Howdy, Stranger!

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

Let them eat cake – politicalbetting.com

245

Comments

  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    edited August 2021

    pigeon said:

    We know the Tories will not only cut UC but feel good making that cut.

    Except that it is clear that a large number of Tory MPs actually wouldn't feel good about cutting this benefit, as TSE has described. What we ought to be asking is whether there is any mechanism available that might be able either to force the Government into keeping the uplift, or at least to try to embarrass it into so doing.

    If Labour can force at least some kind of Commons vote on this, then it is entirely possible that the Government would lose it. UC is a reserved competence so the SNP are free to vote against the cut without breaking their self-denying ordnance, so it wouldn't take much more than 40 Tories to side with the Opposition to bring about a defeat.
    Just leave it to Rashford, he is already 2-0 up against the govt and with the injury and Ronaldo arriving has plenty of time spare to make it 3-0.
    Shame he didn't ... etc.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 10,770
    HYUFD said:

    RobD said:

    Labour tried the same all the time with Cameron / Osborne anytime they announced "cuts".

    I am not sure the politics of envy plays very well. If people are buying stuff with their own money they made it doesn't seem to go down badly, it is when they are using tax payers money to enrich themselves that the shit hits the fan.

    It's not his money. He's a pauper compared to his wife. ;)
    The other thing is, it isn't a secret they are mega wealthy. Again it plays badly if you claim i'm just a poor boy, from a poor family....with two kitchens and domestic staff....

    Nobody cared Mrs C was very wealthy (again must richer than Dave), it wasn't a secret she was from a wealthy family and also very successful in her own right.
    Sunak's wife has a net worth of £430 million, Sunak himself has a net worth of £200 million.

    They make the Camerons look like paupers in comparison
    That's a coincidence.
  • HYUFD said:

    RobD said:

    Labour tried the same all the time with Cameron / Osborne anytime they announced "cuts".

    I am not sure the politics of envy plays very well. If people are buying stuff with their own money they made it doesn't seem to go down badly, it is when they are using tax payers money to enrich themselves that the shit hits the fan.

    It's not his money. He's a pauper compared to his wife. ;)
    The other thing is, it isn't a secret they are mega wealthy. Again it plays badly if you claim i'm just a poor boy, from a poor family....with two kitchens and domestic staff....

    Nobody cared Mrs C was very wealthy (again must richer than Dave), it wasn't a secret she was from a wealthy family and also very successful in her own right.
    Sunak's wife has a net worth of £430 million, Sunak himself has a net worth of £200 million most of it from shares in his father in laws companies as well as his time at Goldman Sachs.

    They make the Camerons look like paupers in comparison
    But do they own Cryptopunks....
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,164
    Not sure if polling on UC favours keeping it high. Lots of Red Wall Tory voters are of the type who are not massively sympathetic to welfare. Of course Twitter is another matter...
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,059
    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    The fact Rishi is son in law of a billionaire, ex Goldman Sachs banker, about to build a swimming pool and tennis court at his rural Yorkshire mansion to go with the Kensington mansion and apartment in Santa Monica he and his wife own would not normally be a problem. As a Tory I also take the view that if you have the money and got it legally then you can spend it how you like.

    However from a PR perspective TSE is right, if the Chancellor is moving from giving away money, in which scenario he can afford to have a lavish lifestyle to cutting UC for the poorest and maybe the triple lock for those reliant on the state pension too then a bit of Brown, Darling, Hammond style dour austerity in his personal life would not go amiss

    What is the point of being a successful Tory if you can't spend your money because it might upset the proles?

    The whole idea is to give an idea as to what everyone might aspire. Like duck houses and shepherd's caravans.
    There is nothing wrong with encouraging aspiration but if you are cutting welfare and the state pension too it doesn't look right
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,420
    malcolmg said:

    TimT said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    I find this hard to get excited about. Rich people gonna rich. And create employment for Yorkshire's (?) swimming pool industry.

    Yeah. Basically, the Labour MPs and TSE are saying no Conservative MP should spend any money on anything someone can stretch to describe as luxury spending, ever. Only Tory-haters are going to gobble that up.
    I'm not saying that, I hate the politics of envy, is why I can never be a leftie.

    It's the toxic mix of giving pensioners an 8% increase and cutting UC for the poorest in society.

    There's many Tory MPs who have gone on the record to oppose the UC cut, this is going to get messy for Sunak.
    Pensioners won't get their 8% though. Sunak isn't an idiot, he will find a fudge so they get 3% just like the NHS.
    A betting market on this would be interesting. I think it is more likely pensioners get the 8% than most on here.
    I will be upset if I don't get my 8%.
    You better hope Scotland never goes Indy then.
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 3,705
    edited August 2021

    Anyway. Anyone watch F1 qualy from Spa? Horrendous weather there (as it has been for days), Lando smashed into the wall after being dominant all day, and George Russell sticks a Williams onto P2.

    With Bottarse only P8 and a 5 place penalty from Hungary's bowl-a-rama making him start P13, you have to ask what is holding Toto Wolff back from making the switch.

    It seems to be the same philosophy that kept Kimi Raikkonen in gainful employment for so long at Ferrari when Vettel was the team leader. Don't upset the main man by putting some young hot-shot in when you've got a solid but uninspiring second driver already incumbent who doesn't make too much trouble. Although personally I think that philosophy is stupid.

    But I suspect time is almost up for Bottas, the PR game this weekend is a bit weird for them to just announce Bottas is still in the seat for next year. Could be wrong though.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 10,770
    If Burnham isn't behind the silencing of Burnham I'll eat my hat.

    He's not going to fare well.
  • Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 5,005

    Anyway. Anyone watch F1 qualy from Spa? Horrendous weather there (as it has been for days), Lando smashed into the wall after being dominant all day, and George Russell sticks a Williams onto P2.

    With Bottarse only P8 and a 5 place penalty from Hungary's bowl-a-rama making him start P13, you have to ask what is holding Toto Wolff back from making the switch.

    My guess is that it's already been made; it's just the announcement they're holding back on.
    Woolf wants Bottas to be able to be certain of a soft landing elsewhere (probably at Alfa Romeo), so he's holding back until that's sorted out.

    It's pure guesswork, but I expect Raikkonen to announce retirement from F1 just before the race at Monza, then Alfa Romeo to announce Bottas is joining them, and Woolf to announce Russell is joining Mercedes.

    Williams will confirm Latifi for 2022, plus - hmm - either Hulkenberg or De Vries?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,930
    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    TimT said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    I find this hard to get excited about. Rich people gonna rich. And create employment for Yorkshire's (?) swimming pool industry.

    Yeah. Basically, the Labour MPs and TSE are saying no Conservative MP should spend any money on anything someone can stretch to describe as luxury spending, ever. Only Tory-haters are going to gobble that up.
    I'm not saying that, I hate the politics of envy, is why I can never be a leftie.

    It's the toxic mix of giving pensioners an 8% increase and cutting UC for the poorest in society.

    There's many Tory MPs who have gone on the record to oppose the UC cut, this is going to get messy for Sunak.
    Pensioners won't get their 8% though. Sunak isn't an idiot, he will find a fudge so they get 3% just like the NHS.
    A betting market on this would be interesting. I think it is more likely pensioners get the 8% than most on here.
    I will be upset if I don't get my 8%.
    You better hope Scotland never goes Indy then.
    Thanks. We almost made it an entire page without it being mentioned. :smiley:
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,827
    I'm thinking it is something like:

    Around 8% - 5/4
    In between (4-6%ish) 5/1
    Around inflation 3% - 2/1
    Below inflation - 25/1

  • felix said:

    Not sure if polling on UC favours keeping it high. Lots of Red Wall Tory voters are of the type who are not massively sympathetic to welfare. Of course Twitter is another matter...

    This the most recent polling on the UC cut.

    38% support the cut.

    39% oppose the cut.

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1429722451064332293
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,647
    edited August 2021
    RobD said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    TimT said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    I find this hard to get excited about. Rich people gonna rich. And create employment for Yorkshire's (?) swimming pool industry.

    Yeah. Basically, the Labour MPs and TSE are saying no Conservative MP should spend any money on anything someone can stretch to describe as luxury spending, ever. Only Tory-haters are going to gobble that up.
    I'm not saying that, I hate the politics of envy, is why I can never be a leftie.

    It's the toxic mix of giving pensioners an 8% increase and cutting UC for the poorest in society.

    There's many Tory MPs who have gone on the record to oppose the UC cut, this is going to get messy for Sunak.
    Pensioners won't get their 8% though. Sunak isn't an idiot, he will find a fudge so they get 3% just like the NHS.
    A betting market on this would be interesting. I think it is more likely pensioners get the 8% than most on here.
    I will be upset if I don't get my 8%.
    You better hope Scotland never goes Indy then.
    Thanks. We almost made it an entire page without it being mentioned. :smiley:
    The morning thread is on Scotland.

    It is the first of five Scotland threads I plan to publish about Scotland during Mike's holiday.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,590

    Anyway. Anyone watch F1 qualy from Spa? Horrendous weather there (as it has been for days), Lando smashed into the wall after being dominant all day, and George Russell sticks a Williams onto P2.

    With Bottarse only P8 and a 5 place penalty from Hungary's bowl-a-rama making him start P13, you have to ask what is holding Toto Wolff back from making the switch.

    My guess is that it's already been made; it's just the announcement they're holding back on.
    Woolf wants Bottas to be able to be certain of a soft landing elsewhere (probably at Alfa Romeo), so he's holding back until that's sorted out.

    It's pure guesswork, but I expect Raikkonen to announce retirement from F1 just before the race at Monza, then Alfa Romeo to announce Bottas is joining them, and Woolf to announce Russell is joining Mercedes.

    Williams will confirm Latifi for 2022, plus - hmm - either Hulkenberg or De Vries?
    That sounds about right.

    Good news for Lando Norris, he’s been passed fit to race tomorrow after a big shunt in the qualifying session. Not sure his car is going to make it though, he’ll have at least a five place penalty (from 10th) for a new gearbox, more likely a pit lane start for a new everything!
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 10,770

    RobD said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    TimT said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    I find this hard to get excited about. Rich people gonna rich. And create employment for Yorkshire's (?) swimming pool industry.

    Yeah. Basically, the Labour MPs and TSE are saying no Conservative MP should spend any money on anything someone can stretch to describe as luxury spending, ever. Only Tory-haters are going to gobble that up.
    I'm not saying that, I hate the politics of envy, is why I can never be a leftie.

    It's the toxic mix of giving pensioners an 8% increase and cutting UC for the poorest in society.

    There's many Tory MPs who have gone on the record to oppose the UC cut, this is going to get messy for Sunak.
    Pensioners won't get their 8% though. Sunak isn't an idiot, he will find a fudge so they get 3% just like the NHS.
    A betting market on this would be interesting. I think it is more likely pensioners get the 8% than most on here.
    I will be upset if I don't get my 8%.
    You better hope Scotland never goes Indy then.
    Thanks. We almost made it an entire page without it being mentioned. :smiley:
    The morning thread is on Scotland.

    It is the first of five Scotland threads I plan to publish on Scotland during Mike's holiday.
    He'll be angry when he gets back!
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,420
    edited August 2021

    RobD said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    TimT said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    I find this hard to get excited about. Rich people gonna rich. And create employment for Yorkshire's (?) swimming pool industry.

    Yeah. Basically, the Labour MPs and TSE are saying no Conservative MP should spend any money on anything someone can stretch to describe as luxury spending, ever. Only Tory-haters are going to gobble that up.
    I'm not saying that, I hate the politics of envy, is why I can never be a leftie.

    It's the toxic mix of giving pensioners an 8% increase and cutting UC for the poorest in society.

    There's many Tory MPs who have gone on the record to oppose the UC cut, this is going to get messy for Sunak.
    Pensioners won't get their 8% though. Sunak isn't an idiot, he will find a fudge so they get 3% just like the NHS.
    A betting market on this would be interesting. I think it is more likely pensioners get the 8% than most on here.
    I will be upset if I don't get my 8%.
    You better hope Scotland never goes Indy then.
    Thanks. We almost made it an entire page without it being mentioned. :smiley:
    The morning thread is on Scotland.

    It is the first of five Scotland threads I plan to publish on Scotland during Mike's holiday.
    I hope you have a nice sturdy tin helmet ready to protect yourself from ballistic turnips.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,541
    ydoethur said:

    RobD said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    TimT said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    I find this hard to get excited about. Rich people gonna rich. And create employment for Yorkshire's (?) swimming pool industry.

    Yeah. Basically, the Labour MPs and TSE are saying no Conservative MP should spend any money on anything someone can stretch to describe as luxury spending, ever. Only Tory-haters are going to gobble that up.
    I'm not saying that, I hate the politics of envy, is why I can never be a leftie.

    It's the toxic mix of giving pensioners an 8% increase and cutting UC for the poorest in society.

    There's many Tory MPs who have gone on the record to oppose the UC cut, this is going to get messy for Sunak.
    Pensioners won't get their 8% though. Sunak isn't an idiot, he will find a fudge so they get 3% just like the NHS.
    A betting market on this would be interesting. I think it is more likely pensioners get the 8% than most on here.
    I will be upset if I don't get my 8%.
    You better hope Scotland never goes Indy then.
    Thanks. We almost made it an entire page without it being mentioned. :smiley:
    The morning thread is on Scotland.

    It is the first of five Scotland threads I plan to publish on Scotland during Mike's holiday.
    I hope you have a nice sturdy tin helmet ready to protect yourself from ballistic turnips.
    He’ll only get angry if he doesn’t get his 8%
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,059

    felix said:

    Not sure if polling on UC favours keeping it high. Lots of Red Wall Tory voters are of the type who are not massively sympathetic to welfare. Of course Twitter is another matter...

    This the most recent polling on the UC cut.

    38% support the cut.

    39% oppose the cut.

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1429722451064332293
    63% of Tory voters support the cut, 61% of Labour voters and 56% of LD voters oppose the cut.

    However Leave voters are less supportive than Tories of cutting UC, 53% of Leave voters back the cut
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,647
    edited August 2021
    ydoethur said:

    RobD said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    TimT said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    I find this hard to get excited about. Rich people gonna rich. And create employment for Yorkshire's (?) swimming pool industry.

    Yeah. Basically, the Labour MPs and TSE are saying no Conservative MP should spend any money on anything someone can stretch to describe as luxury spending, ever. Only Tory-haters are going to gobble that up.
    I'm not saying that, I hate the politics of envy, is why I can never be a leftie.

    It's the toxic mix of giving pensioners an 8% increase and cutting UC for the poorest in society.

    There's many Tory MPs who have gone on the record to oppose the UC cut, this is going to get messy for Sunak.
    Pensioners won't get their 8% though. Sunak isn't an idiot, he will find a fudge so they get 3% just like the NHS.
    A betting market on this would be interesting. I think it is more likely pensioners get the 8% than most on here.
    I will be upset if I don't get my 8%.
    You better hope Scotland never goes Indy then.
    Thanks. We almost made it an entire page without it being mentioned. :smiley:
    The morning thread is on Scotland.

    It is the first of five Scotland threads I plan to publish on Scotland during Mike's holiday.
    I hope you have a nice sturdy tin helmet ready to protect yourself from ballistic turnips.
    The morning thread requires no tin helmet or body armour.

    I suspect the one about an independent Scotland, the currency, and the role of the Bank of England may attract turnips.
  • rcs1000 said:

    geoffw said:

    Covid bumping steadily along, not growing ("exponentially"). Mainly delta. Could it be that the delta strain has a shorter initial unsymptomatic phase pulling R down to 1?

    Just conjecture.

    It is entirely correct that the asymptomatic period for Delta is shorter than for original and earlier variants. The good news about that, is that it means there is less of a lag between changes in policy and changes in case numbers. (That 10 to 14 day lag earlier in the pandemic resulted in lots of gross stupidity by members of the punditry.)

    That being said, the big problem with Delta is that those infected exhibit extremely high levels of viral shedding - up to 1,000x more than with Alpha. It therefore has the ability to break through vaccines (the more of a dose of Covid you get, the less warning your immune system has), and it also spreads much more quickly.

    A school with one pupil with Alpha means they might be putting out a viral load of 1. If they have 20 students with Delta, that's a viral load of 20,000 that's being distributed around.

    That's going to result in very, very few unvaccinated people avoiding Delta. And it's going to mean those people who do get it (especially if they are older) are more likely to get very sick. (Viral load matters, kids!)

    The good news is that most people who've had the vaccine, so long as they get only a small dose of Delta, will end up with only a bit of the sniffles (or hopefully entirely asymptomatic), and it will have been merely a booster shot. And therefore we can also look forward to Delta burning out quickly, as it simply infects so many people, so quickly.

    My gut is that September and October are going to be a little ugly, and that the government will end up regretting not using the ample vaccine resources the UK has. Really, given the extreme infectiousness of Delta, those who got the mRNA vaccines should be getting an AZ booster, while those that got AZ should get a Moderna/Pfizer one. Likewise, kids should get vaccinated. Even if Delta isn't going to kill them, the vaccine dramatically reduce the amount of time they are infectious to others, protecting other members of the community.
    I mostly agree with the above. But would this be a good moment to remind you of your previous prediction about case numbers by the end of August?

    --AS
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,059
    The Taliban have condemned the U.S. drone strike against Islamic State militants. "It was a clear attack on Afghan territory," they said
    https://twitter.com/PoliticsForAlI/status/1431671901005520904?s=20
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,735
    Never a dull moment in Scotland...


    "SCOTLAND'S coal carrying championship has been held after a five-year hiatus.

    Men, women and children competed in a series of races to carry coal sacks for a kilometre through the Fife village of Kelty."

    https://www.thenational.scot/news/19544588.kelty-coal-carrying-championship-returns-five-years/
  • He could always go speak at JezFest / The World Transformed instead.

    Stop laughing at the back
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,373

    32,406 cases, 133 deaths

    Cases down in England (for now...)

    This is why a grateful nation should be funding Rishi's swimming pool.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,059
    edited August 2021
    Not a good look from Starmer. Cameron was not afraid to give Boris a speaking slot, Brown was not afraid to give David Miliband a speaking slot, nor was Major afraid to give Portillo and Heseltine speaking slots even though they were potential future leadership rivals and good speakers who could have overshadowed them
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 3,705

    Never a dull moment in Scotland...


    "SCOTLAND'S coal carrying championship has been held after a five-year hiatus.

    Men, women and children competed in a series of races to carry coal sacks for a kilometre through the Fife village of Kelty."

    https://www.thenational.scot/news/19544588.kelty-coal-carrying-championship-returns-five-years/

    Coal? Don't mention to the Scottish Greens, they'll do their nut in.
  • HYUFD said:

    Not a good look from Starmer. Cameron was not afraid to give Boris a speaking slot, Brown was not afraid to give David Miliband a speaking slot, nor was Major afraid to give Portillo and Heseltine speaking slots even though they were potential future leadership rivals and good speakers who could have overshadowed them
    Burnham has spent the last many weeks publicly undermining Starmer. He should challenge him for the leadership if he thinks he is so rubbish
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,188

    rcs1000 said:

    geoffw said:

    Covid bumping steadily along, not growing ("exponentially"). Mainly delta. Could it be that the delta strain has a shorter initial unsymptomatic phase pulling R down to 1?

    Just conjecture.

    It is entirely correct that the asymptomatic period for Delta is shorter than for original and earlier variants. The good news about that, is that it means there is less of a lag between changes in policy and changes in case numbers. (That 10 to 14 day lag earlier in the pandemic resulted in lots of gross stupidity by members of the punditry.)

    That being said, the big problem with Delta is that those infected exhibit extremely high levels of viral shedding - up to 1,000x more than with Alpha. It therefore has the ability to break through vaccines (the more of a dose of Covid you get, the less warning your immune system has), and it also spreads much more quickly.

    A school with one pupil with Alpha means they might be putting out a viral load of 1. If they have 20 students with Delta, that's a viral load of 20,000 that's being distributed around.

    That's going to result in very, very few unvaccinated people avoiding Delta. And it's going to mean those people who do get it (especially if they are older) are more likely to get very sick. (Viral load matters, kids!)

    The good news is that most people who've had the vaccine, so long as they get only a small dose of Delta, will end up with only a bit of the sniffles (or hopefully entirely asymptomatic), and it will have been merely a booster shot. And therefore we can also look forward to Delta burning out quickly, as it simply infects so many people, so quickly.

    My gut is that September and October are going to be a little ugly, and that the government will end up regretting not using the ample vaccine resources the UK has. Really, given the extreme infectiousness of Delta, those who got the mRNA vaccines should be getting an AZ booster, while those that got AZ should get a Moderna/Pfizer one. Likewise, kids should get vaccinated. Even if Delta isn't going to kill them, the vaccine dramatically reduce the amount of time they are infectious to others, protecting other members of the community.
    I mostly agree with the above. But would this be a good moment to remind you of your previous prediction about case numbers by the end of August?

    --AS
    I change my mind when the facts change, what do you do?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,854
    HYUFD said:

    RobD said:

    Labour tried the same all the time with Cameron / Osborne anytime they announced "cuts".

    I am not sure the politics of envy plays very well. If people are buying stuff with their own money they made it doesn't seem to go down badly, it is when they are using tax payers money to enrich themselves that the shit hits the fan.

    It's not his money. He's a pauper compared to his wife. ;)
    The other thing is, it isn't a secret they are mega wealthy. Again it plays badly if you claim i'm just a poor boy, from a poor family....with two kitchens and domestic staff....

    Nobody cared Mrs C was very wealthy (again must richer than Dave), it wasn't a secret she was from a wealthy family and also very successful in her own right.
    Sunak's wife has a net worth of £430 million, Sunak himself has a net worth of £200 million most of it from shares in his father in laws companies as well as his time at Goldman Sachs.

    They make the Camerons look like paupers in comparison
    In other words, there is a massive conflict of interest with him being CoE, no?
  • The computer systems controlling signs on smart motorways have been nicknamed “Die Now” by staff after they became “unusable” three times in just four days, The Telegraph can reveal.

    Signals across hundreds of miles of the M1, M4, M5 and M62 could not be changed prompting a “horrified” whistleblower at National Highways, the rebranded Highways England, to warn “someone is going to get killed”.

    The insider told how the roads equivalent of air traffic control had repeatedly “gone down” last April, just as Grant Shapps, the Transport Secretary, announced the continued roll-out of smart motorways.

    A Freedom of Information request to National Highways, the Government-owned company, shows two control centres covering Yorkshire, the North East and South West of England were hit by a computer “bug” and server problem disabling digital control of signs for a total of eight hours.

    Dynac, the software used to set signs and signals, including the red X on overhead gantries which closes lanes in which motorists have broken down, was rendered “unusable”, according to documents.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/08/28/smart-motorways-systems-dubbed-die-now-crashed-three-times-just/
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,845
    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    DougSeal said:

    32,406 cases, 133 deaths

    Cases down in England (for now...)

    England down 4 days in a row vs previous week - so the 7 day average has started trending down...
    The rate of growth in Scotland has also slowed - so fingers crossed…
    My Scottish boss is worried as hell about the festival being a super spreader event.
    It was much quieter than normal and nearly all the fringe stuff was outside in the street. I think it will probably be ok although the percentage of masks on the Royal Mile has declined precipitously over the last fortnight.
    numbers are still horrendous
    They have been growing very rapidly which is always troubling but our infection rate is still roughly half that of England. I don't think we should be panicking. We need to get through this and start working and living again.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,059
    France, new IPSOS poll with Barnier as LR candidate

    Macron 25%
    Le Pen 23%
    Jadot 11%
    Barnier 11%
    Hidalgo 9%
    Melenchon 8%
    https://twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/1431595945259634699?s=20

    With Bertrand as LR candidate

    Macron 23%
    Le Pen 21%
    Bertrand 15%
    Jadot 11%
    Hidalgo 9%
    Melenchon 7%
    https://twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/1431594420009410564?s=20
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,420
    HYUFD said:

    Not a good look from Starmer. Cameron was not afraid to give Boris a speaking slot, Brown was not afraid to give David Miliband a speaking slot, nor was Major afraid to give Portillo and Heseltine speaking slots even though they were potential future leadership rivals and good speakers who could have overshadowed them
    How could you refuse to give your *cabinet ministers* a slot and retain any credibility at all?

    Cameron and Johnson I will give you, but that is also a little different. Johnson winning London was the harbinger that the Tories could - and would - win again. Burnham winning Manchester isn’t in quite the smae league.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 10,770

    HYUFD said:

    Not a good look from Starmer. Cameron was not afraid to give Boris a speaking slot, Brown was not afraid to give David Miliband a speaking slot, nor was Major afraid to give Portillo and Heseltine speaking slots even though they were potential future leadership rivals and good speakers who could have overshadowed them
    Burnham has spent the last many weeks publicly undermining Starmer. He should challenge him for the leadership if he thinks he is so rubbish
    He can't though. He's not an MP.

    It's nailed on that the left will try to do daft stuff at the party conference. Burnham won't even turn up.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,854

    Never a dull moment in Scotland...


    "SCOTLAND'S coal carrying championship has been held after a five-year hiatus.

    Men, women and children competed in a series of races to carry coal sacks for a kilometre through the Fife village of Kelty."

    https://www.thenational.scot/news/19544588.kelty-coal-carrying-championship-returns-five-years/

    Coal? Don't mention to the Scottish Greens, they'll do their nut in.
    Sustainable coal. They save it for next year.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,059
    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    Not a good look from Starmer. Cameron was not afraid to give Boris a speaking slot, Brown was not afraid to give David Miliband a speaking slot, nor was Major afraid to give Portillo and Heseltine speaking slots even though they were potential future leadership rivals and good speakers who could have overshadowed them
    How could you refuse to give your *cabinet ministers* a slot and retain any credibility at all?

    Cameron and Johnson I will give you, but that is also a little different. Johnson winning London was the harbinger that the Tories could - and would - win again. Burnham winning Manchester isn’t in quite the smae league.
    Burnham is a Mayor of a major city like Boris and an ex Cabinet Minister too which Boris was not at that stage.

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,420

    Never a dull moment in Scotland...


    "SCOTLAND'S coal carrying championship has been held after a five-year hiatus.

    Men, women and children competed in a series of races to carry coal sacks for a kilometre through the Fife village of Kelty."

    https://www.thenational.scot/news/19544588.kelty-coal-carrying-championship-returns-five-years/

    Coal? Don't mention to the Scottish Greens, they'll do their nut in.
    Nuts? They’re almost as environmentally unfriendly as oil.

    Proper greens eat grass.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,373
    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    Not a good look from Starmer. Cameron was not afraid to give Boris a speaking slot, Brown was not afraid to give David Miliband a speaking slot, nor was Major afraid to give Portillo and Heseltine speaking slots even though they were potential future leadership rivals and good speakers who could have overshadowed them
    How could you refuse to give your *cabinet ministers* a slot and retain any credibility at all?

    Cameron and Johnson I will give you, but that is also a little different. Johnson winning London was the harbinger that the Tories could - and would - win again. Burnham winning Manchester isn’t in quite the smae league.
    HYUFD and BigG are nonetheless outraged.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,059
    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    RobD said:

    Labour tried the same all the time with Cameron / Osborne anytime they announced "cuts".

    I am not sure the politics of envy plays very well. If people are buying stuff with their own money they made it doesn't seem to go down badly, it is when they are using tax payers money to enrich themselves that the shit hits the fan.

    It's not his money. He's a pauper compared to his wife. ;)
    The other thing is, it isn't a secret they are mega wealthy. Again it plays badly if you claim i'm just a poor boy, from a poor family....with two kitchens and domestic staff....

    Nobody cared Mrs C was very wealthy (again must richer than Dave), it wasn't a secret she was from a wealthy family and also very successful in her own right.
    Sunak's wife has a net worth of £430 million, Sunak himself has a net worth of £200 million most of it from shares in his father in laws companies as well as his time at Goldman Sachs.

    They make the Camerons look like paupers in comparison
    In other words, there is a massive conflict of interest with him being CoE, no?
    No, not unless he pursues tax policies relating to his father in law's companies
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,854
    ydoethur said:

    Never a dull moment in Scotland...


    "SCOTLAND'S coal carrying championship has been held after a five-year hiatus.

    Men, women and children competed in a series of races to carry coal sacks for a kilometre through the Fife village of Kelty."

    https://www.thenational.scot/news/19544588.kelty-coal-carrying-championship-returns-five-years/

    Coal? Don't mention to the Scottish Greens, they'll do their nut in.
    Nuts? They’re almost as environmentally unfriendly as oil.

    Proper greens eat grass.
    Oats, bere, barley, wheat ...
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,420
    edited August 2021
    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    Not a good look from Starmer. Cameron was not afraid to give Boris a speaking slot, Brown was not afraid to give David Miliband a speaking slot, nor was Major afraid to give Portillo and Heseltine speaking slots even though they were potential future leadership rivals and good speakers who could have overshadowed them
    How could you refuse to give your *cabinet ministers* a slot and retain any credibility at all?

    Cameron and Johnson I will give you, but that is also a little different. Johnson winning London was the harbinger that the Tories could - and would - win again. Burnham winning Manchester isn’t in quite the smae league.
    Burnham is a Mayor of a major city like Boris and an ex Cabinet Minister too which Boris was not at that stage.

    One thing people forget is he was a pretty ordinary cabinet minister.

    OK, he wasn’t Williamson, Patel or Raab but he was no Rab Butler either.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,059

    HYUFD said:

    Not a good look from Starmer. Cameron was not afraid to give Boris a speaking slot, Brown was not afraid to give David Miliband a speaking slot, nor was Major afraid to give Portillo and Heseltine speaking slots even though they were potential future leadership rivals and good speakers who could have overshadowed them
    Burnham has spent the last many weeks publicly undermining Starmer. He should challenge him for the leadership if he thinks he is so rubbish
    Burnham will likely stand for Parliament at the next general election.

    If Starmer loses and does not resign I expect Burnham would challenge him for the Labour leadership then
  • ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    Not a good look from Starmer. Cameron was not afraid to give Boris a speaking slot, Brown was not afraid to give David Miliband a speaking slot, nor was Major afraid to give Portillo and Heseltine speaking slots even though they were potential future leadership rivals and good speakers who could have overshadowed them
    How could you refuse to give your *cabinet ministers* a slot and retain any credibility at all?

    Cameron and Johnson I will give you, but that is also a little different. Johnson winning London was the harbinger that the Tories could - and would - win again. Burnham winning Manchester isn’t in quite the smae league.
    HYUFD and BigG are nonetheless outraged.
    I am completely indifferent
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,420
    Carnyx said:

    ydoethur said:

    Never a dull moment in Scotland...


    "SCOTLAND'S coal carrying championship has been held after a five-year hiatus.

    Men, women and children competed in a series of races to carry coal sacks for a kilometre through the Fife village of Kelty."

    https://www.thenational.scot/news/19544588.kelty-coal-carrying-championship-returns-five-years/

    Coal? Don't mention to the Scottish Greens, they'll do their nut in.
    Nuts? They’re almost as environmentally unfriendly as oil.

    Proper greens eat grass.
    Oats, bere, barley, wheat ...
    The last one brings us to full flour.
  • rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    geoffw said:

    Covid bumping steadily along, not growing ("exponentially"). Mainly delta. Could it be that the delta strain has a shorter initial unsymptomatic phase pulling R down to 1?

    Just conjecture.

    It is entirely correct that the asymptomatic period for Delta is shorter than for original and earlier variants. The good news about that, is that it means there is less of a lag between changes in policy and changes in case numbers. (That 10 to 14 day lag earlier in the pandemic resulted in lots of gross stupidity by members of the punditry.)

    That being said, the big problem with Delta is that those infected exhibit extremely high levels of viral shedding - up to 1,000x more than with Alpha. It therefore has the ability to break through vaccines (the more of a dose of Covid you get, the less warning your immune system has), and it also spreads much more quickly.

    A school with one pupil with Alpha means they might be putting out a viral load of 1. If they have 20 students with Delta, that's a viral load of 20,000 that's being distributed around.

    That's going to result in very, very few unvaccinated people avoiding Delta. And it's going to mean those people who do get it (especially if they are older) are more likely to get very sick. (Viral load matters, kids!)

    The good news is that most people who've had the vaccine, so long as they get only a small dose of Delta, will end up with only a bit of the sniffles (or hopefully entirely asymptomatic), and it will have been merely a booster shot. And therefore we can also look forward to Delta burning out quickly, as it simply infects so many people, so quickly.

    My gut is that September and October are going to be a little ugly, and that the government will end up regretting not using the ample vaccine resources the UK has. Really, given the extreme infectiousness of Delta, those who got the mRNA vaccines should be getting an AZ booster, while those that got AZ should get a Moderna/Pfizer one. Likewise, kids should get vaccinated. Even if Delta isn't going to kill them, the vaccine dramatically reduce the amount of time they are infectious to others, protecting other members of the community.
    I mostly agree with the above. But would this be a good moment to remind you of your previous prediction about case numbers by the end of August?

    --AS
    I change my mind when the facts change, what do you do?
    I try not to make predictions when there is great uncertainty around the outcome.

    I think the scenario you suggest is highly plausible, but so are others (both better and worse), and I think we simply don't have enough information to discriminate. I agree with you about vaccination.

    --AS
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 10,770
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Not a good look from Starmer. Cameron was not afraid to give Boris a speaking slot, Brown was not afraid to give David Miliband a speaking slot, nor was Major afraid to give Portillo and Heseltine speaking slots even though they were potential future leadership rivals and good speakers who could have overshadowed them
    Burnham has spent the last many weeks publicly undermining Starmer. He should challenge him for the leadership if he thinks he is so rubbish
    Burnham will likely stand for Parliament at the next general election.

    If Starmer loses and does not resign I expect Burnham would challenge him for the Labour leadership then
    How likely? - I see a bet here.
  • Philippines reports 19,441 new coronavirus cases, the biggest one-day increase on record, and 167 new deaths
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,854
    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    RobD said:

    Labour tried the same all the time with Cameron / Osborne anytime they announced "cuts".

    I am not sure the politics of envy plays very well. If people are buying stuff with their own money they made it doesn't seem to go down badly, it is when they are using tax payers money to enrich themselves that the shit hits the fan.

    It's not his money. He's a pauper compared to his wife. ;)
    The other thing is, it isn't a secret they are mega wealthy. Again it plays badly if you claim i'm just a poor boy, from a poor family....with two kitchens and domestic staff....

    Nobody cared Mrs C was very wealthy (again must richer than Dave), it wasn't a secret she was from a wealthy family and also very successful in her own right.
    Sunak's wife has a net worth of £430 million, Sunak himself has a net worth of £200 million most of it from shares in his father in laws companies as well as his time at Goldman Sachs.

    They make the Camerons look like paupers in comparison
    In other words, there is a massive conflict of interest with him being CoE, no?
    No, not unless he pursues tax policies relating to his father in law's companies
    What tax policies don't affect substantial companies? Or the income to be had from them? Or the pay they have to pay their workers? And so on.

    I'm not saying he is doing anything dodgy - but it is the principle of the thing. Thew sort of thijng one would not permit in other walks of life, such as charity trustees.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,420
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Not a good look from Starmer. Cameron was not afraid to give Boris a speaking slot, Brown was not afraid to give David Miliband a speaking slot, nor was Major afraid to give Portillo and Heseltine speaking slots even though they were potential future leadership rivals and good speakers who could have overshadowed them
    Burnham has spent the last many weeks publicly undermining Starmer. He should challenge him for the leadership if he thinks he is so rubbish
    Burnham will likely stand for Parliament at the next general election.

    If Starmer loses and does not resign I expect Burnham would challenge him for the Labour leadership then
    He has to resign as Mayor to do so, don’t forget.

    I don’t therefore see him standing for Parliament unless Labour are set to win.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,202

    felix said:

    Not sure if polling on UC favours keeping it high. Lots of Red Wall Tory voters are of the type who are not massively sympathetic to welfare. Of course Twitter is another matter...

    This the most recent polling on the UC cut.

    38% support the cut.

    39% oppose the cut.

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1429722451064332293
    Remarkably evenly divided. Exceptions are Leaver support phasing out the £20. London / Scotland opposed, other regions not. Under 25s opposed, the rest not.


  • rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    geoffw said:

    Covid bumping steadily along, not growing ("exponentially"). Mainly delta. Could it be that the delta strain has a shorter initial unsymptomatic phase pulling R down to 1?

    Just conjecture.

    It is entirely correct that the asymptomatic period for Delta is shorter than for original and earlier variants. The good news about that, is that it means there is less of a lag between changes in policy and changes in case numbers. (That 10 to 14 day lag earlier in the pandemic resulted in lots of gross stupidity by members of the punditry.)

    That being said, the big problem with Delta is that those infected exhibit extremely high levels of viral shedding - up to 1,000x more than with Alpha. It therefore has the ability to break through vaccines (the more of a dose of Covid you get, the less warning your immune system has), and it also spreads much more quickly.

    A school with one pupil with Alpha means they might be putting out a viral load of 1. If they have 20 students with Delta, that's a viral load of 20,000 that's being distributed around.

    That's going to result in very, very few unvaccinated people avoiding Delta. And it's going to mean those people who do get it (especially if they are older) are more likely to get very sick. (Viral load matters, kids!)

    The good news is that most people who've had the vaccine, so long as they get only a small dose of Delta, will end up with only a bit of the sniffles (or hopefully entirely asymptomatic), and it will have been merely a booster shot. And therefore we can also look forward to Delta burning out quickly, as it simply infects so many people, so quickly.

    My gut is that September and October are going to be a little ugly, and that the government will end up regretting not using the ample vaccine resources the UK has. Really, given the extreme infectiousness of Delta, those who got the mRNA vaccines should be getting an AZ booster, while those that got AZ should get a Moderna/Pfizer one. Likewise, kids should get vaccinated. Even if Delta isn't going to kill them, the vaccine dramatically reduce the amount of time they are infectious to others, protecting other members of the community.
    I mostly agree with the above. But would this be a good moment to remind you of your previous prediction about case numbers by the end of August?

    --AS
    I change my mind when the facts change, what do you do?
    I try not to make predictions when there is great uncertainty around the outcome.

    I think the scenario you suggest is highly plausible, but so are others (both better and worse), and I think we simply don't have enough information to discriminate. I agree with you about vaccination.

    --AS
    "A reasonable worst-case scenario could see protection below 50% for the elderly & healthcare workers by winter. With high levels of infection in the UK... this scenario could mean increased hospitalisations and deaths"
    @timspector
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,845

    ydoethur said:

    RobD said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    TimT said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    I find this hard to get excited about. Rich people gonna rich. And create employment for Yorkshire's (?) swimming pool industry.

    Yeah. Basically, the Labour MPs and TSE are saying no Conservative MP should spend any money on anything someone can stretch to describe as luxury spending, ever. Only Tory-haters are going to gobble that up.
    I'm not saying that, I hate the politics of envy, is why I can never be a leftie.

    It's the toxic mix of giving pensioners an 8% increase and cutting UC for the poorest in society.

    There's many Tory MPs who have gone on the record to oppose the UC cut, this is going to get messy for Sunak.
    Pensioners won't get their 8% though. Sunak isn't an idiot, he will find a fudge so they get 3% just like the NHS.
    A betting market on this would be interesting. I think it is more likely pensioners get the 8% than most on here.
    I will be upset if I don't get my 8%.
    You better hope Scotland never goes Indy then.
    Thanks. We almost made it an entire page without it being mentioned. :smiley:
    The morning thread is on Scotland.

    It is the first of five Scotland threads I plan to publish on Scotland during Mike's holiday.
    I hope you have a nice sturdy tin helmet ready to protect yourself from ballistic turnips.
    The morning thread requires no tin helmet or body armour.

    I suspect the one about an independent Scotland, the currency, and the role of the Bank of England may attract turnips.
    And the odd Swede as well.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 10,770
    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Not a good look from Starmer. Cameron was not afraid to give Boris a speaking slot, Brown was not afraid to give David Miliband a speaking slot, nor was Major afraid to give Portillo and Heseltine speaking slots even though they were potential future leadership rivals and good speakers who could have overshadowed them
    Burnham has spent the last many weeks publicly undermining Starmer. He should challenge him for the leadership if he thinks he is so rubbish
    Burnham will likely stand for Parliament at the next general election.

    If Starmer loses and does not resign I expect Burnham would challenge him for the Labour leadership then
    He has to resign as Mayor to do so, don’t forget.

    I don’t therefore see him standing for Parliament unless Labour are set to win.
    "unless Labour are set to win"

    Jim-jimminy, jim jim cheroo!
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,420
    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    RobD said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    TimT said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    I find this hard to get excited about. Rich people gonna rich. And create employment for Yorkshire's (?) swimming pool industry.

    Yeah. Basically, the Labour MPs and TSE are saying no Conservative MP should spend any money on anything someone can stretch to describe as luxury spending, ever. Only Tory-haters are going to gobble that up.
    I'm not saying that, I hate the politics of envy, is why I can never be a leftie.

    It's the toxic mix of giving pensioners an 8% increase and cutting UC for the poorest in society.

    There's many Tory MPs who have gone on the record to oppose the UC cut, this is going to get messy for Sunak.
    Pensioners won't get their 8% though. Sunak isn't an idiot, he will find a fudge so they get 3% just like the NHS.
    A betting market on this would be interesting. I think it is more likely pensioners get the 8% than most on here.
    I will be upset if I don't get my 8%.
    You better hope Scotland never goes Indy then.
    Thanks. We almost made it an entire page without it being mentioned. :smiley:
    The morning thread is on Scotland.

    It is the first of five Scotland threads I plan to publish on Scotland during Mike's holiday.
    I hope you have a nice sturdy tin helmet ready to protect yourself from ballistic turnips.
    The morning thread requires no tin helmet or body armour.

    I suspect the one about an independent Scotland, the currency, and the role of the Bank of England may attract turnips.
    And the odd Swede as well.
    Doesn’t sound as though he will be attracted to it. Repelled, more like.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,735

    rcs1000 said:

    geoffw said:

    Covid bumping steadily along, not growing ("exponentially"). Mainly delta. Could it be that the delta strain has a shorter initial unsymptomatic phase pulling R down to 1?

    Just conjecture.

    It is entirely correct that the asymptomatic period for Delta is shorter than for original and earlier variants. The good news about that, is that it means there is less of a lag between changes in policy and changes in case numbers. (That 10 to 14 day lag earlier in the pandemic resulted in lots of gross stupidity by members of the punditry.)

    That being said, the big problem with Delta is that those infected exhibit extremely high levels of viral shedding - up to 1,000x more than with Alpha. It therefore has the ability to break through vaccines (the more of a dose of Covid you get, the less warning your immune system has), and it also spreads much more quickly.

    A school with one pupil with Alpha means they might be putting out a viral load of 1. If they have 20 students with Delta, that's a viral load of 20,000 that's being distributed around.

    That's going to result in very, very few unvaccinated people avoiding Delta. And it's going to mean those people who do get it (especially if they are older) are more likely to get very sick. (Viral load matters, kids!)

    The good news is that most people who've had the vaccine, so long as they get only a small dose of Delta, will end up with only a bit of the sniffles (or hopefully entirely asymptomatic), and it will have been merely a booster shot. And therefore we can also look forward to Delta burning out quickly, as it simply infects so many people, so quickly.

    My gut is that September and October are going to be a little ugly, and that the government will end up regretting not using the ample vaccine resources the UK has. Really, given the extreme infectiousness of Delta, those who got the mRNA vaccines should be getting an AZ booster, while those that got AZ should get a Moderna/Pfizer one. Likewise, kids should get vaccinated. Even if Delta isn't going to kill them, the vaccine dramatically reduce the amount of time they are infectious to others, protecting other members of the community.
    I mostly agree with the above. But would this be a good moment to remind you of your previous prediction about case numbers by the end of August?

    --AS
    There's an interesting piece in this week's Spectator from Israel, looking at the situation there and the plans for third dose booster. One of the policy types involves says the country is doing the world a favour by testing the idea.
  • ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Not a good look from Starmer. Cameron was not afraid to give Boris a speaking slot, Brown was not afraid to give David Miliband a speaking slot, nor was Major afraid to give Portillo and Heseltine speaking slots even though they were potential future leadership rivals and good speakers who could have overshadowed them
    Burnham has spent the last many weeks publicly undermining Starmer. He should challenge him for the leadership if he thinks he is so rubbish
    Burnham will likely stand for Parliament at the next general election.

    If Starmer loses and does not resign I expect Burnham would challenge him for the Labour leadership then
    He has to resign as Mayor to do so, don’t forget.

    I don’t therefore see him standing for Parliament unless Labour are set to win.
    Surely it makes more sense for him to stand for Parliament if Labour are set to lose?

    Then he can get into Parliament just as we face Tears for Kiers and the inevitable leadership election that follows?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,059
    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Not a good look from Starmer. Cameron was not afraid to give Boris a speaking slot, Brown was not afraid to give David Miliband a speaking slot, nor was Major afraid to give Portillo and Heseltine speaking slots even though they were potential future leadership rivals and good speakers who could have overshadowed them
    Burnham has spent the last many weeks publicly undermining Starmer. He should challenge him for the leadership if he thinks he is so rubbish
    Burnham will likely stand for Parliament at the next general election.

    If Starmer loses and does not resign I expect Burnham would challenge him for the Labour leadership then
    He has to resign as Mayor to do so, don’t forget.

    I don’t therefore see him standing for Parliament unless Labour are set to win.
    Which he would likely do having done 6 years as Mayor in 2023, 7 by 2024.

    Why would he only want to stand if Labour are set to win? That would mean Starmer would become PM and at best he might get a Cabinet role.

    Most likely he would look for a safe Labour seat in Greater Manchester, hope Starmer loses then look to succeed him as Leader of the Opposition and become PM at the general election after that

  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,541
    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    RobD said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    TimT said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    I find this hard to get excited about. Rich people gonna rich. And create employment for Yorkshire's (?) swimming pool industry.

    Yeah. Basically, the Labour MPs and TSE are saying no Conservative MP should spend any money on anything someone can stretch to describe as luxury spending, ever. Only Tory-haters are going to gobble that up.
    I'm not saying that, I hate the politics of envy, is why I can never be a leftie.

    It's the toxic mix of giving pensioners an 8% increase and cutting UC for the poorest in society.

    There's many Tory MPs who have gone on the record to oppose the UC cut, this is going to get messy for Sunak.
    Pensioners won't get their 8% though. Sunak isn't an idiot, he will find a fudge so they get 3% just like the NHS.
    A betting market on this would be interesting. I think it is more likely pensioners get the 8% than most on here.
    I will be upset if I don't get my 8%.
    You better hope Scotland never goes Indy then.
    Thanks. We almost made it an entire page without it being mentioned. :smiley:
    The morning thread is on Scotland.

    It is the first of five Scotland threads I plan to publish on Scotland during Mike's holiday.
    I hope you have a nice sturdy tin helmet ready to protect yourself from ballistic turnips.
    The morning thread requires no tin helmet or body armour.

    I suspect the one about an independent Scotland, the currency, and the role of the Bank of England may attract turnips.
    And the odd Swede as well.
    Nice! Why didn’t I think of that before.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,854
    ydoethur said:

    Carnyx said:

    ydoethur said:

    Never a dull moment in Scotland...


    "SCOTLAND'S coal carrying championship has been held after a five-year hiatus.

    Men, women and children competed in a series of races to carry coal sacks for a kilometre through the Fife village of Kelty."

    https://www.thenational.scot/news/19544588.kelty-coal-carrying-championship-returns-five-years/

    Coal? Don't mention to the Scottish Greens, they'll do their nut in.
    Nuts? They’re almost as environmentally unfriendly as oil.

    Proper greens eat grass.
    Oats, bere, barley, wheat ...
    The last one brings us to full flour.
    Indeed, without even making a meal of it.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    edited August 2021
    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    Not a good look from Starmer. Cameron was not afraid to give Boris a speaking slot, Brown was not afraid to give David Miliband a speaking slot, nor was Major afraid to give Portillo and Heseltine speaking slots even though they were potential future leadership rivals and good speakers who could have overshadowed them
    How could you refuse to give your *cabinet ministers* a slot and retain any credibility at all?

    Cameron and Johnson I will give you, but that is also a little different. Johnson winning London was the harbinger that the Tories could - and would - win again. Burnham winning Manchester isn’t in quite the smae league.
    I saw Johnson speak at Tory Conference as London Mayor, not as a Cabinet Minister.

    It was besides Cameron's own speech easily the most hotly anticipated speech of the entire Conference. Even more than Chancellor Osborne or anyone else.

    Its a part of the reason why I never ruled out the idea he could become party leader and PM.

    There's no reason that Burnham and Sadiq Khan couldn't or shouldn't have their own speeches.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,845
    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    RobD said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    TimT said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    I find this hard to get excited about. Rich people gonna rich. And create employment for Yorkshire's (?) swimming pool industry.

    Yeah. Basically, the Labour MPs and TSE are saying no Conservative MP should spend any money on anything someone can stretch to describe as luxury spending, ever. Only Tory-haters are going to gobble that up.
    I'm not saying that, I hate the politics of envy, is why I can never be a leftie.

    It's the toxic mix of giving pensioners an 8% increase and cutting UC for the poorest in society.

    There's many Tory MPs who have gone on the record to oppose the UC cut, this is going to get messy for Sunak.
    Pensioners won't get their 8% though. Sunak isn't an idiot, he will find a fudge so they get 3% just like the NHS.
    A betting market on this would be interesting. I think it is more likely pensioners get the 8% than most on here.
    I will be upset if I don't get my 8%.
    You better hope Scotland never goes Indy then.
    Thanks. We almost made it an entire page without it being mentioned. :smiley:
    The morning thread is on Scotland.

    It is the first of five Scotland threads I plan to publish on Scotland during Mike's holiday.
    I hope you have a nice sturdy tin helmet ready to protect yourself from ballistic turnips.
    The morning thread requires no tin helmet or body armour.

    I suspect the one about an independent Scotland, the currency, and the role of the Bank of England may attract turnips.
    And the odd Swede as well.
    Doesn’t sound as though he will be attracted to it. Repelled, more like.
    Still got the makings of a good scotch broth.
  • Anyway. Anyone watch F1 qualy from Spa? Horrendous weather there (as it has been for days), Lando smashed into the wall after being dominant all day, and George Russell sticks a Williams onto P2.

    With Bottarse only P8 and a 5 place penalty from Hungary's bowl-a-rama making him start P13, you have to ask what is holding Toto Wolff back from making the switch.

    My guess is that it's already been made; it's just the announcement they're holding back on.
    Woolf wants Bottas to be able to be certain of a soft landing elsewhere (probably at Alfa Romeo), so he's holding back until that's sorted out.

    It's pure guesswork, but I expect Raikkonen to announce retirement from F1 just before the race at Monza, then Alfa Romeo to announce Bottas is joining them, and Woolf to announce Russell is joining Mercedes.

    Williams will confirm Latifi for 2022, plus - hmm - either Hulkenberg or De Vries?
    Having now watched the interviews afterwards from the Williams and Mercedes team bosses it is absolutely clear that the deal is done.
  • rcs1000 said:

    geoffw said:

    Covid bumping steadily along, not growing ("exponentially"). Mainly delta. Could it be that the delta strain has a shorter initial unsymptomatic phase pulling R down to 1?

    Just conjecture.

    It is entirely correct that the asymptomatic period for Delta is shorter than for original and earlier variants. The good news about that, is that it means there is less of a lag between changes in policy and changes in case numbers. (That 10 to 14 day lag earlier in the pandemic resulted in lots of gross stupidity by members of the punditry.)

    That being said, the big problem with Delta is that those infected exhibit extremely high levels of viral shedding - up to 1,000x more than with Alpha. It therefore has the ability to break through vaccines (the more of a dose of Covid you get, the less warning your immune system has), and it also spreads much more quickly.

    A school with one pupil with Alpha means they might be putting out a viral load of 1. If they have 20 students with Delta, that's a viral load of 20,000 that's being distributed around.

    That's going to result in very, very few unvaccinated people avoiding Delta. And it's going to mean those people who do get it (especially if they are older) are more likely to get very sick. (Viral load matters, kids!)

    The good news is that most people who've had the vaccine, so long as they get only a small dose of Delta, will end up with only a bit of the sniffles (or hopefully entirely asymptomatic), and it will have been merely a booster shot. And therefore we can also look forward to Delta burning out quickly, as it simply infects so many people, so quickly.

    My gut is that September and October are going to be a little ugly, and that the government will end up regretting not using the ample vaccine resources the UK has. Really, given the extreme infectiousness of Delta, those who got the mRNA vaccines should be getting an AZ booster, while those that got AZ should get a Moderna/Pfizer one. Likewise, kids should get vaccinated. Even if Delta isn't going to kill them, the vaccine dramatically reduce the amount of time they are infectious to others, protecting other members of the community.
    I mostly agree with the above. But would this be a good moment to remind you of your previous prediction about case numbers by the end of August?

    --AS
    There's an interesting piece in this week's Spectator from Israel, looking at the situation there and the plans for third dose booster. One of the policy types involves says the country is doing the world a favour by testing the idea.
    That's probably true, but I will say that Israel's data has been pretty mixed (in terms of accuracy) to date. Early in the pandemic we saw several releases that suggested rather contradictory things (near-perfect protection against infection, vs not; near-perfect protection against death, vs not; waning infection -- I haven't yet seen one that contradicts that, but wouldn't be surprised). They seemed rather poorly-controlled cohort studies. I think their surveillance is not as good as ours and I'm going to be skeptical of their outcomes until confirmed elsewhere.

    --AS
  • ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    Not a good look from Starmer. Cameron was not afraid to give Boris a speaking slot, Brown was not afraid to give David Miliband a speaking slot, nor was Major afraid to give Portillo and Heseltine speaking slots even though they were potential future leadership rivals and good speakers who could have overshadowed them
    How could you refuse to give your *cabinet ministers* a slot and retain any credibility at all?

    Cameron and Johnson I will give you, but that is also a little different. Johnson winning London was the harbinger that the Tories could - and would - win again. Burnham winning Manchester isn’t in quite the smae league.
    I saw Johnson speak at Tory Conference as London Mayor, not as a Cabinet Minister.

    It was besides Cameron's own speech easily the most hotly anticipated speech of the entire Conference. Even more than Chancellor Osborne or anyone else.

    Its a part of the reason why I never ruled out the idea he could become party leader and PM.

    There's no reason that Burnham and Sadiq Khan couldn't or shouldn't have their own speeches.
    If BoJo had made this call you'd be here praising him
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,420
    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Not a good look from Starmer. Cameron was not afraid to give Boris a speaking slot, Brown was not afraid to give David Miliband a speaking slot, nor was Major afraid to give Portillo and Heseltine speaking slots even though they were potential future leadership rivals and good speakers who could have overshadowed them
    Burnham has spent the last many weeks publicly undermining Starmer. He should challenge him for the leadership if he thinks he is so rubbish
    Burnham will likely stand for Parliament at the next general election.

    If Starmer loses and does not resign I expect Burnham would challenge him for the Labour leadership then
    He has to resign as Mayor to do so, don’t forget.

    I don’t therefore see him standing for Parliament unless Labour are set to win.
    Which he would likely do having done 6 years as Mayor in 2023, 7 by 2024.

    Why would he only want to stand if Labour are set to win? That would mean Starmer would become PM and at best he might get a Cabinet role.

    Most likely he would look for a safe Labour seat in Greater Manchester, hope Starmer loses then look to succeed him as Leader of the Opposition and become PM at the general election after that

    Do you really think he would want five years slogging in opposition to become PM at pushing 60?

    Better for Starmer to win, serve three years under him in a big role, and then replace him while in government.

    Otherwise, he’s better off where he is.

    I suppose we shouldn’t underestimate the politician’s appetite for power - but I don’t think he wants to be Leader of the Opposition. If he did, he would have been better off hanging on under Corbyn.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,854
    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    RobD said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    TimT said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    I find this hard to get excited about. Rich people gonna rich. And create employment for Yorkshire's (?) swimming pool industry.

    Yeah. Basically, the Labour MPs and TSE are saying no Conservative MP should spend any money on anything someone can stretch to describe as luxury spending, ever. Only Tory-haters are going to gobble that up.
    I'm not saying that, I hate the politics of envy, is why I can never be a leftie.

    It's the toxic mix of giving pensioners an 8% increase and cutting UC for the poorest in society.

    There's many Tory MPs who have gone on the record to oppose the UC cut, this is going to get messy for Sunak.
    Pensioners won't get their 8% though. Sunak isn't an idiot, he will find a fudge so they get 3% just like the NHS.
    A betting market on this would be interesting. I think it is more likely pensioners get the 8% than most on here.
    I will be upset if I don't get my 8%.
    You better hope Scotland never goes Indy then.
    Thanks. We almost made it an entire page without it being mentioned. :smiley:
    The morning thread is on Scotland.

    It is the first of five Scotland threads I plan to publish on Scotland during Mike's holiday.
    I hope you have a nice sturdy tin helmet ready to protect yourself from ballistic turnips.
    The morning thread requires no tin helmet or body armour.

    I suspect the one about an independent Scotland, the currency, and the role of the Bank of England may attract turnips.
    And the odd Swede as well.
    Doesn’t sound as though he will be attracted to it. Repelled, more like.
    Still got the makings of a good scotch broth.
    Turnips for lamb stew - swedes for the broth (or potato soup, with shank of lamb), I think.
  • MattW said:

    felix said:

    Not sure if polling on UC favours keeping it high. Lots of Red Wall Tory voters are of the type who are not massively sympathetic to welfare. Of course Twitter is another matter...

    This the most recent polling on the UC cut.

    38% support the cut.

    39% oppose the cut.

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1429722451064332293
    Remarkably evenly divided. Exceptions are Leaver support phasing out the £20. London / Scotland opposed, other regions not. Under 25s opposed, the rest not.


    When's the point of no return for the UC cut? Haven't some of the letters already gone out?

    And whilst Rishi can't be held responsible for the family he was born into or the one he married into, there's no escaping the reality that he is a squillionaire and not particularly of the self-made kind. Nothing wrong with that, but if austerity is coming down the line (surely it is?), it makes him a suboptimal choice to front it.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,735

    rcs1000 said:

    geoffw said:

    Covid bumping steadily along, not growing ("exponentially"). Mainly delta. Could it be that the delta strain has a shorter initial unsymptomatic phase pulling R down to 1?

    Just conjecture.

    It is entirely correct that the asymptomatic period for Delta is shorter than for original and earlier variants. The good news about that, is that it means there is less of a lag between changes in policy and changes in case numbers. (That 10 to 14 day lag earlier in the pandemic resulted in lots of gross stupidity by members of the punditry.)

    That being said, the big problem with Delta is that those infected exhibit extremely high levels of viral shedding - up to 1,000x more than with Alpha. It therefore has the ability to break through vaccines (the more of a dose of Covid you get, the less warning your immune system has), and it also spreads much more quickly.

    A school with one pupil with Alpha means they might be putting out a viral load of 1. If they have 20 students with Delta, that's a viral load of 20,000 that's being distributed around.

    That's going to result in very, very few unvaccinated people avoiding Delta. And it's going to mean those people who do get it (especially if they are older) are more likely to get very sick. (Viral load matters, kids!)

    The good news is that most people who've had the vaccine, so long as they get only a small dose of Delta, will end up with only a bit of the sniffles (or hopefully entirely asymptomatic), and it will have been merely a booster shot. And therefore we can also look forward to Delta burning out quickly, as it simply infects so many people, so quickly.

    My gut is that September and October are going to be a little ugly, and that the government will end up regretting not using the ample vaccine resources the UK has. Really, given the extreme infectiousness of Delta, those who got the mRNA vaccines should be getting an AZ booster, while those that got AZ should get a Moderna/Pfizer one. Likewise, kids should get vaccinated. Even if Delta isn't going to kill them, the vaccine dramatically reduce the amount of time they are infectious to others, protecting other members of the community.
    I mostly agree with the above. But would this be a good moment to remind you of your previous prediction about case numbers by the end of August?

    --AS
    There's an interesting piece in this week's Spectator from Israel, looking at the situation there and the plans for third dose booster. One of the policy types involves says the country is doing the world a favour by testing the idea.
    That's probably true, but I will say that Israel's data has been pretty mixed (in terms of accuracy) to date. Early in the pandemic we saw several releases that suggested rather contradictory things (near-perfect protection against infection, vs not; near-perfect protection against death, vs not; waning infection -- I haven't yet seen one that contradicts that, but wouldn't be surprised). They seemed rather poorly-controlled cohort studies. I think their surveillance is not as good as ours and I'm going to be skeptical of their outcomes until confirmed elsewhere.

    --AS
    You may be right, but the article says there has been a lot of cross talk between experts in UK and Israel public health systems as both sides see similarities over the levels of data collection and digitisation of healthcare.
  • RobD said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    TimT said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    I find this hard to get excited about. Rich people gonna rich. And create employment for Yorkshire's (?) swimming pool industry.

    Yeah. Basically, the Labour MPs and TSE are saying no Conservative MP should spend any money on anything someone can stretch to describe as luxury spending, ever. Only Tory-haters are going to gobble that up.
    I'm not saying that, I hate the politics of envy, is why I can never be a leftie.

    It's the toxic mix of giving pensioners an 8% increase and cutting UC for the poorest in society.

    There's many Tory MPs who have gone on the record to oppose the UC cut, this is going to get messy for Sunak.
    Pensioners won't get their 8% though. Sunak isn't an idiot, he will find a fudge so they get 3% just like the NHS.
    A betting market on this would be interesting. I think it is more likely pensioners get the 8% than most on here.
    I will be upset if I don't get my 8%.
    You better hope Scotland never goes Indy then.
    Thanks. We almost made it an entire page without it being mentioned. :smiley:
    The morning thread is on Scotland.

    It is the first of five Scotland threads I plan to publish about Scotland during Mike's holiday.
    Before the F1 excitement I spent a glorious three hours walking down Fraserburgh beach, through Cairnbulg where the east coast becomes the north coast, then down the beach to St Combs before returning along the old railway line back to the Broch. 10 miles of glorious sunshine, almost entirely deserted beaches, zero midges.

    Perhaps there needs to be a thread about why the English tourists all go to Loch Lomond, Skye and the NC500. Aberdeenshire is glorious, more so by not being full of meandering tourists in oversized camper vans.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,845
    Carnyx said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    RobD said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    TimT said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    I find this hard to get excited about. Rich people gonna rich. And create employment for Yorkshire's (?) swimming pool industry.

    Yeah. Basically, the Labour MPs and TSE are saying no Conservative MP should spend any money on anything someone can stretch to describe as luxury spending, ever. Only Tory-haters are going to gobble that up.
    I'm not saying that, I hate the politics of envy, is why I can never be a leftie.

    It's the toxic mix of giving pensioners an 8% increase and cutting UC for the poorest in society.

    There's many Tory MPs who have gone on the record to oppose the UC cut, this is going to get messy for Sunak.
    Pensioners won't get their 8% though. Sunak isn't an idiot, he will find a fudge so they get 3% just like the NHS.
    A betting market on this would be interesting. I think it is more likely pensioners get the 8% than most on here.
    I will be upset if I don't get my 8%.
    You better hope Scotland never goes Indy then.
    Thanks. We almost made it an entire page without it being mentioned. :smiley:
    The morning thread is on Scotland.

    It is the first of five Scotland threads I plan to publish on Scotland during Mike's holiday.
    I hope you have a nice sturdy tin helmet ready to protect yourself from ballistic turnips.
    The morning thread requires no tin helmet or body armour.

    I suspect the one about an independent Scotland, the currency, and the role of the Bank of England may attract turnips.
    And the odd Swede as well.
    Doesn’t sound as though he will be attracted to it. Repelled, more like.
    Still got the makings of a good scotch broth.
    Turnips for lamb stew - swedes for the broth (or potato soup, with shank of lamb), I think.
    My mum would use turnip or swede for her Scotch broth along with plenty of carrot and a bit of boiling beef. Whatever was available, really.
  • gealbhangealbhan Posts: 2,362
    HYUFD said:

    The Taliban have condemned the U.S. drone strike against Islamic State militants. "It was a clear attack on Afghan territory," they said
    https://twitter.com/PoliticsForAlI/status/1431671901005520904?s=20

    File in the ‘they have to say this publicly’ in private they may have supplied the coordinates
  • BoJo takes a stand and kicks out MPs who speak against him

    Praise

    Starmer takes a stand and stops speeches from MPs who speak against him

    Criticism

    WhY IS StARMer SuCh A WEaK LEAder
  • BoJo takes a stand and kicks out MPs who speak against him

    Praise

    Starmer takes a stand and stops speeches from MPs who speak against him

    Criticism

    WhY IS StARMer SuCh A WEaK LEAder

    Is this Starmer? Didn't some Corbynites get elected to organise the conference?
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,409
    edited August 2021

    HYUFD said:

    Not a good look from Starmer. Cameron was not afraid to give Boris a speaking slot, Brown was not afraid to give David Miliband a speaking slot, nor was Major afraid to give Portillo and Heseltine speaking slots even though they were potential future leadership rivals and good speakers who could have overshadowed them
    Burnham has spent the last many weeks publicly undermining Starmer. He should challenge him for the leadership if he thinks he is so rubbish
    He's only been undermining him by making him look staid, robotic, uncharismatic and a bit crap in comparison.
    That is, if managing to lay a glove on the government doesn't count.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,827

    MattW said:

    felix said:

    Not sure if polling on UC favours keeping it high. Lots of Red Wall Tory voters are of the type who are not massively sympathetic to welfare. Of course Twitter is another matter...

    This the most recent polling on the UC cut.

    38% support the cut.

    39% oppose the cut.

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1429722451064332293
    Remarkably evenly divided. Exceptions are Leaver support phasing out the £20. London / Scotland opposed, other regions not. Under 25s opposed, the rest not.


    When's the point of no return for the UC cut? Haven't some of the letters already gone out?

    And whilst Rishi can't be held responsible for the family he was born into or the one he married into, there's no escaping the reality that he is a squillionaire and not particularly of the self-made kind. Nothing wrong with that, but if austerity is coming down the line (surely it is?), it makes him a suboptimal choice to front it.
    The day of the u-turn is the one Jenrick is sent out on breakfast tv to say there will be no u-turn and Rashford gets through on the phone to the PM.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,930
    edited August 2021

    BoJo takes a stand and kicks out MPs who speak against him

    Praise

    Starmer takes a stand and stops speeches from MPs who speak against him

    Criticism

    WhY IS StARMer SuCh A WEaK LEAder

    Well they voted against the whip, it's a little different.
  • dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    Not a good look from Starmer. Cameron was not afraid to give Boris a speaking slot, Brown was not afraid to give David Miliband a speaking slot, nor was Major afraid to give Portillo and Heseltine speaking slots even though they were potential future leadership rivals and good speakers who could have overshadowed them
    Burnham has spent the last many weeks publicly undermining Starmer. He should challenge him for the leadership if he thinks he is so rubbish
    He's only been undermining him by making him look staid, robotic, uncharasmatic and a bit crap in comparison.
    That is, if managing to lay a glove on the government doesn't count.
    If that's what he thinks, he should quit being a wimp and challenge him, or get somebody who can.

    I think he'd be doing the same or worse than Starmer, right now he's managing to be all things to all people and that cannot hold. A man formerly called a red Tory cannot now be a Corbynite.

  • ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Not a good look from Starmer. Cameron was not afraid to give Boris a speaking slot, Brown was not afraid to give David Miliband a speaking slot, nor was Major afraid to give Portillo and Heseltine speaking slots even though they were potential future leadership rivals and good speakers who could have overshadowed them
    Burnham has spent the last many weeks publicly undermining Starmer. He should challenge him for the leadership if he thinks he is so rubbish
    Burnham will likely stand for Parliament at the next general election.

    If Starmer loses and does not resign I expect Burnham would challenge him for the Labour leadership then
    He has to resign as Mayor to do so, don’t forget.

    I don’t therefore see him standing for Parliament unless Labour are set to win.
    Which he would likely do having done 6 years as Mayor in 2023, 7 by 2024.

    Why would he only want to stand if Labour are set to win? That would mean Starmer would become PM and at best he might get a Cabinet role.

    Most likely he would look for a safe Labour seat in Greater Manchester, hope Starmer loses then look to succeed him as Leader of the Opposition and become PM at the general election after that

    Do you really think he would want five years slogging in opposition to become PM at pushing 60?

    Better for Starmer to win, serve three years under him in a big role, and then replace him while in government.

    Otherwise, he’s better off where he is.

    I suppose we shouldn’t underestimate the politician’s appetite for power - but I don’t think he wants to be Leader of the Opposition. If he did, he would have been better off hanging on under Corbyn.
    Though that goes back to one of the core mysteries of the Labour movement, looking at it from the outside.

    Right now, it seems obvious that the best for all involved is to back Starmer and attack Johnson in a disciplined way. Half the time, Burnham, Rayner et Al (sorry- their "friends") seem to put more effort into attacking their leader than the other lot.

    Conservatives do this from time to time- usually it's an indication of imminent collapse. In Labour it seems to go on all the time.
  • AslanAslan Posts: 1,673

    MattW said:

    felix said:

    Not sure if polling on UC favours keeping it high. Lots of Red Wall Tory voters are of the type who are not massively sympathetic to welfare. Of course Twitter is another matter...

    This the most recent polling on the UC cut.

    38% support the cut.

    39% oppose the cut.

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1429722451064332293
    Remarkably evenly divided. Exceptions are Leaver support phasing out the £20. London / Scotland opposed, other regions not. Under 25s opposed, the rest not.


    When's the point of no return for the UC cut? Haven't some of the letters already gone out?

    And whilst Rishi can't be held responsible for the family he was born into or the one he married into, there's no escaping the reality that he is a squillionaire and not particularly of the self-made kind. Nothing wrong with that, but if austerity is coming down the line (surely it is?), it makes him a suboptimal choice to front it.
    How was he not self made? His parents were a doctor and a pharmacist, middle class professions. He is rich because of his own business career.
  • RobD said:

    BoJo takes a stand and kicks out MPs who speak against him

    Praise

    Starmer takes a stand and stops speeches from MPs who speak against him

    Criticism

    WhY IS StARMer SuCh A WEaK LEAder

    Well they voted against the whip, it's a little different.
    Load of nonsense, it's exactly the same. Hypocrisy as usual!
  • ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Not a good look from Starmer. Cameron was not afraid to give Boris a speaking slot, Brown was not afraid to give David Miliband a speaking slot, nor was Major afraid to give Portillo and Heseltine speaking slots even though they were potential future leadership rivals and good speakers who could have overshadowed them
    Burnham has spent the last many weeks publicly undermining Starmer. He should challenge him for the leadership if he thinks he is so rubbish
    Burnham will likely stand for Parliament at the next general election.

    If Starmer loses and does not resign I expect Burnham would challenge him for the Labour leadership then
    He has to resign as Mayor to do so, don’t forget.

    I don’t therefore see him standing for Parliament unless Labour are set to win.
    Which he would likely do having done 6 years as Mayor in 2023, 7 by 2024.

    Why would he only want to stand if Labour are set to win? That would mean Starmer would become PM and at best he might get a Cabinet role.

    Most likely he would look for a safe Labour seat in Greater Manchester, hope Starmer loses then look to succeed him as Leader of the Opposition and become PM at the general election after that

    Do you really think he would want five years slogging in opposition to become PM at pushing 60?

    Better for Starmer to win, serve three years under him in a big role, and then replace him while in government.

    Otherwise, he’s better off where he is.

    I suppose we shouldn’t underestimate the politician’s appetite for power - but I don’t think he wants to be Leader of the Opposition. If he did, he would have been better off hanging on under Corbyn.
    Though that goes back to one of the core mysteries of the Labour movement, looking at it from the outside.

    Right now, it seems obvious that the best for all involved is to back Starmer and attack Johnson in a disciplined way. Half the time, Burnham, Rayner et Al (sorry- their "friends") seem to put more effort into attacking their leader than the other lot.

    Conservatives do this from time to time- usually it's an indication of imminent collapse. In Labour it seems to go on all the time.
    That's why it is right Starmer puts his foot down
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,854

    RobD said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    TimT said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    I find this hard to get excited about. Rich people gonna rich. And create employment for Yorkshire's (?) swimming pool industry.

    Yeah. Basically, the Labour MPs and TSE are saying no Conservative MP should spend any money on anything someone can stretch to describe as luxury spending, ever. Only Tory-haters are going to gobble that up.
    I'm not saying that, I hate the politics of envy, is why I can never be a leftie.

    It's the toxic mix of giving pensioners an 8% increase and cutting UC for the poorest in society.

    There's many Tory MPs who have gone on the record to oppose the UC cut, this is going to get messy for Sunak.
    Pensioners won't get their 8% though. Sunak isn't an idiot, he will find a fudge so they get 3% just like the NHS.
    A betting market on this would be interesting. I think it is more likely pensioners get the 8% than most on here.
    I will be upset if I don't get my 8%.
    You better hope Scotland never goes Indy then.
    Thanks. We almost made it an entire page without it being mentioned. :smiley:
    The morning thread is on Scotland.

    It is the first of five Scotland threads I plan to publish about Scotland during Mike's holiday.
    Before the F1 excitement I spent a glorious three hours walking down Fraserburgh beach, through Cairnbulg where the east coast becomes the north coast, then down the beach to St Combs before returning along the old railway line back to the Broch. 10 miles of glorious sunshine, almost entirely deserted beaches, zero midges.

    Perhaps there needs to be a thread about why the English tourists all go to Loch Lomond, Skye and the NC500. Aberdeenshire is glorious, more so by not being full of meandering tourists in oversized camper vans.
    (Incl. Banff and Buchan.) And Moray and Nairn. But hush, don't let on.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,827
    Aslan said:

    MattW said:

    felix said:

    Not sure if polling on UC favours keeping it high. Lots of Red Wall Tory voters are of the type who are not massively sympathetic to welfare. Of course Twitter is another matter...

    This the most recent polling on the UC cut.

    38% support the cut.

    39% oppose the cut.

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1429722451064332293
    Remarkably evenly divided. Exceptions are Leaver support phasing out the £20. London / Scotland opposed, other regions not. Under 25s opposed, the rest not.


    When's the point of no return for the UC cut? Haven't some of the letters already gone out?

    And whilst Rishi can't be held responsible for the family he was born into or the one he married into, there's no escaping the reality that he is a squillionaire and not particularly of the self-made kind. Nothing wrong with that, but if austerity is coming down the line (surely it is?), it makes him a suboptimal choice to front it.
    How was he not self made? His parents were a doctor and a pharmacist, middle class professions. He is rich because of his own business career.
    Head boy at Winchester, definitely a typical middle class background.
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,839
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Not a good look from Starmer. Cameron was not afraid to give Boris a speaking slot, Brown was not afraid to give David Miliband a speaking slot, nor was Major afraid to give Portillo and Heseltine speaking slots even though they were potential future leadership rivals and good speakers who could have overshadowed them
    Burnham has spent the last many weeks publicly undermining Starmer. He should challenge him for the leadership if he thinks he is so rubbish
    Burnham will likely stand for Parliament at the next general election.

    If Starmer loses and does not resign I expect Burnham would challenge him for the Labour leadership then
    The next mayoral election isn't due until 2024. Are you suggesting that he would resign from office early to seek a return to Parliament?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,930

    RobD said:

    BoJo takes a stand and kicks out MPs who speak against him

    Praise

    Starmer takes a stand and stops speeches from MPs who speak against him

    Criticism

    WhY IS StARMer SuCh A WEaK LEAder

    Well they voted against the whip, it's a little different.
    Load of nonsense, it's exactly the same. Hypocrisy as usual!
    Is it? MPs generally don't get expelled from the party just for voicing disagreement with the PM or with policy.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,420

    RobD said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    TimT said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    I find this hard to get excited about. Rich people gonna rich. And create employment for Yorkshire's (?) swimming pool industry.

    Yeah. Basically, the Labour MPs and TSE are saying no Conservative MP should spend any money on anything someone can stretch to describe as luxury spending, ever. Only Tory-haters are going to gobble that up.
    I'm not saying that, I hate the politics of envy, is why I can never be a leftie.

    It's the toxic mix of giving pensioners an 8% increase and cutting UC for the poorest in society.

    There's many Tory MPs who have gone on the record to oppose the UC cut, this is going to get messy for Sunak.
    Pensioners won't get their 8% though. Sunak isn't an idiot, he will find a fudge so they get 3% just like the NHS.
    A betting market on this would be interesting. I think it is more likely pensioners get the 8% than most on here.
    I will be upset if I don't get my 8%.
    You better hope Scotland never goes Indy then.
    Thanks. We almost made it an entire page without it being mentioned. :smiley:
    The morning thread is on Scotland.

    It is the first of five Scotland threads I plan to publish about Scotland during Mike's holiday.
    Before the F1 excitement I spent a glorious three hours walking down Fraserburgh beach, through Cairnbulg where the east coast becomes the north coast, then down the beach to St Combs before returning along the old railway line back to the Broch. 10 miles of glorious sunshine, almost entirely deserted beaches, zero midges.

    Perhaps there needs to be a thread about why the English tourists all go to Loch Lomond, Skye and the NC500. Aberdeenshire is glorious, more so by not being full of meandering tourists in oversized camper vans.
    Are you and Mrs RP going to be running a BandB or did that idea not take off?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,854
    edited August 2021

    Aslan said:

    MattW said:

    felix said:

    Not sure if polling on UC favours keeping it high. Lots of Red Wall Tory voters are of the type who are not massively sympathetic to welfare. Of course Twitter is another matter...

    This the most recent polling on the UC cut.

    38% support the cut.

    39% oppose the cut.

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1429722451064332293
    Remarkably evenly divided. Exceptions are Leaver support phasing out the £20. London / Scotland opposed, other regions not. Under 25s opposed, the rest not.


    When's the point of no return for the UC cut? Haven't some of the letters already gone out?

    And whilst Rishi can't be held responsible for the family he was born into or the one he married into, there's no escaping the reality that he is a squillionaire and not particularly of the self-made kind. Nothing wrong with that, but if austerity is coming down the line (surely it is?), it makes him a suboptimal choice to front it.
    How was he not self made? His parents were a doctor and a pharmacist, middle class professions. He is rich because of his own business career.
    Head boy at Winchester, definitely a typical middle class background.
    It used to be, perhaps with the help of a scholarship or a maiden aunt: maybe not so much now.

    Edit: the head bit is pretty much up to the chap.
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,839

    RobD said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    TimT said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    I find this hard to get excited about. Rich people gonna rich. And create employment for Yorkshire's (?) swimming pool industry.

    Yeah. Basically, the Labour MPs and TSE are saying no Conservative MP should spend any money on anything someone can stretch to describe as luxury spending, ever. Only Tory-haters are going to gobble that up.
    I'm not saying that, I hate the politics of envy, is why I can never be a leftie.

    It's the toxic mix of giving pensioners an 8% increase and cutting UC for the poorest in society.

    There's many Tory MPs who have gone on the record to oppose the UC cut, this is going to get messy for Sunak.
    Pensioners won't get their 8% though. Sunak isn't an idiot, he will find a fudge so they get 3% just like the NHS.
    A betting market on this would be interesting. I think it is more likely pensioners get the 8% than most on here.
    I will be upset if I don't get my 8%.
    You better hope Scotland never goes Indy then.
    Thanks. We almost made it an entire page without it being mentioned. :smiley:
    The morning thread is on Scotland.

    It is the first of five Scotland threads I plan to publish about Scotland during Mike's holiday.
    Oh the humanity!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,059
    edited August 2021
    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Not a good look from Starmer. Cameron was not afraid to give Boris a speaking slot, Brown was not afraid to give David Miliband a speaking slot, nor was Major afraid to give Portillo and Heseltine speaking slots even though they were potential future leadership rivals and good speakers who could have overshadowed them
    Burnham has spent the last many weeks publicly undermining Starmer. He should challenge him for the leadership if he thinks he is so rubbish
    Burnham will likely stand for Parliament at the next general election.

    If Starmer loses and does not resign I expect Burnham would challenge him for the Labour leadership then
    He has to resign as Mayor to do so, don’t forget.

    I don’t therefore see him standing for Parliament unless Labour are set to win.
    Which he would likely do having done 6 years as Mayor in 2023, 7 by 2024.

    Why would he only want to stand if Labour are set to win? That would mean Starmer would become PM and at best he might get a Cabinet role.

    Most likely he would look for a safe Labour seat in Greater Manchester, hope Starmer loses then look to succeed him as Leader of the Opposition and become PM at the general election after that

    Do you really think he would want five years slogging in opposition to become PM at pushing 60?

    Better for Starmer to win, serve three years under him in a big role, and then replace him while in government.

    Otherwise, he’s better off where he is.

    I suppose we shouldn’t underestimate the politician’s appetite for power - but I don’t think he wants to be Leader of the Opposition. If he did, he would have been better off hanging on under Corbyn.
    Of course, 60 would be almost 20 years younger than Biden is as President now and about the average age for most PMs and Presidents.

    If Starmer wins he is not going to go before the subsequent general election and against a Tory Party likely no longer led by the votewinner Boris would be favourite to be re elected if he ran again. No PM has ever lost a leadership challenge in power since the War, even Thatcher technically beat Heseltine in 1990 and only left after 11 years in power.

    Burnham would be far better off if Starmer lost the next general election, then he would likely win the subsequent Labour leadership election and after 17+ years of Tory rule be favourite the win the general election after that
  • gealbhangealbhan Posts: 2,362
    Is Klopp well. He doesn’t look right.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,188

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    geoffw said:

    Covid bumping steadily along, not growing ("exponentially"). Mainly delta. Could it be that the delta strain has a shorter initial unsymptomatic phase pulling R down to 1?

    Just conjecture.

    It is entirely correct that the asymptomatic period for Delta is shorter than for original and earlier variants. The good news about that, is that it means there is less of a lag between changes in policy and changes in case numbers. (That 10 to 14 day lag earlier in the pandemic resulted in lots of gross stupidity by members of the punditry.)

    That being said, the big problem with Delta is that those infected exhibit extremely high levels of viral shedding - up to 1,000x more than with Alpha. It therefore has the ability to break through vaccines (the more of a dose of Covid you get, the less warning your immune system has), and it also spreads much more quickly.

    A school with one pupil with Alpha means they might be putting out a viral load of 1. If they have 20 students with Delta, that's a viral load of 20,000 that's being distributed around.

    That's going to result in very, very few unvaccinated people avoiding Delta. And it's going to mean those people who do get it (especially if they are older) are more likely to get very sick. (Viral load matters, kids!)

    The good news is that most people who've had the vaccine, so long as they get only a small dose of Delta, will end up with only a bit of the sniffles (or hopefully entirely asymptomatic), and it will have been merely a booster shot. And therefore we can also look forward to Delta burning out quickly, as it simply infects so many people, so quickly.

    My gut is that September and October are going to be a little ugly, and that the government will end up regretting not using the ample vaccine resources the UK has. Really, given the extreme infectiousness of Delta, those who got the mRNA vaccines should be getting an AZ booster, while those that got AZ should get a Moderna/Pfizer one. Likewise, kids should get vaccinated. Even if Delta isn't going to kill them, the vaccine dramatically reduce the amount of time they are infectious to others, protecting other members of the community.
    I mostly agree with the above. But would this be a good moment to remind you of your previous prediction about case numbers by the end of August?

    --AS
    I change my mind when the facts change, what do you do?
    I try not to make predictions when there is great uncertainty around the outcome.

    I think the scenario you suggest is highly plausible, but so are others (both better and worse), and I think we simply don't have enough information to discriminate. I agree with you about vaccination.

    --AS
    This is a political betting website! It's sole purpose is the making of (and the discussion around) predictions.

    I follow a simple principle: be willing to make predictions, but update them as new information comes in. Always ask if what you are seeing is consistent with your forecast, and never be afraid to change your mind. A foolish consistency is the universal trait of unsuccessful gamblers and investors.

  • ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    Not a good look from Starmer. Cameron was not afraid to give Boris a speaking slot, Brown was not afraid to give David Miliband a speaking slot, nor was Major afraid to give Portillo and Heseltine speaking slots even though they were potential future leadership rivals and good speakers who could have overshadowed them
    How could you refuse to give your *cabinet ministers* a slot and retain any credibility at all?

    Cameron and Johnson I will give you, but that is also a little different. Johnson winning London was the harbinger that the Tories could - and would - win again. Burnham winning Manchester isn’t in quite the smae league.
    I saw Johnson speak at Tory Conference as London Mayor, not as a Cabinet Minister.

    It was besides Cameron's own speech easily the most hotly anticipated speech of the entire Conference. Even more than Chancellor Osborne or anyone else.

    Its a part of the reason why I never ruled out the idea he could become party leader and PM.

    There's no reason that Burnham and Sadiq Khan couldn't or shouldn't have their own speeches.
    If BoJo had made this call you'd be here praising him
    Why? Support that claim please, because its more bovine manure from my creepy stalker.

    When you have nothing to say you just respond with "if the shoe was on the other foot" with no evidence for that whatsoever.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,634

    RobD said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    TimT said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    I find this hard to get excited about. Rich people gonna rich. And create employment for Yorkshire's (?) swimming pool industry.

    Yeah. Basically, the Labour MPs and TSE are saying no Conservative MP should spend any money on anything someone can stretch to describe as luxury spending, ever. Only Tory-haters are going to gobble that up.
    I'm not saying that, I hate the politics of envy, is why I can never be a leftie.

    It's the toxic mix of giving pensioners an 8% increase and cutting UC for the poorest in society.

    There's many Tory MPs who have gone on the record to oppose the UC cut, this is going to get messy for Sunak.
    Pensioners won't get their 8% though. Sunak isn't an idiot, he will find a fudge so they get 3% just like the NHS.
    A betting market on this would be interesting. I think it is more likely pensioners get the 8% than most on here.
    I will be upset if I don't get my 8%.
    You better hope Scotland never goes Indy then.
    Thanks. We almost made it an entire page without it being mentioned. :smiley:
    The morning thread is on Scotland.

    It is the first of five Scotland threads I plan to publish about Scotland during Mike's holiday.
    Before the F1 excitement I spent a glorious three hours walking down Fraserburgh beach, through Cairnbulg where the east coast becomes the north coast, then down the beach to St Combs before returning along the old railway line back to the Broch. 10 miles of glorious sunshine, almost entirely deserted beaches, zero midges.

    Perhaps there needs to be a thread about why the English tourists all go to Loch Lomond, Skye and the NC500. Aberdeenshire is glorious, more so by not being full of meandering tourists in oversized camper vans.
    It's a beautiful and relatively unappreciated stretch of coast IMO - a bit like the Lleyn peninsular in Wales. Tourists flock like Lemmings to certain places, leaving other spectacular areas nearby relatively empty.

    I once stayed in lighthouse cottages at Rattray Head. Inside, there was a collection of poetry by a local poet, along with a dictionary of the local Buchan dialect, to help you understand it.
  • CorrectHorseBatteryCorrectHorseBattery Posts: 21,436
    edited August 2021

    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    Not a good look from Starmer. Cameron was not afraid to give Boris a speaking slot, Brown was not afraid to give David Miliband a speaking slot, nor was Major afraid to give Portillo and Heseltine speaking slots even though they were potential future leadership rivals and good speakers who could have overshadowed them
    How could you refuse to give your *cabinet ministers* a slot and retain any credibility at all?

    Cameron and Johnson I will give you, but that is also a little different. Johnson winning London was the harbinger that the Tories could - and would - win again. Burnham winning Manchester isn’t in quite the smae league.
    I saw Johnson speak at Tory Conference as London Mayor, not as a Cabinet Minister.

    It was besides Cameron's own speech easily the most hotly anticipated speech of the entire Conference. Even more than Chancellor Osborne or anyone else.

    Its a part of the reason why I never ruled out the idea he could become party leader and PM.

    There's no reason that Burnham and Sadiq Khan couldn't or shouldn't have their own speeches.
    If BoJo had made this call you'd be here praising him
    Why? Support that claim please, because its more bovine manure from my creepy stalker.

    When you have nothing to say you just respond with "if the shoe was on the other foot" with no evidence for that whatsoever.
    You really should ask for a raise from CCHQ Philip.

    It doesn't matter what BoJo says or does, you are here to tell us how great he is
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 4,935

    ydoethur said:

    RobD said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    TimT said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    I find this hard to get excited about. Rich people gonna rich. And create employment for Yorkshire's (?) swimming pool industry.

    Yeah. Basically, the Labour MPs and TSE are saying no Conservative MP should spend any money on anything someone can stretch to describe as luxury spending, ever. Only Tory-haters are going to gobble that up.
    I'm not saying that, I hate the politics of envy, is why I can never be a leftie.

    It's the toxic mix of giving pensioners an 8% increase and cutting UC for the poorest in society.

    There's many Tory MPs who have gone on the record to oppose the UC cut, this is going to get messy for Sunak.
    Pensioners won't get their 8% though. Sunak isn't an idiot, he will find a fudge so they get 3% just like the NHS.
    A betting market on this would be interesting. I think it is more likely pensioners get the 8% than most on here.
    I will be upset if I don't get my 8%.
    You better hope Scotland never goes Indy then.
    Thanks. We almost made it an entire page without it being mentioned. :smiley:
    The morning thread is on Scotland.

    It is the first of five Scotland threads I plan to publish on Scotland during Mike's holiday.
    I hope you have a nice sturdy tin helmet ready to protect yourself from ballistic turnips.
    The morning thread requires no tin helmet or body armour.

    I suspect the one about an independent Scotland, the currency, and the role of the Bank of England may attract turnips.
    I hope someone has warned HYFUD to make sure his laptop is fully charged and his tank has plenty of fuel.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,188
    PBers:

    I'm finding LA difficult for a business that's increasingly all over the US. And it's on a terrible time zone for communications with the UK. My wife also hates driving in Los Angeles, and would rather be somewhere more walkable.

    So, we're looking around the US for somewhere:

    (1) With acceptable weather (which counts Boston and Chicago out)
    (2) With good public transport, and where one doesn't have to jump in the car *all* *the* *time*.
    (3) That has really good transport links (both to the UK and across the US)
    (4) That is on EST or CET
    (5) That has decent restaurants, museums, etc.

    Any thoughts? We're thinking of the DC area, but any other suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,854
    DavidL said:

    Carnyx said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    RobD said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    TimT said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    I find this hard to get excited about. Rich people gonna rich. And create employment for Yorkshire's (?) swimming pool industry.

    Yeah. Basically, the Labour MPs and TSE are saying no Conservative MP should spend any money on anything someone can stretch to describe as luxury spending, ever. Only Tory-haters are going to gobble that up.
    I'm not saying that, I hate the politics of envy, is why I can never be a leftie.

    It's the toxic mix of giving pensioners an 8% increase and cutting UC for the poorest in society.

    There's many Tory MPs who have gone on the record to oppose the UC cut, this is going to get messy for Sunak.
    Pensioners won't get their 8% though. Sunak isn't an idiot, he will find a fudge so they get 3% just like the NHS.
    A betting market on this would be interesting. I think it is more likely pensioners get the 8% than most on here.
    I will be upset if I don't get my 8%.
    You better hope Scotland never goes Indy then.
    Thanks. We almost made it an entire page without it being mentioned. :smiley:
    The morning thread is on Scotland.

    It is the first of five Scotland threads I plan to publish on Scotland during Mike's holiday.
    I hope you have a nice sturdy tin helmet ready to protect yourself from ballistic turnips.
    The morning thread requires no tin helmet or body armour.

    I suspect the one about an independent Scotland, the currency, and the role of the Bank of England may attract turnips.
    And the odd Swede as well.
    Doesn’t sound as though he will be attracted to it. Repelled, more like.
    Still got the makings of a good scotch broth.
    Turnips for lamb stew - swedes for the broth (or potato soup, with shank of lamb), I think.
    My mum would use turnip or swede for her Scotch broth along with plenty of carrot and a bit of boiling beef. Whatever was available, really.
    For some reason my family didn't often have that broth - it was far more often potato and carrot soup with a shank of lamb and large chunks of swede cooked in it and served as the second course with bread.
This discussion has been closed.