more pathetic example of narcissism and self indulgence than from these 2 multi millionaires as seems to be the case with this disgraceful interview.

    Trashing in public the family who made them (with the exception of the Queen knowing full way if they attacked her that would destroy them), trashing Prince Charles despite all the funds they received from the Duchy of Cornwall. Factually wrong too, as Archie is not the son of an heir to the throne he by definition could not be a prince but he got a title as Earl of Dumbarton which they then renounced when they abandoned their royal duties.

    I wish never to see or hear from this pair ever again and may they be exiled from these shores never to set foot here again. They are the 21st century Duke and Duchess of Windsor without the class!
    Never have I seen a more pathetic example of narcissism and self indulgence than from these 2 multi millionaires

    Do you not read anyone else's posts?
  • eekeek Posts: 12,249
    edited March 8
    tlg86 said:

    MattW said:

    8th.

    And FPT as I slept well last night.

    tlg86 said:

    MattW said:

    tlg86 said:

    MattW said:

    kyf_100 said:



    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/56294009

    It's a policy that has jacked up house prices and made it harder for people who actually need to buy houses to buy them (it's done a great job for those already owning them, which is pointless, they already own a home) vs a policy to pay our nursing staff properly for a job they've done superbly and without complaint over the last year and beyond.

    It's obvious to anyone what a better use of the money was.

    How does removing a tax on buyers make it harder for a buyer to buy their house? 🙄
    Because the sellers simply raise their prices, which they can. Because the buyers aren't buying with their own money, they're buying with a maxed out mortgage. Combine that with a reduction in interest rates and all you've done is raise the price of property while forcing new buyers to take on more debt. That is exactly what has happened.
    All of these government 'initiatives' - Help to Buy, LISAs and stamp duty cuts - simply push up prices as described previously.

    What we need is to 'encourage' the Buy To Let and other multiple home owner community to release their properties with a fair and equitable tax system on these people, who have had so many tax breaks in the past:
    - 5% stamp duty loading on acquisition of a second/BTL property (I know we have 3% now)
    - 3% capital charge PER YEAR
    - no tax relief on interest paid to buy BTL
    - double Council Tax on a second property
    - any capital gain taxed at 40%

    That will 'encourage' these people to release these properties! Lots more supply. Prices fall, chance for renters and other aspirant buyers to buy.

    Let's do it!
    We did this last week.

    As a policy, that will do untold damage to the marginal and less well-off members of the community, particularly very significant numbers who cannot access credit.

    And in favour of relatively richer people.

    It is crazy.

    The unholy alliance between the rich and the poor.

    The obvious solution has and always will be to increase interest rates slowly to c.3-4% to reduce the profitability of BTL.
    Where will the human beings you are proposing to make homeless live?
    Ummm, in houses/flats like they do now?

    For every BTL property sold to a first time buyer, that's one less person competing in the rental sector.
    You don't understand how housing occupation works.

    The rental sector is far more densely occupied than the Owner Occupied sector, so when you move X people from the rental sector to OO - by whatever mechanism you are using to close down rental - you need a lot more houses.

    I posted the stats the other day. These are in the English Housing Survey.

    Nearly Half of OO houses are underoccupied - the official stat is 2 or more spare bedrooms.

    For rental that is under 10%.

    Therefore you are creating a lot of people with nowhere to live - homeless.

    And you need to have a policy where you will put the people you are making homeless.
    Do you think, then, that we actually need more rental properties and should aim to have fewer people getting on the ladder?
    I do believe that we need to remove amateurs from the rental market and let more pension firms build to rent.

    As for the idea of using under occupation (2 or more spare bedrooms) as the basis of anything beyond inappropriate use of housing stock I will leave things there especially as thanks to Covid those rooms are probably being used.

    Our 5 bedroom house (3 occupied) now has separate working spaces for me (always been the case) and my wife who has only needed them due needing to WFH through covid.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 7,277
    edited March 8
    tlg86 said:

    MattW said:

    8th.

    And FPT as I slept well last night.

    tlg86 said:

    MattW said:

    tlg86 said:

    MattW said:

    kyf_100 said:



    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/56294009

    It's a policy that has jacked up house prices and made it harder for people who actually need to buy houses to buy them (it's done a great job for those already owning them, which is pointless, they already own a home) vs a policy to pay our nursing staff properly for a job they've done superbly and without complaint over the last year and beyond.

    It's obvious to anyone what a better use of the money was.

    How does removing a tax on buyers make it harder for a buyer to buy their house? 🙄
    Because the sellers simply raise their prices, which they can. Because the buyers aren't buying with their own money, they're buying with a maxed out mortgage. Combine that with a reduction in interest rates and all you've done is raise the price of property while forcing new buyers to take on more debt. That is exactly what has happened.
    All of these government 'initiatives' - Help to Buy, LISAs and stamp duty cuts - simply push up prices as described previously.

    What we need is to 'encourage' the Buy To Let and other multiple home owner community to release their properties with a fair and equitable tax system on these people, who have had so many tax breaks in the past:
    - 5% stamp duty loading on acquisition of a second/BTL property (I know we have 3% now)
    - 3% capital charge PER YEAR
    - no tax relief on interest paid to buy BTL
    - double Council Tax on a second property
    - any capital gain taxed at 40%

    That will 'encourage' these people to release these properties! Lots more supply. Prices fall, chance for renters and other aspirant buyers to buy.

    Let's do it!
    We did this last week.

    As a policy, that will do untold damage to the marginal and less well-off members of the community, particularly very significant numbers who cannot access credit.

    And in favour of relatively richer people.

    It is crazy.

    The unholy alliance between the rich and the poor.

    The obvious solution has and always will be to increase interest rates slowly to c.3-4% to reduce the profitability of BTL.
    Where will the human beings you are proposing to make homeless live?
    Ummm, in houses/flats like they do now?

    For every BTL property sold to a first time buyer, that's one less person competing in the rental sector.
    You don't understand how housing occupation works.

    The rental sector is far more densely occupied than the Owner Occupied sector, so when you move X people from the rental sector to OO - by whatever mechanism you are using to close down rental - you need a lot more houses.

    I posted the stats the other day. These are in the English Housing Survey.

    Nearly Half of OO houses are underoccupied - the official stat is 2 or more spare bedrooms.

    For rental that is under 10%.

    Therefore you are creating a lot of people with nowhere to live - homeless.

    And you need to have a policy where you will put the people you are making homeless.
    Do you think, then, that we actually need more rental properties and should aim to have fewer people getting on the ladder?
    It's not a zero sum game. We need a sufficient rental supply, and a sufficient OO supply.

    I find it strange that the argument for "we need more houses to bring prices down" sits alongside "make renting more expensive", when the latter is occupied by people less well off than the former. And when many millions of
    them do not have the opportunity to buy.

    Complex issue. And it won't be moved forward by simplistic policies.

    Unfortunately politicians are on the whole useless on this, and make a bigger mess every time tehy stick an oar in.

    One thing I would say is to tilt policy towards increasing household size, which is down significantly since even the 1970s/1980s. But there are a lot of other nuances.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 92,251
    tlg86 said:
    There were consequences for that.

    But Dave wasn't involved day to day with that in the way that the Queen was involved in a daily basis with Diana, Princess of Wales, and the Duchess of Sussex.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 40,661
    Good morning

    I have been very impressed with LIz Truss and she has enhanced her claim to the top spot

    On the Megan interview I have to say it is very damaging to both sides and nobody can be sure how this pans out but I expect it will be extremely divisive

    I am more than surprised that they were married 3 days before their lavish wedding ceremony and that was not known at the time of the ceremony

    I do expect it ends their connection and titles with the Royal Family and it is certain changes will come about following the Queen's passing
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 84,095

    After the revelations last night I suspect Truss will be back to backing the abolition of the monarchy.

    That alone will win her a landslide.

    The only reason Truss leads is because of her success getting Brexit deals.

    If her main campaign was pushing abolition of the monarchy she would rightly get nowhere given 88% of Tory voters are monarchists
    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2015/09/08/monarchy-here-stay
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 64,758
    Sean_F said:

    Whether Archie Windsor gets to be called Prince, Duke or Earl seems to fall very much into the category of Rich Peoples' Problems.

    I'd assumed they wanted him not to be a prince or be reliant on royal funds, in order to be independent and normal, so other accusations feel like theyd get more play as those barely seem like complaints.

    It's like the day after a GE when the winners are unbearably triumphant, as everyone deserves to celebrate - I should think theres a week of headlines and mopping up excitable saliva dribbles from this.

    At least there were a few juicy accusations in there to make it worthwhile. And no I dont have a problem viewing it in those terms - with presentation and summary of things not said we are already teased for more to come so it was effective brand management even of sincere issues. It's managed like an entertainment project and can reacted to as such.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 92,251
    Charles said:

    FPT

    Charles said:

    The Queen's uncle was a Nazi sympathiser, Her Majesty herself used to do Nazi salutes, is it any surprise she didn't offer her first non white great-grandchild a title like she did for the Aryan looking Charlotte and Louis?

    That’s a very unpleasant smear

    Shame on you
    Sorry Charles, the royal family has made both Diana, Princess of Wales, and the Duchess of Sussex have suicidal thoughts (and in the former's case, attempt to kill herself.)

    This is a failing organisation led by an out of touch person, the Queen needs to go lest we do see an outsider end up killing themselves thanks to the rules of the 'firm.'

    If this was any other organisation it would be called a failing institution with the police involved.

    Edit - And I notice you've gone all Corbynite calling unimpeachable facts 'smears.'
    The smear was the implied motivation you ascribed for the Quern’s decision. That’s not a fact.
    Well the person who dealt with the Queen implied as much, she would know better than you.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 84,095

    Good morning

    I have been very impressed with LIz Truss and she has enhanced her claim to the top spot

    On the Megan interview I have to say it is very damaging to both sides and nobody can be sure how this pans out but I expect it will be extremely divisive

    I am more than surprised that they were married 3 days before their lavish wedding ceremony and that was not known at the time of the ceremony

    I do expect it ends their connection and titles with the Royal Family and it is certain changes will come about following the Queen's passing

    They wish to no longer be royals and do royal duties fine, cut them off without a penny more, remove all royal titles from them and let us never hear from them on these shores again!
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 64,758

    Morning all,

    Two days after my AZ/Oxford jab and I am feeling dreadful. Had a real bad night - fever, chills, terrible muscle pains and severe headache.

    I knew there were some fever like effects for a day or so. But this has poleaxed me. Anyone else had a bad reaction? How many days does this last?

    2 days is a lot, though I know several who were awful the day after. Strong immune system you have I guess.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 1,377
    MattW said:

    8th.

    And FPT as I slept well last night.

    tlg86 said:

    MattW said:

    tlg86 said:

    MattW said:

    kyf_100 said:



    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/56294009

    It's a policy that has jacked up house prices and made it harder for people who actually need to buy houses to buy them (it's done a great job for those already owning them, which is pointless, they already own a home) vs a policy to pay our nursing staff properly for a job they've done superbly and without complaint over the last year and beyond.

    It's obvious to anyone what a better use of the money was.

    How does removing a tax on buyers make it harder for a buyer to buy their house? 🙄
    Because the sellers simply raise their prices, which they can. Because the buyers aren't buying with their own money, they're buying with a maxed out mortgage. Combine that with a reduction in interest rates and all you've done is raise the price of property while forcing new buyers to take on more debt. That is exactly what has happened.
    All of these government 'initiatives' - Help to Buy, LISAs and stamp duty cuts - simply push up prices as described previously.

    What we need is to 'encourage' the Buy To Let and other multiple home owner community to release their properties with a fair and equitable tax system on these people, who have had so many tax breaks in the past:
    - 5% stamp duty loading on acquisition of a second/BTL property (I know we have 3% now)
    - 3% capital charge PER YEAR
    - no tax relief on interest paid to buy BTL
    - double Council Tax on a second property
    - any capital gain taxed at 40%

    That will 'encourage' these people to release these properties! Lots more supply. Prices fall, chance for renters and other aspirant buyers to buy.

    Let's do it!
    We did this last week.

    As a policy, that will do untold damage to the marginal and less well-off members of the community, particularly very significant numbers who cannot access credit.

    And in favour of relatively richer people.

    It is crazy.

    The unholy alliance between the rich and the poor.

    The obvious solution has and always will be to increase interest rates slowly to c.3-4% to reduce the profitability of BTL.
    Where will the human beings you are proposing to make homeless live?
    Ummm, in houses/flats like they do now?

    For every BTL property sold to a first time buyer, that's one less person competing in the rental sector.
    You don't understand how housing occupation works.

    The rental sector is far more densely occupied than the Owner Occupied sector, so when you move X people from the rental sector to OO - by whatever mechanism you are using to close down rental - you need a lot more houses.

    I posted the stats the other day. These are in the English Housing Survey.

    Nearly Half of OO houses are underoccupied - the official stat is 2 or more spare bedrooms.

    For rental that is under 10%.

    Therefore you are creating a lot of people with nowhere to live - homeless.

    And you need to have a policy where you will put the people you are making homeless.
    I don't have a particular view on BTL (I've rented privately in the past, now homeowner; when renting I was in a position to choose my house and landlord and not take any nonsense).

    However, the logic in the above is, well, lacking.

    Many owned houses are under-occupied because people buy family homes and don't necessarily move when the family moves out. For switch from rental to owned for the same housing stock to suddenly leave masses of homeless you need to argue that a family renting a house at full occupancy is, on buying a house, suddenly going to decide they want two houses to ensure spare rooms. Sure, they may desire a bigger house when buying (with an eye on a family/larger family in the future) but as demand won't have dropped they'll be priced into buying what they need.

    There is the area of houses of multiple occupancy - students, single young workers - where these groups would be unlikely to buy together (although that does happen). These groups are not generally going to want to commit to ownership and will remain in the rental sector and/or one buyer with subletting/lodging.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 36,847
    Charles said:

    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:

    FPT

    Charles said:

    The Queen's uncle was a Nazi sympathiser, Her Majesty herself used to do Nazi salutes, is it any surprise she didn't offer her first non white great-grandchild a title like she did for the Aryan looking Charlotte and Louis?

    That’s a very unpleasant smear

    Shame on you
    Sorry Charles, the royal family has made both Diana, Princess of Wales, and the Duchess of Sussex have suicidal thoughts (and in the former's case, attempt to kill herself.)

    This is a failing organisation led by an out of touch person, the Queen needs to go lest we do see an outsider end up killing themselves thanks to the rules of the 'firm.'

    If this was any other organisation it would be called a failing institution with the police involved.
    Utter rubbish, as to be expected by a non Tory republican like you.

    Never have I seen a more pathetic example of narcissism and self indulgence than from these 2 multi millionaires as seems to be the case with this disgraceful interview.

    Trashing in public the family who made them (with the exception of the Queen knowing full way if they attacked her that would destroy them), trashing Prince Charles despite all the funds they received from the Duchy of Cornwall. Factually wrong too, as Archie is not the son of an heir to the throne he by definition could not be a prince but he got a title as Earl of Dumbarton which they then renounced when they abandoned their royal duties.

    I wish never to see or hear from this pair ever again and may they be exiled from these shores never to set foot here again. They are the 21st century Duke and Duchess of Windsor without the class!
    Never have I seen a more pathetic example of narcissism and self indulgence than from these 2 multi millionaires

    Do you not read anyone else's posts?
    I’m sure I read a post recently from a narcissistic millionaire throwing a strop that their favourite food was going to be banned
    Fair point.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 84,095
    edited March 8

    HYUFD said:

    FPT

    Charles said:

    The Queen's uncle was a Nazi sympathiser, Her Majesty herself used to do Nazi salutes, is it any surprise she didn't offer her first non white great-grandchild a title like she did for the Aryan looking Charlotte and Louis?

    That’s a very unpleasant smear

    Shame on you
    Sorry Charles, the royal family has made both Diana, Princess of Wales, and the Duchess of Sussex have suicidal thoughts (and in the former's case, attempt to kill herself.)

    This is a failing organisation led by an out of touch person, the Queen needs to go lest we do see an outsider end up killing themselves thanks to the rules of the 'firm.'

    If this was any other organisation it would be called a failing institution with the police involved.
    Utter rubbish, as to be expected by a non Tory republican like you.

    Never have a seen I more pathetic example of narcissism and self indulgence from these 2 multi millionaires than seems to be the case with this interview.

    Trashing in public the family who made them (with the exception of the Queen knowing full way if they attacked her that would destroy them), trashing Prince Charles despite all the funds they received from the Duchy of Cornwall. Factually wrong too, as Archie is not the son of an heir to the throne he by definition could not be a prince but he got a title as Earl of Dumbarton which they then renounced when they abandoned their royal duties.

    I wish never to see or hear from this pair ever again and may they be exiled from these shores never to set foot here again. They are the 21st century Duke and Duchess of Windsor without the class!
    BIB - I see you missed the Prince Andrew interview in 2019 then?

    Also, I noticed last week you said Boris Johnson was a social democrat, so in your head he's as much as a Tory as me!
    You can effectively be a social democrat, as distinct from being a socialist and still be a Tory, see Macmillan for example who effectively governed as a social democrat as Boris largely is now.


    You cannot however be a republican and be a Tory.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 17,385
    eek said:

    tlg86 said:

    MattW said:

    8th.

    And FPT as I slept well last night.

    tlg86 said:

    MattW said:

    tlg86 said:

    MattW said:

    kyf_100 said:



    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/56294009

    It's a policy that has jacked up house prices and made it harder for people who actually need to buy houses to buy them (it's done a great job for those already owning them, which is pointless, they already own a home) vs a policy to pay our nursing staff properly for a job they've done superbly and without complaint over the last year and beyond.

    It's obvious to anyone what a better use of the money was.

    How does removing a tax on buyers make it harder for a buyer to buy their house? 🙄
    Because the sellers simply raise their prices, which they can. Because the buyers aren't buying with their own money, they're buying with a maxed out mortgage. Combine that with a reduction in interest rates and all you've done is raise the price of property while forcing new buyers to take on more debt. That is exactly what has happened.
    All of these government 'initiatives' - Help to Buy, LISAs and stamp duty cuts - simply push up prices as described previously.

    What we need is to 'encourage' the Buy To Let and other multiple home owner community to release their properties with a fair and equitable tax system on these people, who have had so many tax breaks in the past:
    - 5% stamp duty loading on acquisition of a second/BTL property (I know we have 3% now)
    - 3% capital charge PER YEAR
    - no tax relief on interest paid to buy BTL
    - double Council Tax on a second property
    - any capital gain taxed at 40%

    That will 'encourage' these people to release these properties! Lots more supply. Prices fall, chance for renters and other aspirant buyers to buy.

    Let's do it!
    We did this last week.

    As a policy, that will do untold damage to the marginal and less well-off members of the community, particularly very significant numbers who cannot access credit.

    And in favour of relatively richer people.

    It is crazy.

    The unholy alliance between the rich and the poor.

    The obvious solution has and always will be to increase interest rates slowly to c.3-4% to reduce the profitability of BTL.
    Where will the human beings you are proposing to make homeless live?
    Ummm, in houses/flats like they do now?

    For every BTL property sold to a first time buyer, that's one less person competing in the rental sector.
    You don't understand how housing occupation works.

    The rental sector is far more densely occupied than the Owner Occupied sector, so when you move X people from the rental sector to OO - by whatever mechanism you are using to close down rental - you need a lot more houses.

    I posted the stats the other day. These are in the English Housing Survey.

    Nearly Half of OO houses are underoccupied - the official stat is 2 or more spare bedrooms.

    For rental that is under 10%.

    Therefore you are creating a lot of people with nowhere to live - homeless.

    And you need to have a policy where you will put the people you are making homeless.
    Do you think, then, that we actually need more rental properties and should aim to have fewer people getting on the ladder?
    I do believe that we need to remove amateurs from the rental market and let more pension firms build to rent.

    As for the idea of using under occupation (2 or more spare bedrooms) as the basis of anything beyond inappropriate use of housing stock I will leave things there especially as thanks to Covid those rooms are probably being used.

    Our 5 bedroom house (3 occupied) now has separate working spaces for me (always been the case) and my wife who has only needed them due needing to WFH through covid.
    I like to think that I'm doing my bit to help improve the occupancy stats for owner occupied housing by living at home with my parents.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 40,661

    Morning all,

    Two days after my AZ/Oxford jab and I am feeling dreadful. Had a real bad night - fever, chills, terrible muscle pains and severe headache.

    I knew there were some fever like effects for a day or so. But this has poleaxed me. Anyone else had a bad reaction? How many days does this last?

    Sorry to hear that but am sure it will pass

    My wife and I had our second Pfizer vaccinations yesterday and became listless quite quickly but after a night's sleep feeling better but the arm is quite sore
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 31,476

    Good morning

    I have been very impressed with LIz Truss and she has enhanced her claim to the top spot

    On the Megan interview I have to say it is very damaging to both sides and nobody can be sure how this pans out but I expect it will be extremely divisive

    I am more than surprised that they were married 3 days before their lavish wedding ceremony and that was not known at the time of the ceremony

    I do expect it ends their connection and titles with the Royal Family and it is certain changes will come about following the Queen's passing

    They weren’t married 3 days before (except in their hearts).

    It’s fine then wanting to say private vows. Expecting ++Cantab to officiate is a little pretentious
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 64,758

    Good morning

    I have been very impressed with LIz Truss and she has enhanced her claim to the top spot

    On the Megan interview I have to say it is very damaging to both sides and nobody can be sure how this pans out but I expect it will be extremely divisive

    I am more than surprised that they were married 3 days before their lavish wedding ceremony and that was not known at the time of the ceremony

    I do expect it ends their connection and titles with the Royal Family and it is certain changes will come about following the Queen's passing

    It's going to be a nasty time. One side or another needs to stop leaking and briefing this personal war of escalation as itll only get grubbier. That should be the palace as they have more to lose and more unknowns to come out. Keep quiet and ride it out.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 31,476

    Charles said:

    FPT

    Charles said:

    The Queen's uncle was a Nazi sympathiser, Her Majesty herself used to do Nazi salutes, is it any surprise she didn't offer her first non white great-grandchild a title like she did for the Aryan looking Charlotte and Louis?

    That’s a very unpleasant smear

    Shame on you
    Sorry Charles, the royal family has made both Diana, Princess of Wales, and the Duchess of Sussex have suicidal thoughts (and in the former's case, attempt to kill herself.)

    This is a failing organisation led by an out of touch person, the Queen needs to go lest we do see an outsider end up killing themselves thanks to the rules of the 'firm.'

    If this was any other organisation it would be called a failing institution with the police involved.

    Edit - And I notice you've gone all Corbynite calling unimpeachable facts 'smears.'
    The smear was the implied motivation you ascribed for the Quern’s decision. That’s not a fact.
    Well the person who dealt with the Queen implied as much, she would know better than you.
    One side to a nasty dispute made an allegation without evidence.

    You have accepted and amplified that.

    Shame on you
  • eekeek Posts: 12,249
    MattW said:

    tlg86 said:

    MattW said:

    8th.

    And FPT as I slept well last night.

    tlg86 said:

    MattW said:

    tlg86 said:

    MattW said:

    kyf_100 said:



    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/56294009

    It's a policy that has jacked up house prices and made it harder for people who actually need to buy houses to buy them (it's done a great job for those already owning them, which is pointless, they already own a home) vs a policy to pay our nursing staff properly for a job they've done superbly and without complaint over the last year and beyond.

    It's obvious to anyone what a better use of the money was.

    How does removing a tax on buyers make it harder for a buyer to buy their house? 🙄
    Because the sellers simply raise their prices, which they can. Because the buyers aren't buying with their own money, they're buying with a maxed out mortgage. Combine that with a reduction in interest rates and all you've done is raise the price of property while forcing new buyers to take on more debt. That is exactly what has happened.
    All of these government 'initiatives' - Help to Buy, LISAs and stamp duty cuts - simply push up prices as described previously.

    What we need is to 'encourage' the Buy To Let and other multiple home owner community to release their properties with a fair and equitable tax system on these people, who have had so many tax breaks in the past:
    - 5% stamp duty loading on acquisition of a second/BTL property (I know we have 3% now)
    - 3% capital charge PER YEAR
    - no tax relief on interest paid to buy BTL
    - double Council Tax on a second property
    - any capital gain taxed at 40%

    That will 'encourage' these people to release these properties! Lots more supply. Prices fall, chance for renters and other aspirant buyers to buy.

    Let's do it!
    We did this last week.

    As a policy, that will do untold damage to the marginal and less well-off members of the community, particularly very significant numbers who cannot access credit.

    And in favour of relatively richer people.

    It is crazy.

    The unholy alliance between the rich and the poor.

    The obvious solution has and always will be to increase interest rates slowly to c.3-4% to reduce the profitability of BTL.
    Where will the human beings you are proposing to make homeless live?
    Ummm, in houses/flats like they do now?

    For every BTL property sold to a first time buyer, that's one less person competing in the rental sector.
    You don't understand how housing occupation works.

    The rental sector is far more densely occupied than the Owner Occupied sector, so when you move X people from the rental sector to OO - by whatever mechanism you are using to close down rental - you need a lot more houses.

    I posted the stats the other day. These are in the English Housing Survey.

    Nearly Half of OO houses are underoccupied - the official stat is 2 or more spare bedrooms.

    For rental that is under 10%.

    Therefore you are creating a lot of people with nowhere to live - homeless.

    And you need to have a policy where you will put the people you are making homeless.
    Do you think, then, that we actually need more rental properties and should aim to have fewer people getting on the ladder?
    It's not a zero sum game. We need a sufficient rental supply, and a sufficient OO supply.

    I find it strange that the argument for "we need more houses to bring prices down" sits alongside "make renting more expensive", when the latter is occupied by people less well off than the former. And when many millions of
    them do not have the opportunity to buy.

    Complex issue. And it won't be moved forward by simplistic policies.

    Unfortunately politicians are on the whole useless on this, and make a bigger mess every time tehy stick an oar in.

    One thing I would say is to tilt policy towards increasing household size, which is down significantly since even the 1970s/1980s. But there are a lot of other nuances.
    So you are against the bedroom tax then?
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 27,542
    tlg86 said:

    eek said:

    tlg86 said:

    MattW said:

    8th.

    And FPT as I slept well last night.

    tlg86 said:

    MattW said:

    tlg86 said:

    MattW said:

    kyf_100 said:



    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/56294009

    It's a policy that has jacked up house prices and made it harder for people who actually need to buy houses to buy them (it's done a great job for those already owning them, which is pointless, they already own a home) vs a policy to pay our nursing staff properly for a job they've done superbly and without complaint over the last year and beyond.

    It's obvious to anyone what a better use of the money was.

    How does removing a tax on buyers make it harder for a buyer to buy their house? 🙄
    Because the sellers simply raise their prices, which they can. Because the buyers aren't buying with their own money, they're buying with a maxed out mortgage. Combine that with a reduction in interest rates and all you've done is raise the price of property while forcing new buyers to take on more debt. That is exactly what has happened.
    All of these government 'initiatives' - Help to Buy, LISAs and stamp duty cuts - simply push up prices as described previously.

    What we need is to 'encourage' the Buy To Let and other multiple home owner community to release their properties with a fair and equitable tax system on these people, who have had so many tax breaks in the past:
    - 5% stamp duty loading on acquisition of a second/BTL property (I know we have 3% now)
    - 3% capital charge PER YEAR
    - no tax relief on interest paid to buy BTL
    - double Council Tax on a second property
    - any capital gain taxed at 40%

    That will 'encourage' these people to release these properties! Lots more supply. Prices fall, chance for renters and other aspirant buyers to buy.

    Let's do it!
    We did this last week.

    As a policy, that will do untold damage to the marginal and less well-off members of the community, particularly very significant numbers who cannot access credit.

    And in favour of relatively richer people.

    It is crazy.

    The unholy alliance between the rich and the poor.

    The obvious solution has and always will be to increase interest rates slowly to c.3-4% to reduce the profitability of BTL.
    Where will the human beings you are proposing to make homeless live?
    Ummm, in houses/flats like they do now?

    For every BTL property sold to a first time buyer, that's one less person competing in the rental sector.
    You don't understand how housing occupation works.

    The rental sector is far more densely occupied than the Owner Occupied sector, so when you move X people from the rental sector to OO - by whatever mechanism you are using to close down rental - you need a lot more houses.

    I posted the stats the other day. These are in the English Housing Survey.

    Nearly Half of OO houses are underoccupied - the official stat is 2 or more spare bedrooms.

    For rental that is under 10%.

    Therefore you are creating a lot of people with nowhere to live - homeless.

    And you need to have a policy where you will put the people you are making homeless.
    Do you think, then, that we actually need more rental properties and should aim to have fewer people getting on the ladder?
    I do believe that we need to remove amateurs from the rental market and let more pension firms build to rent.

    As for the idea of using under occupation (2 or more spare bedrooms) as the basis of anything beyond inappropriate use of housing stock I will leave things there especially as thanks to Covid those rooms are probably being used.

    Our 5 bedroom house (3 occupied) now has separate working spaces for me (always been the case) and my wife who has only needed them due needing to WFH through covid.
    I like to think that I'm doing my bit to help improve the occupancy stats for owner occupied housing by living at home with my parents.
    Oh mate, how do you do it? A week over Xmas was too much for me.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 27,996
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    FPT

    Charles said:

    The Queen's uncle was a Nazi sympathiser, Her Majesty herself used to do Nazi salutes, is it any surprise she didn't offer her first non white great-grandchild a title like she did for the Aryan looking Charlotte and Louis?

    That’s a very unpleasant smear

    Shame on you
    Sorry Charles, the royal family has made both Diana, Princess of Wales, and the Duchess of Sussex have suicidal thoughts (and in the former's case, attempt to kill herself.)

    This is a failing organisation led by an out of touch person, the Queen needs to go lest we do see an outsider end up killing themselves thanks to the rules of the 'firm.'

    If this was any other organisation it would be called a failing institution with the police involved.
    Utter rubbish, as to be expected by a non Tory republican like you.

    Never have a seen I more pathetic example of narcissism and self indulgence from these 2 multi millionaires than seems to be the case with this interview.

    Trashing in public the family who made them (with the exception of the Queen knowing full way if they attacked her that would destroy them), trashing Prince Charles despite all the funds they received from the Duchy of Cornwall. Factually wrong too, as Archie is not the son of an heir to the throne he by definition could not be a prince but he got a title as Earl of Dumbarton which they then renounced when they abandoned their royal duties.

    I wish never to see or hear from this pair ever again and may they be exiled from these shores never to set foot here again. They are the 21st century Duke and Duchess of Windsor without the class!
    BIB - I see you missed the Prince Andrew interview in 2019 then?

    Also, I noticed last week you said Boris Johnson was a social democrat, so in your head he's as much as a Tory as me!
    You can effectively be a social democrat, as distinct from being a socialist and still be a Tory, see Macmillan for example who effectively governed as a social democrat as Boris largely is now.


    You cannot however be a republican and be a Tory.
    Can you be a remainer and be a Tory?
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 8,492
    Charles said:

    Good morning

    I have been very impressed with LIz Truss and she has enhanced her claim to the top spot

    On the Megan interview I have to say it is very damaging to both sides and nobody can be sure how this pans out but I expect it will be extremely divisive

    I am more than surprised that they were married 3 days before their lavish wedding ceremony and that was not known at the time of the ceremony

    I do expect it ends their connection and titles with the Royal Family and it is certain changes will come about following the Queen's passing

    They weren’t married 3 days before (except in their hearts).

    It’s fine then wanting to say private vows. Expecting ++Cantab to officiate is a little pretentious
    They were married three days before, not that it matters one jot. It’s fairly common nowadays.

    For me, the explosive revelations are that the family had “concerns” about the colour of their child’s skin. I hadn’t expected that. It is horrific.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 92,251
    MaxPB said:



    Oh mate, how do you do it? A week over Xmas was too much for me.

    I've done it for the last eight years.

    It is great when you have kids and your parents dote on them 24/7.

    #168HoursWorthOfFreeChildcareAWeek
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 40,661
    HYUFD said:

    Good morning

    I have been very impressed with LIz Truss and she has enhanced her claim to the top spot

    On the Megan interview I have to say it is very damaging to both sides and nobody can be sure how this pans out but I expect it will be extremely divisive

    I am more than surprised that they were married 3 days before their lavish wedding ceremony and that was not known at the time of the ceremony

    I do expect it ends their connection and titles with the Royal Family and it is certain changes will come about following the Queen's passing

    They wish to no longer be royals and do royal duties fine, cut them off without a penny more, remove all royal titles from them and let us never hear from them on these shores again!
    I do not share your tone but think it is the likely end result
  • kjhkjh Posts: 3,100
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    FPT

    Charles said:

    The Queen's uncle was a Nazi sympathiser, Her Majesty herself used to do Nazi salutes, is it any surprise she didn't offer her first non white great-grandchild a title like she did for the Aryan looking Charlotte and Louis?

    That’s a very unpleasant smear

    Shame on you
    Sorry Charles, the royal family has made both Diana, Princess of Wales, and the Duchess of Sussex have suicidal thoughts (and in the former's case, attempt to kill herself.)

    This is a failing organisation led by an out of touch person, the Queen needs to go lest we do see an outsider end up killing themselves thanks to the rules of the 'firm.'

    If this was any other organisation it would be called a failing institution with the police involved.
    Utter rubbish, as to be expected by a non Tory republican like you.

    Never have a seen I more pathetic example of narcissism and self indulgence from these 2 multi millionaires than seems to be the case with this interview.

    Trashing in public the family who made them (with the exception of the Queen knowing full way if they attacked her that would destroy them), trashing Prince Charles despite all the funds they received from the Duchy of Cornwall. Factually wrong too, as Archie is not the son of an heir to the throne he by definition could not be a prince but he got a title as Earl of Dumbarton which they then renounced when they abandoned their royal duties.

    I wish never to see or hear from this pair ever again and may they be exiled from these shores never to set foot here again. They are the 21st century Duke and Duchess of Windsor without the class!
    BIB - I see you missed the Prince Andrew interview in 2019 then?

    Also, I noticed last week you said Boris Johnson was a social democrat, so in your head he's as much as a Tory as me!
    You can effectively be a social democrat, as distinct from being a socialist and still be a Tory, see Macmillan for example who effectively governed as a social democrat as Boris largely is now.


    You cannot however be a republican and be a Tory.
    Is there a checklist so one can check whether one is a Tory or not?
  • eekeek Posts: 12,249

    Charles said:

    Good morning

    I have been very impressed with LIz Truss and she has enhanced her claim to the top spot

    On the Megan interview I have to say it is very damaging to both sides and nobody can be sure how this pans out but I expect it will be extremely divisive

    I am more than surprised that they were married 3 days before their lavish wedding ceremony and that was not known at the time of the ceremony

    I do expect it ends their connection and titles with the Royal Family and it is certain changes will come about following the Queen's passing

    They weren’t married 3 days before (except in their hearts).

    It’s fine then wanting to say private vows. Expecting ++Cantab to officiate is a little pretentious
    They were married three days before, not that it matters one jot. It’s fairly common nowadays.

    For me, the explosive revelations are that the family had “concerns” about the colour of their child’s skin. I hadn’t expected that. It is horrific.
    It's that last bit that both doesn't surprise but still leaves me wondering who was stupid enough to say it outside beyond the obvious suspect of Princess Michael of Kent.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 3,053
    You can only be at the top so long. Harry and Meghan will be tomorrow's fish and chip paper. They will be very rich but should be reminded of 1 Timothy 6:10.....
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 40,661
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    FPT

    Charles said:

    The Queen's uncle was a Nazi sympathiser, Her Majesty herself used to do Nazi salutes, is it any surprise she didn't offer her first non white great-grandchild a title like she did for the Aryan looking Charlotte and Louis?

    That’s a very unpleasant smear

    Shame on you
    Sorry Charles, the royal family has made both Diana, Princess of Wales, and the Duchess of Sussex have suicidal thoughts (and in the former's case, attempt to kill herself.)

    This is a failing organisation led by an out of touch person, the Queen needs to go lest we do see an outsider end up killing themselves thanks to the rules of the 'firm.'

    If this was any other organisation it would be called a failing institution with the police involved.
    Utter rubbish, as to be expected by a non Tory republican like you.

    Never have a seen I more pathetic example of narcissism and self indulgence from these 2 multi millionaires than seems to be the case with this interview.

    Trashing in public the family who made them (with the exception of the Queen knowing full way if they attacked her that would destroy them), trashing Prince Charles despite all the funds they received from the Duchy of Cornwall. Factually wrong too, as Archie is not the son of an heir to the throne he by definition could not be a prince but he got a title as Earl of Dumbarton which they then renounced when they abandoned their royal duties.

    I wish never to see or hear from this pair ever again and may they be exiled from these shores never to set foot here again. They are the 21st century Duke and Duchess of Windsor without the class!
    BIB - I see you missed the Prince Andrew interview in 2019 then?

    Also, I noticed last week you said Boris Johnson was a social democrat, so in your head he's as much as a Tory as me!
    You can effectively be a social democrat, as distinct from being a socialist and still be a Tory, see Macmillan for example who effectively governed as a social democrat as Boris largely is now.


    You cannot however be a republican and be a Tory.
    Of course you can, indeed I have been a republican most of my life but have grown to respect the Queen

    You do come out with extraordinary rubbish at times
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 92,251
    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    FPT

    Charles said:

    The Queen's uncle was a Nazi sympathiser, Her Majesty herself used to do Nazi salutes, is it any surprise she didn't offer her first non white great-grandchild a title like she did for the Aryan looking Charlotte and Louis?

    That’s a very unpleasant smear

    Shame on you
    Sorry Charles, the royal family has made both Diana, Princess of Wales, and the Duchess of Sussex have suicidal thoughts (and in the former's case, attempt to kill herself.)

    This is a failing organisation led by an out of touch person, the Queen needs to go lest we do see an outsider end up killing themselves thanks to the rules of the 'firm.'

    If this was any other organisation it would be called a failing institution with the police involved.

    Edit - And I notice you've gone all Corbynite calling unimpeachable facts 'smears.'
    The smear was the implied motivation you ascribed for the Quern’s decision. That’s not a fact.
    Well the person who dealt with the Queen implied as much, she would know better than you.
    One side to a nasty dispute made an allegation without evidence.

    You have accepted and amplified that.

    Shame on you
    The family stinks, this is the write up in The Times.

    If that was not enough, the royal family was implicitly accused of racism when Meghan said that someone in the family had a conversation with Meghan about the colour of Archie’s skin.

    As someone with mixed race children experience tells me that whoever brought up the skin colour of the kids has a bad heart.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 40,362

    Morning all,

    Two days after my AZ/Oxford jab and I am feeling dreadful. Had a real bad night - fever, chills, terrible muscle pains and severe headache.

    I knew there were some fever like effects for a day or so. But this has poleaxed me. Anyone else had a bad reaction? How many days does this last?

    Sorry to hear that but am sure it will pass

    My wife and I had our second Pfizer vaccinations yesterday and became listless quite quickly but after a night's sleep feeling better but the arm is quite sore
    Thanks. I couldn't sleep. Not a wink. I think that has made it all feel much worse. Hopefully I will start to come around later today.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 64,758
    Sean_F said:

    Charles said:

    FPT

    Charles said:

    The Queen's uncle was a Nazi sympathiser, Her Majesty herself used to do Nazi salutes, is it any surprise she didn't offer her first non white great-grandchild a title like she did for the Aryan looking Charlotte and Louis?

    That’s a very unpleasant smear

    Shame on you
    Sorry Charles, the royal family has made both Diana, Princess of Wales, and the Duchess of Sussex have suicidal thoughts (and in the former's case, attempt to kill herself.)

    This is a failing organisation led by an out of touch person, the Queen needs to go lest we do see an outsider end up killing themselves thanks to the rules of the 'firm.'

    If this was any other organisation it would be called a failing institution with the police involved.

    Edit - And I notice you've gone all Corbynite calling unimpeachable facts 'smears.'
    The smear was the implied motivation you ascribed for the Quern’s decision. That’s not a fact.
    Well the person who dealt with the Queen implied as much, she would know better than you.
    As a lawyer, I'm sure you're well aware that bitter people allege all kinds of things, without such allegations necessarily being correct.
    He started out talking about nazi salutes, this is just how he overshoots when trying to troll on the issue which makes it funnier rather than provoking.

    I'd focus on the suicidal angle if making genuine criticism - it's more personal, not as implausible as implied nazi motivation, and harder to dismiss. Also Andrew as a focus. Those are weak points, not 'she a naziiiiiiiii'
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 84,095
    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    FPT

    Charles said:

    The Queen's uncle was a Nazi sympathiser, Her Majesty herself used to do Nazi salutes, is it any surprise she didn't offer her first non white great-grandchild a title like she did for the Aryan looking Charlotte and Louis?

    That’s a very unpleasant smear

    Shame on you
    Sorry Charles, the royal family has made both Diana, Princess of Wales, and the Duchess of Sussex have suicidal thoughts (and in the former's case, attempt to kill herself.)

    This is a failing organisation led by an out of touch person, the Queen needs to go lest we do see an outsider end up killing themselves thanks to the rules of the 'firm.'

    If this was any other organisation it would be called a failing institution with the police involved.
    Utter rubbish, as to be expected by a non Tory republican like you.

    Never have a seen I more pathetic example of narcissism and self indulgence from these 2 multi millionaires than seems to be the case with this interview.

    Trashing in public the family who made them (with the exception of the Queen knowing full way if they attacked her that would destroy them), trashing Prince Charles despite all the funds they received from the Duchy of Cornwall. Factually wrong too, as Archie is not the son of an heir to the throne he by definition could not be a prince but he got a title as Earl of Dumbarton which they then renounced when they abandoned their royal duties.

    I wish never to see or hear from this pair ever again and may they be exiled from these shores never to set foot here again. They are the 21st century Duke and Duchess of Windsor without the class!
    BIB - I see you missed the Prince Andrew interview in 2019 then?

    Also, I noticed last week you said Boris Johnson was a social democrat, so in your head he's as much as a Tory as me!
    You can effectively be a social democrat, as distinct from being a socialist and still be a Tory, see Macmillan for example who effectively governed as a social democrat as Boris largely is now.


    You cannot however be a republican and be a Tory.
    Can you be a remainer and be a Tory?
    Of course, see Ted Heath or John Major or Theresa May or David Cameron or Jeremy Hunt
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 40,661
    kle4 said:

    Good morning

    I have been very impressed with LIz Truss and she has enhanced her claim to the top spot

    On the Megan interview I have to say it is very damaging to both sides and nobody can be sure how this pans out but I expect it will be extremely divisive

    I am more than surprised that they were married 3 days before their lavish wedding ceremony and that was not known at the time of the ceremony

    I do expect it ends their connection and titles with the Royal Family and it is certain changes will come about following the Queen's passing

    It's going to be a nasty time. One side or another needs to stop leaking and briefing this personal war of escalation as itll only get grubbier. That should be the palace as they have more to lose and more unknowns to come out. Keep quiet and ride it out.
    Very sensible
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 84,095
    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    FPT

    Charles said:

    The Queen's uncle was a Nazi sympathiser, Her Majesty herself used to do Nazi salutes, is it any surprise she didn't offer her first non white great-grandchild a title like she did for the Aryan looking Charlotte and Louis?

    That’s a very unpleasant smear

    Shame on you
    Sorry Charles, the royal family has made both Diana, Princess of Wales, and the Duchess of Sussex have suicidal thoughts (and in the former's case, attempt to kill herself.)

    This is a failing organisation led by an out of touch person, the Queen needs to go lest we do see an outsider end up killing themselves thanks to the rules of the 'firm.'

    If this was any other organisation it would be called a failing institution with the police involved.
    Utter rubbish, as to be expected by a non Tory republican like you.

    Never have a seen I more pathetic example of narcissism and self indulgence from these 2 multi millionaires than seems to be the case with this interview.

    Trashing in public the family who made them (with the exception of the Queen knowing full way if they attacked her that would destroy them), trashing Prince Charles despite all the funds they received from the Duchy of Cornwall. Factually wrong too, as Archie is not the son of an heir to the throne he by definition could not be a prince but he got a title as Earl of Dumbarton which they then renounced when they abandoned their royal duties.

    I wish never to see or hear from this pair ever again and may they be exiled from these shores never to set foot here again. They are the 21st century Duke and Duchess of Windsor without the class!
    BIB - I see you missed the Prince Andrew interview in 2019 then?

    Also, I noticed last week you said Boris Johnson was a social democrat, so in your head he's as much as a Tory as me!
    You can effectively be a social democrat, as distinct from being a socialist and still be a Tory, see Macmillan for example who effectively governed as a social democrat as Boris largely is now.


    You cannot however be a republican and be a Tory.
    Is there a checklist so one can check whether one is a Tory or not?
    If you a republican you can be a centre right liberal but you cannot be a Tory, it is logically impossible, to be a Tory you have to be a monarchist
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 27,996
    edited March 8
    HYUFD said:

    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    FPT

    Charles said:

    The Queen's uncle was a Nazi sympathiser, Her Majesty herself used to do Nazi salutes, is it any surprise she didn't offer her first non white great-grandchild a title like she did for the Aryan looking Charlotte and Louis?

    That’s a very unpleasant smear

    Shame on you
    Sorry Charles, the royal family has made both Diana, Princess of Wales, and the Duchess of Sussex have suicidal thoughts (and in the former's case, attempt to kill herself.)

    This is a failing organisation led by an out of touch person, the Queen needs to go lest we do see an outsider end up killing themselves thanks to the rules of the 'firm.'

    If this was any other organisation it would be called a failing institution with the police involved.
    Utter rubbish, as to be expected by a non Tory republican like you.

    Never have a seen I more pathetic example of narcissism and self indulgence from these 2 multi millionaires than seems to be the case with this interview.

    Trashing in public the family who made them (with the exception of the Queen knowing full way if they attacked her that would destroy them), trashing Prince Charles despite all the funds they received from the Duchy of Cornwall. Factually wrong too, as Archie is not the son of an heir to the throne he by definition could not be a prince but he got a title as Earl of Dumbarton which they then renounced when they abandoned their royal duties.

    I wish never to see or hear from this pair ever again and may they be exiled from these shores never to set foot here again. They are the 21st century Duke and Duchess of Windsor without the class!
    BIB - I see you missed the Prince Andrew interview in 2019 then?

    Also, I noticed last week you said Boris Johnson was a social democrat, so in your head he's as much as a Tory as me!
    You can effectively be a social democrat, as distinct from being a socialist and still be a Tory, see Macmillan for example who effectively governed as a social democrat as Boris largely is now.


    You cannot however be a republican and be a Tory.
    Can you be a remainer and be a Tory?
    Of course, see Ted Heath or John Major or Theresa May or David Cameron or Jeremy Hunt
    No you can't. Being a remainer means that you want to join the EU. That is directly contradictory to Tory party policy.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 29,310
    kle4 said:

    Sean_F said:

    Charles said:

    FPT

    Charles said:

    The Queen's uncle was a Nazi sympathiser, Her Majesty herself used to do Nazi salutes, is it any surprise she didn't offer her first non white great-grandchild a title like she did for the Aryan looking Charlotte and Louis?

    That’s a very unpleasant smear

    Shame on you
    Sorry Charles, the royal family has made both Diana, Princess of Wales, and the Duchess of Sussex have suicidal thoughts (and in the former's case, attempt to kill herself.)

    This is a failing organisation led by an out of touch person, the Queen needs to go lest we do see an outsider end up killing themselves thanks to the rules of the 'firm.'

    If this was any other organisation it would be called a failing institution with the police involved.

    Edit - And I notice you've gone all Corbynite calling unimpeachable facts 'smears.'
    The smear was the implied motivation you ascribed for the Quern’s decision. That’s not a fact.
    Well the person who dealt with the Queen implied as much, she would know better than you.
    As a lawyer, I'm sure you're well aware that bitter people allege all kinds of things, without such allegations necessarily being correct.
    He started out talking about nazi salutes, this is just how he overshoots when trying to troll on the issue which makes it funnier rather than provoking.

    I'd focus on the suicidal angle if making genuine criticism - it's more personal, not as implausible as implied nazi motivation, and harder to dismiss. Also Andrew as a focus. Those are weak points, not 'she a naziiiiiiiii'
    Andrew is a shit. I appreciate that much of this is just trolling.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 55,439
    Mr. Borough, hope you feel better soon.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 31,476

    Charles said:

    Good morning

    I have been very impressed with LIz Truss and she has enhanced her claim to the top spot

    On the Megan interview I have to say it is very damaging to both sides and nobody can be sure how this pans out but I expect it will be extremely divisive

    I am more than surprised that they were married 3 days before their lavish wedding ceremony and that was not known at the time of the ceremony

    I do expect it ends their connection and titles with the Royal Family and it is certain changes will come about following the Queen's passing

    They weren’t married 3 days before (except in their hearts).

    It’s fine then wanting to say private vows. Expecting ++Cantab to officiate is a little pretentious
    They were married three days before, not that it matters one jot. It’s fairly common nowadays.

    For me, the explosive revelations are that the family had “concerns” about the colour of their child’s skin. I hadn’t expected that. It is horrific.
    You don’t know that they were “concerns”. I could imagine someone of a certain generation asking what colour the child of a white/mixed couple would be. It’s gauche and offensive certainly, but possibly not quite as it has been painted.

    But it has been presented in a particularly wounding and damaging way. Almost as if it was designed to attract ratings.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 40,661

    Morning all,

    Two days after my AZ/Oxford jab and I am feeling dreadful. Had a real bad night - fever, chills, terrible muscle pains and severe headache.

    I knew there were some fever like effects for a day or so. But this has poleaxed me. Anyone else had a bad reaction? How many days does this last?

    Sorry to hear that but am sure it will pass

    My wife and I had our second Pfizer vaccinations yesterday and became listless quite quickly but after a night's sleep feeling better but the arm is quite sore
    Thanks. I couldn't sleep. Not a wink. I think that has made it all feel much worse. Hopefully I will start to come around later today.
    I am sure you will, it is not pleasant for you but the gains will be worth it
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 27,996
    ot

    Out on my bike this morning. Zillions of children alone and in family groups heading to school.

    Great sight.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 12,878

    Morning all,

    Two days after my AZ/Oxford jab and I am feeling dreadful. Had a real bad night - fever, chills, terrible muscle pains and severe headache.

    I knew there were some fever like effects for a day or so. But this has poleaxed me. Anyone else had a bad reaction? How many days does this last?

    Mum reported exactly the same. Cleared up a day later. Fingers crossed the same for you!
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 64,758
    eek said:

    Charles said:

    Good morning

    I have been very impressed with LIz Truss and she has enhanced her claim to the top spot

    On the Megan interview I have to say it is very damaging to both sides and nobody can be sure how this pans out but I expect it will be extremely divisive

    I am more than surprised that they were married 3 days before their lavish wedding ceremony and that was not known at the time of the ceremony

    I do expect it ends their connection and titles with the Royal Family and it is certain changes will come about following the Queen's passing

    They weren’t married 3 days before (except in their hearts).

    It’s fine then wanting to say private vows. Expecting ++Cantab to officiate is a little pretentious
    They were married three days before, not that it matters one jot. It’s fairly common nowadays.

    For me, the explosive revelations are that the family had “concerns” about the colour of their child’s skin. I hadn’t expected that. It is horrific.
    It's that last bit that both doesn't surprise but still leaves me wondering who was stupid enough to say it outside beyond the obvious suspect of Princess Michael of Kent.
    Besides being very racist it is very dumb when meghan markle is pretty pale anyway, even a racist should calm down but they are not known for such.

    It is very clever not to say who it was. Could be anyone, possibly very senior, so tars the lot and sets up a sequel. I'd have assumed phillip making a poor joke.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 3,100

    Morning all,

    Two days after my AZ/Oxford jab and I am feeling dreadful. Had a real bad night - fever, chills, terrible muscle pains and severe headache.

    I knew there were some fever like effects for a day or so. But this has poleaxed me. Anyone else had a bad reaction? How many days does this last?

    Sorry to hear that but am sure it will pass

    My wife and I had our second Pfizer vaccinations yesterday and became listless quite quickly but after a night's sleep feeling better but the arm is quite sore
    Thanks. I couldn't sleep. Not a wink. I think that has made it all feel much worse. Hopefully I will start to come around later today.
    Re AZ vaccine:

    A friend of mine (who has had Covid) had the same reaction to you but it passed after about 12 hours. He had a terrible night.

    Everyone else I know (including me) has had mild flu like symptoms for a day.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 27,542

    MaxPB said:



    Oh mate, how do you do it? A week over Xmas was too much for me.

    I've done it for the last eight years.

    It is great when you have kids and your parents dote on them 24/7.

    #168HoursWorthOfFreeChildcareAWeek
    I think my wife would divorce me on the spot if I suggested it, I'd probably need to be checked into a mental hospital too. Not that my parents are horrible people, they aren't and are very good hosts to everyone who stays and dealt with having us and my sister's family over at the same time this Christmas. I just couldn't ever imagine having to love with them in their house ever again. It's been about 10 years since I moved out and bought my first flat in Shepherd's Bush. I remember the many people if PB telling me to go for it at the time despite fears of taking on a big mortgage etc...
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 84,095
    Charles said:

    Good morning

    I have been very impressed with LIz Truss and she has enhanced her claim to the top spot

    On the Megan interview I have to say it is very damaging to both sides and nobody can be sure how this pans out but I expect it will be extremely divisive

    I am more than surprised that they were married 3 days before their lavish wedding ceremony and that was not known at the time of the ceremony

    I do expect it ends their connection and titles with the Royal Family and it is certain changes will come about following the Queen's passing

    They weren’t married 3 days before (except in their hearts).

    It’s fine then wanting to say private vows. Expecting ++Cantab to officiate is a little pretentious
    Just a minor private backyard wedding with the Archbishop of Canterbury, then effectively a service of Thanksgiving at Windsor Castle with the Archbishop too

    https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1368753624688566272?s=20
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 40,661
    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    FPT

    Charles said:

    The Queen's uncle was a Nazi sympathiser, Her Majesty herself used to do Nazi salutes, is it any surprise she didn't offer her first non white great-grandchild a title like she did for the Aryan looking Charlotte and Louis?

    That’s a very unpleasant smear

    Shame on you
    Sorry Charles, the royal family has made both Diana, Princess of Wales, and the Duchess of Sussex have suicidal thoughts (and in the former's case, attempt to kill herself.)

    This is a failing organisation led by an out of touch person, the Queen needs to go lest we do see an outsider end up killing themselves thanks to the rules of the 'firm.'

    If this was any other organisation it would be called a failing institution with the police involved.
    Utter rubbish, as to be expected by a non Tory republican like you.

    Never have a seen I more pathetic example of narcissism and self indulgence from these 2 multi millionaires than seems to be the case with this interview.

    Trashing in public the family who made them (with the exception of the Queen knowing full way if they attacked her that would destroy them), trashing Prince Charles despite all the funds they received from the Duchy of Cornwall. Factually wrong too, as Archie is not the son of an heir to the throne he by definition could not be a prince but he got a title as Earl of Dumbarton which they then renounced when they abandoned their royal duties.

    I wish never to see or hear from this pair ever again and may they be exiled from these shores never to set foot here again. They are the 21st century Duke and Duchess of Windsor without the class!
    BIB - I see you missed the Prince Andrew interview in 2019 then?

    Also, I noticed last week you said Boris Johnson was a social democrat, so in your head he's as much as a Tory as me!
    You can effectively be a social democrat, as distinct from being a socialist and still be a Tory, see Macmillan for example who effectively governed as a social democrat as Boris largely is now.


    You cannot however be a republican and be a Tory.
    Is there a checklist so one can check whether one is a Tory or not?
    If you a republican you can be a centre right liberal but you cannot be a Tory, it is logically impossible, to be a Tory you have to be a monarchist
    Utter and complete tripe
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 4,116
    edited March 8

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    FPT

    Charles said:

    The Queen's uncle was a Nazi sympathiser, Her Majesty herself used to do Nazi salutes, is it any surprise she didn't offer her first non white great-grandchild a title like she did for the Aryan looking Charlotte and Louis?

    That’s a very unpleasant smear

    Shame on you
    Sorry Charles, the royal family has made both Diana, Princess of Wales, and the Duchess of Sussex have suicidal thoughts (and in the former's case, attempt to kill herself.)

    This is a failing organisation led by an out of touch person, the Queen needs to go lest we do see an outsider end up killing themselves thanks to the rules of the 'firm.'

    If this was any other organisation it would be called a failing institution with the police involved.

    Edit - And I notice you've gone all Corbynite calling unimpeachable facts 'smears.'
    The smear was the implied motivation you ascribed for the Quern’s decision. That’s not a fact.
    Well the person who dealt with the Queen implied as much, she would know better than you.
    One side to a nasty dispute made an allegation without evidence.

    You have accepted and amplified that.

    Shame on you
    The family stinks, this is the write up in The Times.

    If that was not enough, the royal family was implicitly accused of racism when Meghan said that someone in the family had a conversation with Meghan about the colour of Archie’s skin.

    As someone with mixed race children experience tells me that whoever brought up the skin colour of the kids has a bad heart.
    There would also be a generational element here too as with any family, although obviously anything that happens within the family is taken as having symbolic significance. I would be extremely surprised if that comment wasn't from an older member of the family, very likely not the queen, with her general record and specifically on multiculturalism. Both of them still seem keen on the Queen, so that would seem to confirm that.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 1,377

    Charles said:

    Good morning

    I have been very impressed with LIz Truss and she has enhanced her claim to the top spot

    On the Megan interview I have to say it is very damaging to both sides and nobody can be sure how this pans out but I expect it will be extremely divisive

    I am more than surprised that they were married 3 days before their lavish wedding ceremony and that was not known at the time of the ceremony

    I do expect it ends their connection and titles with the Royal Family and it is certain changes will come about following the Queen's passing

    They weren’t married 3 days before (except in their hearts).

    It’s fine then wanting to say private vows. Expecting ++Cantab to officiate is a little pretentious
    They were married three days before, not that it matters one jot. It’s fairly common nowadays.

    For me, the explosive revelations are that the family had “concerns” about the colour of their child’s skin. I hadn’t expected that. It is horrific.
    Sadly, I can't say I'm particularly surprised by this, if true. I can easily imagine the Duke of Edinburgh making some kind of comment, not necessarily in seriousness (although maybe entirely seriously...).

    It seems to me that, much like Diana, Meghan offered an opportunity for the Royal Family to reach out and become relevant to many more people in the UK. I'm loosely republican (in principle, but not really bothered either way) so not too bothered about the fallout on that level, but it's sad to see a family fighting and particularly in public. The failures will harm both the Royal Family and Harry and Meghan, I expect.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 40,362
    kjh said:

    Morning all,

    Two days after my AZ/Oxford jab and I am feeling dreadful. Had a real bad night - fever, chills, terrible muscle pains and severe headache.

    I knew there were some fever like effects for a day or so. But this has poleaxed me. Anyone else had a bad reaction? How many days does this last?

    Sorry to hear that but am sure it will pass

    My wife and I had our second Pfizer vaccinations yesterday and became listless quite quickly but after a night's sleep feeling better but the arm is quite sore
    Thanks. I couldn't sleep. Not a wink. I think that has made it all feel much worse. Hopefully I will start to come around later today.
    Re AZ vaccine:

    A friend of mine (who has had Covid) had the same reaction to you but it passed after about 12 hours. He had a terrible night.

    Everyone else I know (including me) has had mild flu like symptoms for a day.
    Thanks. Seems to be a bit more widespread than the few % that were being quoted after the trials. But I guess a lot of them were younger.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 14,708

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    FPT

    Charles said:

    The Queen's uncle was a Nazi sympathiser, Her Majesty herself used to do Nazi salutes, is it any surprise she didn't offer her first non white great-grandchild a title like she did for the Aryan looking Charlotte and Louis?

    That’s a very unpleasant smear

    Shame on you
    Sorry Charles, the royal family has made both Diana, Princess of Wales, and the Duchess of Sussex have suicidal thoughts (and in the former's case, attempt to kill herself.)

    This is a failing organisation led by an out of touch person, the Queen needs to go lest we do see an outsider end up killing themselves thanks to the rules of the 'firm.'

    If this was any other organisation it would be called a failing institution with the police involved.

    Edit - And I notice you've gone all Corbynite calling unimpeachable facts 'smears.'
    The smear was the implied motivation you ascribed for the Quern’s decision. That’s not a fact.
    Well the person who dealt with the Queen implied as much, she would know better than you.
    One side to a nasty dispute made an allegation without evidence.

    You have accepted and amplified that.

    Shame on you
    The family stinks, this is the write up in The Times.

    If that was not enough, the royal family was implicitly accused of racism when Meghan said that someone in the family had a conversation with Meghan about the colour of Archie’s skin.

    As someone with mixed race children experience tells me that whoever brought up the skin colour of the kids has a bad heart.
    If we don't have a transcript, we don't know that the conversation was a racist one at all.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 27,542
    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    FPT

    Charles said:

    The Queen's uncle was a Nazi sympathiser, Her Majesty herself used to do Nazi salutes, is it any surprise she didn't offer her first non white great-grandchild a title like she did for the Aryan looking Charlotte and Louis?

    That’s a very unpleasant smear

    Shame on you
    Sorry Charles, the royal family has made both Diana, Princess of Wales, and the Duchess of Sussex have suicidal thoughts (and in the former's case, attempt to kill herself.)

    This is a failing organisation led by an out of touch person, the Queen needs to go lest we do see an outsider end up killing themselves thanks to the rules of the 'firm.'

    If this was any other organisation it would be called a failing institution with the police involved.
    Utter rubbish, as to be expected by a non Tory republican like you.

    Never have a seen I more pathetic example of narcissism and self indulgence from these 2 multi millionaires than seems to be the case with this interview.

    Trashing in public the family who made them (with the exception of the Queen knowing full way if they attacked her that would destroy them), trashing Prince Charles despite all the funds they received from the Duchy of Cornwall. Factually wrong too, as Archie is not the son of an heir to the throne he by definition could not be a prince but he got a title as Earl of Dumbarton which they then renounced when they abandoned their royal duties.

    I wish never to see or hear from this pair ever again and may they be exiled from these shores never to set foot here again. They are the 21st century Duke and Duchess of Windsor without the class!
    BIB - I see you missed the Prince Andrew interview in 2019 then?

    Also, I noticed last week you said Boris Johnson was a social democrat, so in your head he's as much as a Tory as me!
    You can effectively be a social democrat, as distinct from being a socialist and still be a Tory, see Macmillan for example who effectively governed as a social democrat as Boris largely is now.


    You cannot however be a republican and be a Tory.
    Can you be a remainer and be a Tory?
    Of course, see Ted Heath or John Major or Theresa May or David Cameron or Jeremy Hunt
    No you can't. Being a remainer means that you want to join the EU. That is directly contradictory to Tory party policy.
    Point of order, remainers and rejoiners aren't necessarily the same people.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 64,758
    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    FPT

    Charles said:

    The Queen's uncle was a Nazi sympathiser, Her Majesty herself used to do Nazi salutes, is it any surprise she didn't offer her first non white great-grandchild a title like she did for the Aryan looking Charlotte and Louis?

    That’s a very unpleasant smear

    Shame on you
    Sorry Charles, the royal family has made both Diana, Princess of Wales, and the Duchess of Sussex have suicidal thoughts (and in the former's case, attempt to kill herself.)

    This is a failing organisation led by an out of touch person, the Queen needs to go lest we do see an outsider end up killing themselves thanks to the rules of the 'firm.'

    If this was any other organisation it would be called a failing institution with the police involved.
    Utter rubbish, as to be expected by a non Tory republican like you.

    Never have a seen I more pathetic example of narcissism and self indulgence from these 2 multi millionaires than seems to be the case with this interview.

    Trashing in public the family who made them (with the exception of the Queen knowing full way if they attacked her that would destroy them), trashing Prince Charles despite all the funds they received from the Duchy of Cornwall. Factually wrong too, as Archie is not the son of an heir to the throne he by definition could not be a prince but he got a title as Earl of Dumbarton which they then renounced when they abandoned their royal duties.

    I wish never to see or hear from this pair ever again and may they be exiled from these shores never to set foot here again. They are the 21st century Duke and Duchess of Windsor without the class!
    BIB - I see you missed the Prince Andrew interview in 2019 then?

    Also, I noticed last week you said Boris Johnson was a social democrat, so in your head he's as much as a Tory as me!
    You can effectively be a social democrat, as distinct from being a socialist and still be a Tory, see Macmillan for example who effectively governed as a social democrat as Boris largely is now.


    You cannot however be a republican and be a Tory.
    Is there a checklist so one can check whether one is a Tory or not?
    If you a republican you can be a centre right liberal but you cannot be a Tory, it is logically impossible, to be a Tory you have to be a monarchist
    If you wish to be prescriptive what is this Tory party you refer to anyway?
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 2,811
    Sean_F said:

    Whether Archie Windsor gets to be called Prince, Duke or Earl seems to fall very much into the category of Rich Peoples' Problems.

    These particular rich people seem to be setting up the palace for a U-turn, if Archie automatically inherits the title Prince when HM dies.

    Good morning, everyone.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 40,362

    Morning all,

    Two days after my AZ/Oxford jab and I am feeling dreadful. Had a real bad night - fever, chills, terrible muscle pains and severe headache.

    I knew there were some fever like effects for a day or so. But this has poleaxed me. Anyone else had a bad reaction? How many days does this last?

    Sorry to hear that but am sure it will pass

    My wife and I had our second Pfizer vaccinations yesterday and became listless quite quickly but after a night's sleep feeling better but the arm is quite sore
    Thanks. I couldn't sleep. Not a wink. I think that has made it all feel much worse. Hopefully I will start to come around later today.
    I am sure you will, it is not pleasant for you but the gains will be worth it
    I have no doubt. Although I'm now not at all looking forward to the second bout of this in 12 weeks time.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 48,044
    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Good morning

    I have been very impressed with LIz Truss and she has enhanced her claim to the top spot

    On the Megan interview I have to say it is very damaging to both sides and nobody can be sure how this pans out but I expect it will be extremely divisive

    I am more than surprised that they were married 3 days before their lavish wedding ceremony and that was not known at the time of the ceremony

    I do expect it ends their connection and titles with the Royal Family and it is certain changes will come about following the Queen's passing

    They weren’t married 3 days before (except in their hearts).

    It’s fine then wanting to say private vows. Expecting ++Cantab to officiate is a little pretentious
    They were married three days before, not that it matters one jot. It’s fairly common nowadays.

    For me, the explosive revelations are that the family had “concerns” about the colour of their child’s skin. I hadn’t expected that. It is horrific.
    You don’t know that they were “concerns”. I could imagine someone of a certain generation asking what colour the child of a white/mixed couple would be. It’s gauche and offensive certainly, but possibly not quite as it has been painted.

    But it has been presented in a particularly wounding and damaging way. Almost as if it was designed to attract ratings.
    There are also two versions of the story:

    Meghan: "While I was pregnant"
    Harry: "Before we married"

    And add the spin that "Archie wasn't a Prince because of his skin colour" (untrue) and it starts to look far from accidental.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 53,947
    I suspect the biggest takeaway in much of the world from the Meghan interview will be her remarks that she was struggling with her mental health and feeling suicidal . . . and the monarchy and the press response in advance has been to try and character assassinate her through leaking things like "bullying allegations" that are many years old and date to when she was known to be struggling with her mental health.

    That does not look good at all and makes the institution and its sycophantic admirers look cruel.

    Discretion would have been the better part of valour, not saying anything at all until she spoke rather than building it up with all sorts of character assassination attempts first that magnify and play into what she has now said.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 1,377
    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    FPT

    Charles said:

    The Queen's uncle was a Nazi sympathiser, Her Majesty herself used to do Nazi salutes, is it any surprise she didn't offer her first non white great-grandchild a title like she did for the Aryan looking Charlotte and Louis?

    That’s a very unpleasant smear

    Shame on you
    Sorry Charles, the royal family has made both Diana, Princess of Wales, and the Duchess of Sussex have suicidal thoughts (and in the former's case, attempt to kill herself.)

    This is a failing organisation led by an out of touch person, the Queen needs to go lest we do see an outsider end up killing themselves thanks to the rules of the 'firm.'

    If this was any other organisation it would be called a failing institution with the police involved.
    Utter rubbish, as to be expected by a non Tory republican like you.

    Never have a seen I more pathetic example of narcissism and self indulgence from these 2 multi millionaires than seems to be the case with this interview.

    Trashing in public the family who made them (with the exception of the Queen knowing full way if they attacked her that would destroy them), trashing Prince Charles despite all the funds they received from the Duchy of Cornwall. Factually wrong too, as Archie is not the son of an heir to the throne he by definition could not be a prince but he got a title as Earl of Dumbarton which they then renounced when they abandoned their royal duties.

    I wish never to see or hear from this pair ever again and may they be exiled from these shores never to set foot here again. They are the 21st century Duke and Duchess of Windsor without the class!
    BIB - I see you missed the Prince Andrew interview in 2019 then?

    Also, I noticed last week you said Boris Johnson was a social democrat, so in your head he's as much as a Tory as me!
    You can effectively be a social democrat, as distinct from being a socialist and still be a Tory, see Macmillan for example who effectively governed as a social democrat as Boris largely is now.


    You cannot however be a republican and be a Tory.
    Is there a checklist so one can check whether one is a Tory or not?
    If you a republican you can be a centre right liberal but you cannot be a Tory, it is logically impossible, to be a Tory you have to be a monarchist
    Is it permitted to vote Tory while being a republican? Asking for a friend.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 40,123
    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    Good morning

    I have been very impressed with LIz Truss and she has enhanced her claim to the top spot

    On the Megan interview I have to say it is very damaging to both sides and nobody can be sure how this pans out but I expect it will be extremely divisive

    I am more than surprised that they were married 3 days before their lavish wedding ceremony and that was not known at the time of the ceremony

    I do expect it ends their connection and titles with the Royal Family and it is certain changes will come about following the Queen's passing

    They weren’t married 3 days before (except in their hearts).

    It’s fine then wanting to say private vows. Expecting ++Cantab to officiate is a little pretentious
    Just a minor private backyard wedding with the Archbishop of Canterbury, then effectively a service of Thanksgiving at Windsor Castle with the Archbishop too

    https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1368753624688566272?s=20
    She wasn't taking the risk of him doing a runner! (I used to work with a guy who did that....)
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 92,251
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:



    Oh mate, how do you do it? A week over Xmas was too much for me.

    I've done it for the last eight years.

    It is great when you have kids and your parents dote on them 24/7.

    #168HoursWorthOfFreeChildcareAWeek
    I think my wife would divorce me on the spot if I suggested it, I'd probably need to be checked into a mental hospital too. Not that my parents are horrible people, they aren't and are very good hosts to everyone who stays and dealt with having us and my sister's family over at the same time this Christmas. I just couldn't ever imagine having to love with them in their house ever again. It's been about 10 years since I moved out and bought my first flat in Shepherd's Bush. I remember the many people if PB telling me to go for it at the time despite fears of taking on a big mortgage etc...
    I think my situation is slightly different in the respect that I'm a lone parent these days, have been for the last seven years, plus I still own my place in Manchester, I like being on the housing ladder.

    I'm lucky in the respect that my parents are wonderful and own a decent home, I think if they lived in a small semi detached house I wouldn't have moved back in as it just wouldn't be practicable.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 40,661

    Morning all,

    Two days after my AZ/Oxford jab and I am feeling dreadful. Had a real bad night - fever, chills, terrible muscle pains and severe headache.

    I knew there were some fever like effects for a day or so. But this has poleaxed me. Anyone else had a bad reaction? How many days does this last?

    Sorry to hear that but am sure it will pass

    My wife and I had our second Pfizer vaccinations yesterday and became listless quite quickly but after a night's sleep feeling better but the arm is quite sore
    Thanks. I couldn't sleep. Not a wink. I think that has made it all feel much worse. Hopefully I will start to come around later today.
    I am sure you will, it is not pleasant for you but the gains will be worth it
    I have no doubt. Although I'm now not at all looking forward to the second bout of this in 12 weeks time.
    I can understand that but hopefully it will be much less severe
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 6,879

    Scott_xP said:

    Charles said:

    Basically the grandchildren of a monarch are princes/princesses but their children are not. Meghan got upset because she didn’t get special treatment.

    But Kate did

    Kate knew what she was about from the time she walked into Williams student party in a see-through dress.
    I wonder how "The Crown" will treat Kate's very successful stalking of William.
  • eekeek Posts: 12,249
    kle4 said:

    eek said:

    Charles said:

    Good morning

    I have been very impressed with LIz Truss and she has enhanced her claim to the top spot

    On the Megan interview I have to say it is very damaging to both sides and nobody can be sure how this pans out but I expect it will be extremely divisive

    I am more than surprised that they were married 3 days before their lavish wedding ceremony and that was not known at the time of the ceremony

    I do expect it ends their connection and titles with the Royal Family and it is certain changes will come about following the Queen's passing

    They weren’t married 3 days before (except in their hearts).

    It’s fine then wanting to say private vows. Expecting ++Cantab to officiate is a little pretentious
    They were married three days before, not that it matters one jot. It’s fairly common nowadays.

    For me, the explosive revelations are that the family had “concerns” about the colour of their child’s skin. I hadn’t expected that. It is horrific.
    It's that last bit that both doesn't surprise but still leaves me wondering who was stupid enough to say it outside beyond the obvious suspect of Princess Michael of Kent.
    Besides being very racist it is very dumb when meghan markle is pretty pale anyway, even a racist should calm down but they are not known for such.

    It is very clever not to say who it was. Could be anyone, possibly very senior, so tars the lot and sets up a sequel. I'd have assumed phillip making a poor joke.
    It's interesting to read twitter and David Allen Green's viewpoints.

    This seems to sum things up as well and is my viewpoint

    https://twitter.com/garius/status/1368852137321631744

    Once the Queen has gone a Republic or a very slimed down Family is the future. Sadly the latter was already in progress until Charles and William scared away the most useful part of it.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 7,277
    edited March 8
    eek said:

    MattW said:

    tlg86 said:

    MattW said:

    8th.

    And FPT as I slept well last night.

    tlg86 said:

    MattW said:

    tlg86 said:

    MattW said:

    kyf_100 said:



    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/56294009

    It's a policy that has jacked up house prices and made it harder for people who actually need to buy houses to buy them (it's done a great job for those already owning them, which is pointless, they already own a home) vs a policy to pay our nursing staff properly for a job they've done superbly and without complaint over the last year and beyond.

    It's obvious to anyone what a better use of the money was.

    How does removing a tax on buyers make it harder for a buyer to buy their house? 🙄
    Because the sellers simply raise their prices, which they can. Because the buyers aren't buying with their own money, they're buying with a maxed out mortgage. Combine that with a reduction in interest rates and all you've done is raise the price of property while forcing new buyers to take on more debt. That is exactly what has happened.
    All of these government 'initiatives' - Help to Buy, LISAs and stamp duty cuts - simply push up prices as described previously.

    What we need is to 'encourage' the Buy To Let and other multiple home owner community to release their properties with a fair and equitable tax system on these people, who have had so many tax breaks in the past:
    - 5% stamp duty loading on acquisition of a second/BTL property (I know we have 3% now)
    - 3% capital charge PER YEAR
    - no tax relief on interest paid to buy BTL
    - double Council Tax on a second property
    - any capital gain taxed at 40%

    That will 'encourage' these people to release these properties! Lots more supply. Prices fall, chance for renters and other aspirant buyers to buy.

    Let's do it!
    We did this last week.

    As a policy, that will do untold damage to the marginal and less well-off members of the community, particularly very significant numbers who cannot access credit.

    And in favour of relatively richer people.

    It is crazy.

    The unholy alliance between the rich and the poor.

    The obvious solution has and always will be to increase interest rates slowly to c.3-4% to reduce the profitability of BTL.
    Where will the human beings you are proposing to make homeless live?
    Ummm, in houses/flats like they do now?

    For every BTL property sold to a first time buyer, that's one less person competing in the rental sector.
    You don't understand how housing occupation works.

    The rental sector is far more densely occupied than the Owner Occupied sector, so when you move X people from the rental sector to OO - by whatever mechanism you are using to close down rental - you need a lot more houses.

    I posted the stats the other day. These are in the English Housing Survey.

    Nearly Half of OO houses are underoccupied - the official stat is 2 or more spare bedrooms.

    For rental that is under 10%.

    Therefore you are creating a lot of people with nowhere to live - homeless.

    And you need to have a policy where you will put the people you are making homeless.
    Do you think, then, that we actually need more rental properties and should aim to have fewer people getting on the ladder?
    It's not a zero sum game. We need a sufficient rental supply, and a sufficient OO supply.

    I find it strange that the argument for "we need more houses to bring prices down" sits alongside "make renting more expensive", when the latter is occupied by people less well off than the former. And when many millions of
    them do not have the opportunity to buy.

    Complex issue. And it won't be moved forward by simplistic policies.

    Unfortunately politicians are on the whole useless on this, and make a bigger mess every time tehy stick an oar in.

    One thing I would say is to tilt policy towards increasing household size, which is down significantly since even the 1970s/1980s. But there are a lot of other nuances.
    So you are against the bedroom tax then?
    I'm not clear what that has to do with people being made homeless if you turn rental homes 1:1 into owner occupied. That was just a disaster which would be caused by the policy suggested.

    The principle that a home being contributed to by the state being the size of accommodation needed for the household it is being funded for seems appropriate.

    There are obvs wrinkles at the edges, and perhaps on the implementation, but the basic principle seems sound.

    The weird thing I found with the 'Bedroom Tax' was that it was aiui essentially bringing PRS in the Social Sector HB into line with what had existed for years in the PRS, and all those bodies (Shelter and so on) yammering about how evil it all was appeared to care far more for the politics than the actual people - otherwise they would have said something about HB in the PRS years earlier. As far as I am aware they did not - though open to correction as it is some time ago.

  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 27,996
    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    FPT

    Charles said:

    The Queen's uncle was a Nazi sympathiser, Her Majesty herself used to do Nazi salutes, is it any surprise she didn't offer her first non white great-grandchild a title like she did for the Aryan looking Charlotte and Louis?

    That’s a very unpleasant smear

    Shame on you
    Sorry Charles, the royal family has made both Diana, Princess of Wales, and the Duchess of Sussex have suicidal thoughts (and in the former's case, attempt to kill herself.)

    This is a failing organisation led by an out of touch person, the Queen needs to go lest we do see an outsider end up killing themselves thanks to the rules of the 'firm.'

    If this was any other organisation it would be called a failing institution with the police involved.
    Utter rubbish, as to be expected by a non Tory republican like you.

    Never have a seen I more pathetic example of narcissism and self indulgence from these 2 multi millionaires than seems to be the case with this interview.

    Trashing in public the family who made them (with the exception of the Queen knowing full way if they attacked her that would destroy them), trashing Prince Charles despite all the funds they received from the Duchy of Cornwall. Factually wrong too, as Archie is not the son of an heir to the throne he by definition could not be a prince but he got a title as Earl of Dumbarton which they then renounced when they abandoned their royal duties.

    I wish never to see or hear from this pair ever again and may they be exiled from these shores never to set foot here again. They are the 21st century Duke and Duchess of Windsor without the class!
    BIB - I see you missed the Prince Andrew interview in 2019 then?

    Also, I noticed last week you said Boris Johnson was a social democrat, so in your head he's as much as a Tory as me!
    You can effectively be a social democrat, as distinct from being a socialist and still be a Tory, see Macmillan for example who effectively governed as a social democrat as Boris largely is now.


    You cannot however be a republican and be a Tory.
    Can you be a remainer and be a Tory?
    Of course, see Ted Heath or John Major or Theresa May or David Cameron or Jeremy Hunt
    No you can't. Being a remainer means that you want to join the EU. That is directly contradictory to Tory party policy.
    Point of order, remainers and rejoiners aren't necessarily the same people.
    Point accepted.

    @HYUFD was, because he is a man of great sense, insight and acuity, a remainer. Hence his worldview is that the UK is better inside the EU than outside it. As he is also a man of great probity, principle, and integrity, he does not of course change his mind on a whim to satisfy political expediency.

    Hence his view is still that the UK is better off as an EU member.

    Hence, and I say this with great regret given his position in the local Conservative Party, he is not a Tory.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 3,053

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    Good morning

    I have been very impressed with LIz Truss and she has enhanced her claim to the top spot

    On the Megan interview I have to say it is very damaging to both sides and nobody can be sure how this pans out but I expect it will be extremely divisive

    I am more than surprised that they were married 3 days before their lavish wedding ceremony and that was not known at the time of the ceremony

    I do expect it ends their connection and titles with the Royal Family and it is certain changes will come about following the Queen's passing

    They weren’t married 3 days before (except in their hearts).

    It’s fine then wanting to say private vows. Expecting ++Cantab to officiate is a little pretentious
    Just a minor private backyard wedding with the Archbishop of Canterbury, then effectively a service of Thanksgiving at Windsor Castle with the Archbishop too

    https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1368753624688566272?s=20
    She wasn't taking the risk of him doing a runner! (I used to work with a guy who did that....)
    I don't think that can be true .. you can't marry twice (in this sense) and there have to be witnesses which we are led to believe were not there . It was probably a rehearsal and the poor dear got confused.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 31,476
    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    Good morning

    I have been very impressed with LIz Truss and she has enhanced her claim to the top spot

    On the Megan interview I have to say it is very damaging to both sides and nobody can be sure how this pans out but I expect it will be extremely divisive

    I am more than surprised that they were married 3 days before their lavish wedding ceremony and that was not known at the time of the ceremony

    I do expect it ends their connection and titles with the Royal Family and it is certain changes will come about following the Queen's passing

    They weren’t married 3 days before (except in their hearts).

    It’s fine then wanting to say private vows. Expecting ++Cantab to officiate is a little pretentious
    Just a minor private backyard wedding with the Archbishop of Canterbury, then effectively a service of Thanksgiving at Windsor Castle with the Archbishop too

    https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1368753624688566272?s=20
    It’s not a wedding

    It was a blessing. There are rules about weddings, especially when using an Archbishop’s Licence (I happy to know the rules as we had to get a special licence from ++Cantab for our wedding)
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 53,947
    MattW said:

    eek said:

    MattW said:

    tlg86 said:

    MattW said:

    8th.

    And FPT as I slept well last night.

    tlg86 said:

    MattW said:

    tlg86 said:

    MattW said:

    kyf_100 said:



    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/56294009

    It's a policy that has jacked up house prices and made it harder for people who actually need to buy houses to buy them (it's done a great job for those already owning them, which is pointless, they already own a home) vs a policy to pay our nursing staff properly for a job they've done superbly and without complaint over the last year and beyond.

    It's obvious to anyone what a better use of the money was.

    How does removing a tax on buyers make it harder for a buyer to buy their house? 🙄
    Because the sellers simply raise their prices, which they can. Because the buyers aren't buying with their own money, they're buying with a maxed out mortgage. Combine that with a reduction in interest rates and all you've done is raise the price of property while forcing new buyers to take on more debt. That is exactly what has happened.
    All of these government 'initiatives' - Help to Buy, LISAs and stamp duty cuts - simply push up prices as described previously.

    What we need is to 'encourage' the Buy To Let and other multiple home owner community to release their properties with a fair and equitable tax system on these people, who have had so many tax breaks in the past:
    - 5% stamp duty loading on acquisition of a second/BTL property (I know we have 3% now)
    - 3% capital charge PER YEAR
    - no tax relief on interest paid to buy BTL
    - double Council Tax on a second property
    - any capital gain taxed at 40%

    That will 'encourage' these people to release these properties! Lots more supply. Prices fall, chance for renters and other aspirant buyers to buy.

    Let's do it!
    We did this last week.

    As a policy, that will do untold damage to the marginal and less well-off members of the community, particularly very significant numbers who cannot access credit.

    And in favour of relatively richer people.

    It is crazy.

    The unholy alliance between the rich and the poor.

    The obvious solution has and always will be to increase interest rates slowly to c.3-4% to reduce the profitability of BTL.
    Where will the human beings you are proposing to make homeless live?
    Ummm, in houses/flats like they do now?

    For every BTL property sold to a first time buyer, that's one less person competing in the rental sector.
    You don't understand how housing occupation works.

    The rental sector is far more densely occupied than the Owner Occupied sector, so when you move X people from the rental sector to OO - by whatever mechanism you are using to close down rental - you need a lot more houses.

    I posted the stats the other day. These are in the English Housing Survey.

    Nearly Half of OO houses are underoccupied - the official stat is 2 or more spare bedrooms.

    For rental that is under 10%.

    Therefore you are creating a lot of people with nowhere to live - homeless.

    And you need to have a policy where you will put the people you are making homeless.
    Do you think, then, that we actually need more rental properties and should aim to have fewer people getting on the ladder?
    It's not a zero sum game. We need a sufficient rental supply, and a sufficient OO supply.

    I find it strange that the argument for "we need more houses to bring prices down" sits alongside "make renting more expensive", when the latter is occupied by people less well off than the former. And when many millions of
    them do not have the opportunity to buy.

    Complex issue. And it won't be moved forward by simplistic policies.

    Unfortunately politicians are on the whole useless on this, and make a bigger mess every time tehy stick an oar in.

    One thing I would say is to tilt policy towards increasing household size, which is down significantly since even the 1970s/1980s. But there are a lot of other nuances.
    So you are against the bedroom tax then?
    I'm not clear what that has to do with people being made homeless if you turn rental homes 1:1 into owner occupied. That was just a disaster which would be caused by the policy suggested.

    The principle that a home being contributed to by the state being the size of accommodation needed for the household it is being funded for seems appropriate.

    There are obvs wrinkles at the edges, and perhaps on the implementation, but the basic principle seems sound.

    The weird thing I found with the 'Bedroom Tax' was that it was aiui essentially bringing PRS in the Social Sector HB into line with what had existed for years in the PRS, and all those bodies (Shelter and so on) yammering about how evil it all was appeared to care far more for the politics than the actual people - otherwise they would have said something about HB in the PRS years earlier. As far as I am aware they did not - though open to correction as it is some time ago.

    Could you explain this sorry? Bringing PRS in line with PRS is confusing sorry?
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 40,661
    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    FPT

    Charles said:

    The Queen's uncle was a Nazi sympathiser, Her Majesty herself used to do Nazi salutes, is it any surprise she didn't offer her first non white great-grandchild a title like she did for the Aryan looking Charlotte and Louis?

    That’s a very unpleasant smear

    Shame on you
    Sorry Charles, the royal family has made both Diana, Princess of Wales, and the Duchess of Sussex have suicidal thoughts (and in the former's case, attempt to kill herself.)

    This is a failing organisation led by an out of touch person, the Queen needs to go lest we do see an outsider end up killing themselves thanks to the rules of the 'firm.'

    If this was any other organisation it would be called a failing institution with the police involved.
    Utter rubbish, as to be expected by a non Tory republican like you.

    Never have a seen I more pathetic example of narcissism and self indulgence from these 2 multi millionaires than seems to be the case with this interview.

    Trashing in public the family who made them (with the exception of the Queen knowing full way if they attacked her that would destroy them), trashing Prince Charles despite all the funds they received from the Duchy of Cornwall. Factually wrong too, as Archie is not the son of an heir to the throne he by definition could not be a prince but he got a title as Earl of Dumbarton which they then renounced when they abandoned their royal duties.

    I wish never to see or hear from this pair ever again and may they be exiled from these shores never to set foot here again. They are the 21st century Duke and Duchess of Windsor without the class!
    BIB - I see you missed the Prince Andrew interview in 2019 then?

    Also, I noticed last week you said Boris Johnson was a social democrat, so in your head he's as much as a Tory as me!
    You can effectively be a social democrat, as distinct from being a socialist and still be a Tory, see Macmillan for example who effectively governed as a social democrat as Boris largely is now.


    You cannot however be a republican and be a Tory.
    Can you be a remainer and be a Tory?
    Of course, see Ted Heath or John Major or Theresa May or David Cameron or Jeremy Hunt
    No you can't. Being a remainer means that you want to join the EU. That is directly contradictory to Tory party policy.
    Point of order, remainers and rejoiners aren't necessarily the same people.
    Point accepted.

    @HYUFD was, because he is a man of great sense, insight and acuity, a remainer. Hence his worldview is that the UK is better inside the EU than outside it. As he is also a man of great probity, principle, and integrity, he does not of course change his mind on a whim to satisfy political expediency.

    Hence his view is still that the UK is better off as an EU member.

    Hence, and I say this with great regret given his position in the local Conservative Party, he is not a Tory.
    You bought me a smile and chuckle on your observation
  • eekeek Posts: 12,249
    MattW said:

    eek said:

    MattW said:

    tlg86 said:

    MattW said:

    8th.

    And FPT as I slept well last night.

    tlg86 said:

    MattW said:

    tlg86 said:

    MattW said:

    kyf_100 said:



    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/56294009

    It's a policy that has jacked up house prices and made it harder for people who actually need to buy houses to buy them (it's done a great job for those already owning them, which is pointless, they already own a home) vs a policy to pay our nursing staff properly for a job they've done superbly and without complaint over the last year and beyond.

    It's obvious to anyone what a better use of the money was.

    How does removing a tax on buyers make it harder for a buyer to buy their house? 🙄
    Because the sellers simply raise their prices, which they can. Because the buyers aren't buying with their own money, they're buying with a maxed out mortgage. Combine that with a reduction in interest rates and all you've done is raise the price of property while forcing new buyers to take on more debt. That is exactly what has happened.
    All of these government 'initiatives' - Help to Buy, LISAs and stamp duty cuts - simply push up prices as described previously.

    What we need is to 'encourage' the Buy To Let and other multiple home owner community to release their properties with a fair and equitable tax system on these people, who have had so many tax breaks in the past:
    - 5% stamp duty loading on acquisition of a second/BTL property (I know we have 3% now)
    - 3% capital charge PER YEAR
    - no tax relief on interest paid to buy BTL
    - double Council Tax on a second property
    - any capital gain taxed at 40%

    That will 'encourage' these people to release these properties! Lots more supply. Prices fall, chance for renters and other aspirant buyers to buy.

    Let's do it!
    We did this last week.

    As a policy, that will do untold damage to the marginal and less well-off members of the community, particularly very significant numbers who cannot access credit.

    And in favour of relatively richer people.

    It is crazy.

    The unholy alliance between the rich and the poor.

    The obvious solution has and always will be to increase interest rates slowly to c.3-4% to reduce the profitability of BTL.
    Where will the human beings you are proposing to make homeless live?
    Ummm, in houses/flats like they do now?

    For every BTL property sold to a first time buyer, that's one less person competing in the rental sector.
    You don't understand how housing occupation works.

    The rental sector is far more densely occupied than the Owner Occupied sector, so when you move X people from the rental sector to OO - by whatever mechanism you are using to close down rental - you need a lot more houses.

    I posted the stats the other day. These are in the English Housing Survey.

    Nearly Half of OO houses are underoccupied - the official stat is 2 or more spare bedrooms.

    For rental that is under 10%.

    Therefore you are creating a lot of people with nowhere to live - homeless.

    And you need to have a policy where you will put the people you are making homeless.
    Do you think, then, that we actually need more rental properties and should aim to have fewer people getting on the ladder?
    It's not a zero sum game. We need a sufficient rental supply, and a sufficient OO supply.

    I find it strange that the argument for "we need more houses to bring prices down" sits alongside "make renting more expensive", when the latter is occupied by people less well off than the former. And when many millions of
    them do not have the opportunity to buy.

    Complex issue. And it won't be moved forward by simplistic policies.

    Unfortunately politicians are on the whole useless on this, and make a bigger mess every time tehy stick an oar in.

    One thing I would say is to tilt policy towards increasing household size, which is down significantly since even the 1970s/1980s. But there are a lot of other nuances.
    So you are against the bedroom tax then?
    I'm not clear what that has to do with people being made homeless if you turn rental homes 1:1 into owner occupied. That was just a disaster which would be caused by the policy suggested.

    The principle that a home being contributed to by the state being the size of accommodation needed for the household it is being funded for seems appropriate.

    There are obvs wrinkles at the edges, and perhaps on the implementation, but the basic principle seems sound.

    The weird thing I found with the 'Bedroom Tax' was that it was aiui essentially bringing PRS in the Social Sector HB into line with what had existed for years in the PRS, and all those bodies (Shelter and so on) yammering about how evil it all was appeared to care far more for the politics than the actual people - otherwise they would have said something about HB in the PRS years earlier. As far as I am aware they did not - though open to correction as it is some time ago.

    Rental homes have 1 family in them (unless they are housing of multiple occupation which is a different matter).

    And how does a rental home with 1 family in it becoming a owner occupied home with 1 family in it change the dynamics of the rental market. Demand for rental housing drops by 1 house, supply of rental housing also drops by 1 house - in a market with x million rental properties the impact is always zero.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 27,996
    eek said:

    kle4 said:

    eek said:

    Charles said:

    Good morning

    I have been very impressed with LIz Truss and she has enhanced her claim to the top spot

    On the Megan interview I have to say it is very damaging to both sides and nobody can be sure how this pans out but I expect it will be extremely divisive

    I am more than surprised that they were married 3 days before their lavish wedding ceremony and that was not known at the time of the ceremony

    I do expect it ends their connection and titles with the Royal Family and it is certain changes will come about following the Queen's passing

    They weren’t married 3 days before (except in their hearts).

    It’s fine then wanting to say private vows. Expecting ++Cantab to officiate is a little pretentious
    They were married three days before, not that it matters one jot. It’s fairly common nowadays.

    For me, the explosive revelations are that the family had “concerns” about the colour of their child’s skin. I hadn’t expected that. It is horrific.
    It's that last bit that both doesn't surprise but still leaves me wondering who was stupid enough to say it outside beyond the obvious suspect of Princess Michael of Kent.
    Besides being very racist it is very dumb when meghan markle is pretty pale anyway, even a racist should calm down but they are not known for such.

    It is very clever not to say who it was. Could be anyone, possibly very senior, so tars the lot and sets up a sequel. I'd have assumed phillip making a poor joke.
    It's interesting to read twitter and David Allen Green's viewpoints.

    This seems to sum things up as well and is my viewpoint

    https://twitter.com/garius/status/1368852137321631744

    Once the Queen has gone a Republic or a very slimed down Family is the future. Sadly the latter was already in progress until Charles and William scared away the most useful part of it.
    Check out the list of Royal engagements (published by some nutter monarchist archivist in The Times each year). Hundreds and hundreds overall.

    When some institution or other gets a visit from a member of the Royal Family it is a matter of huge anticipation and excitement.

    Meanwhile, there are not that many working royals.

    Not sure what slimming down ou are expecting, save to get rid of Sandringham/Balmoral perhaps saving a few quid.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 40,362

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    Good morning

    I have been very impressed with LIz Truss and she has enhanced her claim to the top spot

    On the Megan interview I have to say it is very damaging to both sides and nobody can be sure how this pans out but I expect it will be extremely divisive

    I am more than surprised that they were married 3 days before their lavish wedding ceremony and that was not known at the time of the ceremony

    I do expect it ends their connection and titles with the Royal Family and it is certain changes will come about following the Queen's passing

    They weren’t married 3 days before (except in their hearts).

    It’s fine then wanting to say private vows. Expecting ++Cantab to officiate is a little pretentious
    Just a minor private backyard wedding with the Archbishop of Canterbury, then effectively a service of Thanksgiving at Windsor Castle with the Archbishop too

    https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1368753624688566272?s=20
    She wasn't taking the risk of him doing a runner! (I used to work with a guy who did that....)
    Just the three of us? Erm, don't you need a witness or two to sign bits of paper?
  • MattWMattW Posts: 7,277
    eek said:

    Charles said:

    Good morning

    I have been very impressed with LIz Truss and she has enhanced her claim to the top spot

    On the Megan interview I have to say it is very damaging to both sides and nobody can be sure how this pans out but I expect it will be extremely divisive

    I am more than surprised that they were married 3 days before their lavish wedding ceremony and that was not known at the time of the ceremony

    I do expect it ends their connection and titles with the Royal Family and it is certain changes will come about following the Queen's passing

    They weren’t married 3 days before (except in their hearts).

    It’s fine then wanting to say private vows. Expecting ++Cantab to officiate is a little pretentious
    They were married three days before, not that it matters one jot. It’s fairly common nowadays.

    For me, the explosive revelations are that the family had “concerns” about the colour of their child’s skin. I hadn’t expected that. It is horrific.
    It's that last bit that both doesn't surprise but still leaves me wondering who was stupid enough to say it outside beyond the obvious suspect of Princess Michael of Kent.
    I think ++Cantab would be clear that it was a Blessing not a Marriage.

    "In their own hearts" is a good sumamry.
Sign In or Register to comment.