Oh well, I’m now more likely to lose £100 to @Philip_Thompson, than I thought I was going to be 48 hours ago!
On September 8th Sandpit wrote:
"She has no chance of winning SPoTY."
Sometimes you just need to admit you got something badly wrong.
I'm even beginning to wonder if the real reason you're hell-bent on this stance is that she looks and sounds something other than a WASP?
I hope that's not the case but otherwise you're coming across as ridiculous and a sore loser.
Err, what?
I said last week that she had no chance, and I’m now saying she has a much better chance having won the tournament.
Do you even understand what the English words 'no chance' mean? If you write no chance you don't suddenly get the right to revise the words into 'by no chance I really meant not a lot of chance.' Your kind of langauge is dangerous in betting circles.
I said at the time that you'd written something silly.
The context to my comment was that she had no chance *unless she wins the tournament*.
Well guess what, she won the tournament, and she now has a good chance.
I also put my money where my mouth is, and have a £100 bet with @Philip_Thompson on the SPoTY result.
Anyway, more productive uses of my time beckon this fine Sunday morning.
A very measured retort to a complete wombat. I thought Sunday was effectively Tuesday where you are, though?
It will be fascinating to see how quickly the Tory invulnerability is swept away - if we are seeing the start of it.
So far they have been able to lie and break the law and have been practically applauded for doing so by the Cult of Boris. Yes its marvellous that he lied to the Queen etc.
So this week's lies - that the tax increase is to pay for social care, and that its progressive - shouldn't have been any concern. Tory voters like being lied to. And yet suddenly it appears they don't.
One possible angle. We saw the zeal for Brexit. That was seen as doing something to someone else - the man, the powers that be, the EU, the bureaucrats. Easy to support something that supposedly only hits Other People.
But this tax hike hits everyone. And the people who felt hard done by when we were in the EU get hard done the hardest. And thats before working families get scalped by the UC cut. And to cap it all off, they can't even see what benefit there is - the NHS will be on its knees again this winter and keep getting worse according to Javid.
Like I said, this is the Tories apocalpseofuck.
Interestingly - the reason it's not included within National insurance was because Rishi wanted it to be obvious on every payslip.
Which means if Labour gets its messaging right on every payslip there is a deduction to allow the Southern pensioners to keep their home
I get the rationale. Its not a tax rise, its a "Social Care Levy". Same as the "Adult Social Care Levy" 2% on your council tax.
The problem is that people see straight through it. With council tax the complaint is why am I having to pay for something someone else needs (direct repeated horse's mouth quotes from the doorstep before anyone picks at it).
So why would this NI levy be any different? Its a tax. Explicitly called out and supposedly hypothecated. With the money openly wasted.
BTW, southern pensioners DO NOT keep their home. The iniquity of social care was that people have to liquidate their kids inheritance to pay for their own care. They still need to pay £86k - which means selling their home. "Ah but not when they are alive" I heard some clown apologist say on here.
Yes, so after they die the house gets sold to pay for their care. No inheritance.
Its literally the apocalypseofuck. A massive tax rise. On the hardest working (which in punter land is "me"). To fix something that isn't fixed in 3 years. To patch the NHS before then so where the fuck is the Brexit money.
Rishi needs to get his brilliant spin machine on it. Boris produced the plan. Its his team not mine. I warned him not to. Or he goes down with the clown.
On the selling the home point. Firstly, many people can defer the charges until after death (although iirc this depends on a decision by your own local council, so a bit postcodey) and they certainly can if a spouse still lives in the house.
Secondly, I suspect most souther pensioners with a house have an asset worth substantially more than £86K, so they wont be losing all the inheritance, for the personal care side of costs. What Johnson skipped over is that the cap has no affect on the 'hotel' costs as they are called e.g. food, heating for the care home etc. So some people with dementia who don't have sufficient pension coming in to cover these hotel costs will rack up large bills if they are ill for years on end.
But, if you have a decent final salary pension then you will be able to pass on most of the family home to the (ageing) kids.
And that's before we get into a discussion about the emergence of an insurance market for the £86K costs.
According to Google, Hamilton has an estimated net worth of $825m.
Serena Williams is on, apparently $210m.
I find that hard to believe with all the endorsements she must have had.
Hamilton will be being paid a lot more though. At about $55 million a year, that’s probably 4-5 times what a tennis player could earn in prize money even if they won every tournament. Plus he will be having all his coaching, nutritionists, physio etc provided by McLaren and Serena will have to pay for her own.
Lewis Hamilton lives in Monaco, which he enjoys for its fine sea views and tropical climate. Serena Williams has to pay income tax.
It will be fascinating to see how quickly the Tory invulnerability is swept away - if we are seeing the start of it.
So far they have been able to lie and break the law and have been practically applauded for doing so by the Cult of Boris. Yes its marvellous that he lied to the Queen etc.
So this week's lies - that the tax increase is to pay for social care, and that its progressive - shouldn't have been any concern. Tory voters like being lied to. And yet suddenly it appears they don't.
One possible angle. We saw the zeal for Brexit. That was seen as doing something to someone else - the man, the powers that be, the EU, the bureaucrats. Easy to support something that supposedly only hits Other People.
But this tax hike hits everyone. And the people who felt hard done by when we were in the EU get hard done the hardest. And thats before working families get scalped by the UC cut. And to cap it all off, they can't even see what benefit there is - the NHS will be on its knees again this winter and keep getting worse according to Javid.
Like I said, this is the Tories apocalpseofuck.
The last point is the one that will have the biggest impact come the next election.
The NHS won't be visibly better, at best it will have caught up with the backlog, but perhaps not even that. Social care coverage will actually be worse.
Visible, successful signs of levelling up before the next GE will be few and far between. The same applies to improvements to the NHS and social care. Energy bills will be higher. Working people will be paying more tax for worse services. Johnson's pitch will be "Trust Me" after having consistently and demonstrably lied for a number of years.
Oh well, I’m now more likely to lose £100 to @Philip_Thompson, than I thought I was going to be 48 hours ago!
On September 8th Sandpit wrote:
"She has no chance of winning SPoTY."
Sometimes you just need to admit you got something badly wrong.
I'm even beginning to wonder if the real reason you're hell-bent on this stance is that she looks and sounds something other than a WASP?
I hope that's not the case but otherwise you're coming across as ridiculous and a sore loser.
Err, what?
I said last week that she had no chance, and I’m now saying she has a much better chance having won the tournament.
Do you even understand what the English words 'no chance' mean? If you write no chance you don't suddenly get the right to revise the words into 'by no chance I really meant not a lot of chance.' Your kind of langauge is dangerous in betting circles.
I said at the time that you'd written something silly.
The context to my comment was that she had no chance *unless she wins the tournament*.
How not to admit you were wrong. Now you're adding words that you didn't put.
We all make mistakes. The secret to success is to admit them, if not to others at least to yourself. To attempt to re-write what you said belittles yourself. Take some time out and reflect.
So, I wonder who will land the big sponsorship deal with Emma? Someone is going to pay her an enormous amount of money for the modern face of a global superstar.
Emma Raducanu can have more than one sponsor, and from inside and outside the tennis world. Look at the logos plastered all over Lewis Hamilton when he wins the Italian Grand Prix this afternoon. And she can appear in adverts separately from sponsorship. Since she is fluent in Mandarin as well as English, the huge Chinese market is also open to her.
I expect that she also may well change perceptions of the British-Romanian community. Even Nigel Farage seems to be changing his mind over having Romanians as neighbours.
I note she came here aged 2, which would have been 2005 or so. Did her father come on his Romanian passport under FOM, with his Chinese spouse?
Congratulations to Emma Radacunu on her US Open win, a great performance.
We cannot be sure whether her parents would have met the points system requirement we now have for all migrants I don't think. However also should be noted she was educated at a grammar school so good news for grammar supporters too as well as maybe EEA supporters
I wonder if a danger to the Government re-election will come from people who normally vote Tory finding something else to do on the day. They may well not switch to Labour or LD, or even Reform, but just not vote.
Notable that there do not seem to have been many soft-focus, Rishi-branded Tweets about the tax on the low paid to subsidise the wealthy he has signed off on.
Oh well, I’m now more likely to lose £100 to @Philip_Thompson, than I thought I was going to be 48 hours ago!
Congratulations to Miss Raducanu, but I still think prices like 1/10 are ridiculous. Yes she won the tournament, but got an easy run at it. If she’d beaten Serena in the final, I might have thought differently.
I am now praying that Lewis Hamilton wins his record 8th championship on the day of the SPoTY vote, cementing his reputation as the driving GOAT.
Raducanu beat the players rated 12 (the Olympic gold medalist) and 18 in the world, but you would rate her higher if she had beaten the world's no. 22 (who will be the world's no. 41 tomorrow)? Each to his own.
That's perfectly normal. If someone scores three tries in a rugby match against Portugal its probably not counted as amazing as if they are scored against the All Blacks. But the players Raducanu beat were no mugs, and she did it pretty confortably in unprecedented fashion, so 'easy run' is not much of a criticism.
According to Google, Hamilton has an estimated net worth of $825m.
Serena Williams is on, apparently $210m.
I find that hard to believe with all the endorsements she must have had.
Hamilton will be being paid a lot more though. At about $55 million a year, that’s probably 4-5 times what a tennis player could earn in prize money even if they won every tournament. Plus he will be having all his coaching, nutritionists, physio etc provided by McLaren and Serena will have to pay for her own.
I'm not surprised hes wealthier, but how low her wealth is despite such a long career.
Lots of people don't like Serena Williams, she's nowhere near as popular and marketable as Lewis. His sponsorship deals will be an order of magnitude larger than hers because of that. Comparing like for like I'd expect that Roger Federer will have similar career and sponsorship earnings to Lewis.
The way her petulance wrecked Naomi Osaka’s first slam win was awful and pathetic. I also wonder if that is one of the factors that has caused Osaka problems with the press.
Oh well, I’m now more likely to lose £100 to @Philip_Thompson, than I thought I was going to be 48 hours ago!
On September 8th Sandpit wrote:
"She has no chance of winning SPoTY."
Sometimes you just need to admit you got something badly wrong.
I'm even beginning to wonder if the real reason you're hell-bent on this stance is that she looks and sounds something other than a WASP?
I hope that's not the case but otherwise you're coming across as ridiculous and a sore loser.
Err, what?
I said last week that she had no chance, and I’m now saying she has a much better chance having won the tournament.
Do you even understand what the English words 'no chance' mean? If you write no chance you don't suddenly get the right to revise the words into 'by no chance I really meant not a lot of chance.' Your kind of langauge is dangerous in betting circles.
I said at the time that you'd written something silly.
The context to my comment was that she had no chance *unless she wins the tournament*.
How not to admit you were wrong. Now you're adding words that you didn't put.
We all make mistakes. The secret to success is to admit them, if not to others at least to yourself. To attempt to re-write what you said belittles yourself. Take some time out and reflect.
So, I wonder who will land the big sponsorship deal with Emma? Someone is going to pay her an enormous amount of money for the modern face of a global superstar.
Emma Raducanu can have more than one sponsor, and from inside and outside the tennis world. Look at the logos plastered all over Lewis Hamilton when he wins the Italian Grand Prix this afternoon. And she can appear in adverts separately from sponsorship. Since she is fluent in Mandarin as well as English, the huge Chinese market is also open to her.
I expect that she also may well change perceptions of the British-Romanian community. Even Nigel Farage seems to be changing his mind over having Romanians as neighbours.
I note she came here aged 2, which would have been 2005 or so. Did her father come on his Romanian passport under FOM, with his Chinese spouse?
Fucking desperate.
They came hear from Canada where I imagine they were citizens.
And Romania didn’t join the EU until 2007, when Labour did impose a transition. Who can forget Keith Vaz turning up at an airport to welcome the first Romanians and Bulgarians to come under FOM?
Boris still has more voters approving of his performance than Starmer does however, 32% to 29%. Based on the Opinium voting intention figures the Conservatives may lose their majority but would still comfortably win most seats, 297 to 268 for Labour with 7 for the LDs and 55 for the SNP.
Sturgeon and Blackford would therefore be kingmakers and Starmer would need SNP confidence and supply to form a government
Notable that there do not seem to have been many soft-focus, Rishi-branded Tweets about the tax on the low paid to subsidise the wealthy he has signed off on.
Oh well, I’m now more likely to lose £100 to @Philip_Thompson, than I thought I was going to be 48 hours ago!
On September 8th Sandpit wrote:
"She has no chance of winning SPoTY."
Sometimes you just need to admit you got something badly wrong.
I'm even beginning to wonder if the real reason you're hell-bent on this stance is that she looks and sounds something other than a WASP?
I hope that's not the case but otherwise you're coming across as ridiculous and a sore loser.
Err, what?
I said last week that she had no chance, and I’m now saying she has a much better chance having won the tournament.
Do you even understand what the English words 'no chance' mean? If you write no chance you don't suddenly get the right to revise the words into 'by no chance I really meant not a lot of chance.' Your kind of langauge is dangerous in betting circles.
I said at the time that you'd written something silly.
The context to my comment was that she had no chance *unless she wins the tournament*.
How not to admit you were wrong. Now you're adding words that you didn't put.
We all make mistakes. The secret to success is to admit them, if not to others at least to yourself. To attempt to re-write what you said belittles yourself. Take some time out and reflect.
So, I wonder who will land the big sponsorship deal with Emma? Someone is going to pay her an enormous amount of money for the modern face of a global superstar.
Emma Raducanu can have more than one sponsor, and from inside and outside the tennis world. Look at the logos plastered all over Lewis Hamilton when he wins the Italian Grand Prix this afternoon. And she can appear in adverts separately from sponsorship. Since she is fluent in Mandarin as well as English, the huge Chinese market is also open to her.
I expect that she also may well change perceptions of the British-Romanian community. Even Nigel Farage seems to be changing his mind over having Romanians as neighbours.
I note she came here aged 2, which would have been 2005 or so. Did her father come on his Romanian passport under FOM, with his Chinese spouse?
Fucking desperate.
They came hear from Canada where I imagine they were citizens.
And Romania didn’t join the EU until 2007, when Labour did impose a transition. Who can forget Keith Vaz turning up at an airport to welcome the first Romanians and Bulgarians to come under FOM?
I do not thing @Foxy comments were necessary this morning
Mr. Dickson, he's just an airhead spender desperate for popularity and quite willing to throw money (not his) away to get nice headlines that rapidly fade.
Right, that’s Andrew and Nigel covered, but what do you think about Boris?
Breaking
Police Scotland granted warrant to seize evidence in the £600,000 SNP fraud enquiry including accounts and any relevant materials from Johnston Carmichael hired by the SNP
Sturgeon's husband Peter Murrell is to be interviewed by Police Scotland also
You feeling alright Big G?
Leaving the womb been harsh on the old soul?
I am fine and insults do not make this story go away
What story?
You provided no link, and when I googled your gobbledegook it churned out some stale Unionist duffers from the Silly Season.
Oh well, I’m now more likely to lose £100 to @Philip_Thompson, than I thought I was going to be 48 hours ago!
Congratulations to Miss Raducanu, but I still think prices like 1/10 are ridiculous. Yes she won the tournament, but got an easy run at it. If she’d beaten Serena in the final, I might have thought differently.
I am now praying that Lewis Hamilton wins his record 8th championship on the day of the SPoTY vote, cementing his reputation as the driving GOAT.
Raducanu beat the players rated 12 (the Olympic gold medalist) and 18 in the world, but you would rate her higher if she had beaten the world's no. 22 (who will be the world's no. 41 tomorrow)? Each to his own.
She could only beat the players in front of her. She did so and became the first qualifier ever to win a grand slam event. Great achievement.
A couple of other records I would expect she has broken (at least in the modern era) but not seen confirmed:
Least career tour matches played before winning a grand slam Least career tour losses before winning a grand slam
It is not just that she is a qualifier, or is young, it is that she has not really played any senior tennis bar Wimbledon (retired injured) and winning the US Open.
According to Google, Hamilton has an estimated net worth of $825m.
Serena Williams is on, apparently $210m.
I find that hard to believe with all the endorsements she must have had.
Hamilton will be being paid a lot more though. At about $55 million a year, that’s probably 4-5 times what a tennis player could earn in prize money even if they won every tournament. Plus he will be having all his coaching, nutritionists, physio etc provided by McLaren and Serena will have to pay for her own.
I'm not surprised hes wealthier, but how low her wealth is despite such a long career.
Lots of people don't like Serena Williams, she's nowhere near as popular and marketable as Lewis. His sponsorship deals will be an order of magnitude larger than hers because of that. Comparing like for like I'd expect that Roger Federer will have similar career and sponsorship earnings to Lewis.
The way her petulance wrecked Naomi Osaka’s first slam win was awful and pathetic. I also wonder if that is one of the factors that has caused Osaka problems with the press.
It really was incredible - she acted like a giant baby and yet there was still a backlash against criticising her for it. Her I have no doubt being on the end of racist attacks in no way inured her from criticism when she acted like a cock.
Novak Djokovic may make history today winning the four Grand Slam events in one year …. But he will never ,ever win the US Open AND the Sundridge Park Tennis Club ‘Kent Player of the Year’in the same 12 months. Just won’t happen …@EmmaRaducanu will always have that on him . https://twitter.com/markaustintv/status/1436955212439248898
It will be fascinating to see how quickly the Tory invulnerability is swept away - if we are seeing the start of it.
So far they have been able to lie and break the law and have been practically applauded for doing so by the Cult of Boris. Yes its marvellous that he lied to the Queen etc.
So this week's lies - that the tax increase is to pay for social care, and that its progressive - shouldn't have been any concern. Tory voters like being lied to. And yet suddenly it appears they don't.
One possible angle. We saw the zeal for Brexit. That was seen as doing something to someone else - the man, the powers that be, the EU, the bureaucrats. Easy to support something that supposedly only hits Other People.
But this tax hike hits everyone. And the people who felt hard done by when we were in the EU get hard done the hardest. And thats before working families get scalped by the UC cut. And to cap it all off, they can't even see what benefit there is - the NHS will be on its knees again this winter and keep getting worse according to Javid.
Like I said, this is the Tories apocalpseofuck.
The last point is the one that will have the biggest impact come the next election.
The NHS won't be visibly better, at best it will have caught up with the backlog, but perhaps not even that. Social care coverage will actually be worse.
Visible, successful signs of levelling up before the next GE will be few and far between. The same applies to improvements to the NHS and social care. Energy bills will be higher. Working people will be paying more tax for worse services. Johnson's pitch will be "Trust Me" after having consistently and demonstrably lied for a number of years.
Nah, it will be you cant trust Starmer to stand up to the Frenchies and Scots.
Oh well, I’m now more likely to lose £100 to @Philip_Thompson, than I thought I was going to be 48 hours ago!
On September 8th Sandpit wrote:
"She has no chance of winning SPoTY."
Sometimes you just need to admit you got something badly wrong.
I'm even beginning to wonder if the real reason you're hell-bent on this stance is that she looks and sounds something other than a WASP?
I hope that's not the case but otherwise you're coming across as ridiculous and a sore loser.
Err, what?
I said last week that she had no chance, and I’m now saying she has a much better chance having won the tournament.
Do you even understand what the English words 'no chance' mean? If you write no chance you don't suddenly get the right to revise the words into 'by no chance I really meant not a lot of chance.' Your kind of langauge is dangerous in betting circles.
I said at the time that you'd written something silly.
The context to my comment was that she had no chance *unless she wins the tournament*.
How not to admit you were wrong. Now you're adding words that you didn't put.
We all make mistakes. The secret to success is to admit them, if not to others at least to yourself. To attempt to re-write what you said belittles yourself. Take some time out and reflect.
So, I wonder who will land the big sponsorship deal with Emma? Someone is going to pay her an enormous amount of money for the modern face of a global superstar.
Emma Raducanu can have more than one sponsor, and from inside and outside the tennis world. Look at the logos plastered all over Lewis Hamilton when he wins the Italian Grand Prix this afternoon. And she can appear in adverts separately from sponsorship. Since she is fluent in Mandarin as well as English, the huge Chinese market is also open to her.
I expect that she also may well change perceptions of the British-Romanian community. Even Nigel Farage seems to be changing his mind over having Romanians as neighbours.
I note she came here aged 2, which would have been 2005 or so. Did her father come on his Romanian passport under FOM, with his Chinese spouse?
Seems a tad unlikely given Romania didn't join the EU until 2007.
Andy burnham on BBC at the moment, talking about running for Rob Burrows today. He comes over well always.
On another note we were in Newcastle by the swing bridge yesterday and the sight of the little bairns running around the key side was wonderful. It’s a great event for the city.
Boris still has more voters approving of his performance than Starmer does however, 32% to 29%. Based on the Opinium voting intention figures the Conservatives may lose their majority but would still comfortably win most seats, 297 to 268 for Labour with 7 for the LDs and 55 for the SNP.
Sturgeon and Blackford would therefore be kingmakers and Starmer would need SNP confidence and supply to form a government
Oh dear. There isn't going to be a poll now. So how this poll plays out in an election not happening isn't relevant.
The direction of travel is key. And it appears to be sweeping away from your boy Boris.
I concur. Much as I love Martin Baxter’s oeuvre, Baxter seat calculations are purely amusing distraction at this point in the electoral cycle. We don’t even know the boundaries or candidates yet.
Yes, direction is key. If we really are getting back to “normal politics” Johnson is screwed.
Oh well, I’m now more likely to lose £100 to @Philip_Thompson, than I thought I was going to be 48 hours ago!
Congratulations to Miss Raducanu, but I still think prices like 1/10 are ridiculous. Yes she won the tournament, but got an easy run at it. If she’d beaten Serena in the final, I might have thought differently.
I am now praying that Lewis Hamilton wins his record 8th championship on the day of the SPoTY vote, cementing his reputation as the driving GOAT.
Raducanu beat the players rated 12 (the Olympic gold medalist) and 18 in the world, but you would rate her higher if she had beaten the world's no. 22 (who will be the world's no. 41 tomorrow)? Each to his own.
She could only beat the players in front of her. She did so and became the first qualifier ever to win a grand slam event. Great achievement.
A couple of other records I would expect she has broken (at least in the modern era) but not seen confirmed:
Least career tour matches played before winning a grand slam Least career tour losses before winning a grand slam
It is not just that she is a qualifier, or is young, it is that she has not really played any senior tennis bar Wimbledon (retired injured) and winning the US Open.
How much of that was because of COVID? If a qualifier was ever going to come through and win, it would be in these circumstances
According to Google, Hamilton has an estimated net worth of $825m.
Serena Williams is on, apparently $210m.
I find that hard to believe with all the endorsements she must have had.
Hamilton will be being paid a lot more though. At about $55 million a year, that’s probably 4-5 times what a tennis player could earn in prize money even if they won every tournament. Plus he will be having all his coaching, nutritionists, physio etc provided by McLaren and Serena will have to pay for her own.
I'm not surprised hes wealthier, but how low her wealth is despite such a long career.
Lots of people don't like Serena Williams, she's nowhere near as popular and marketable as Lewis. His sponsorship deals will be an order of magnitude larger than hers because of that. Comparing like for like I'd expect that Roger Federer will have similar career and sponsorship earnings to Lewis.
You would expect wrongly. Estimated worth $450 million so around half of what Hamilton has.
Edit - mind you, I daresay most of us could just about manage on around $450 million.
Jon Ashworth on Marr refusing to say labour will scrap the new NI tax and labour's magic answer to care is to prevent people going into care in the first place, apparently saving 2.5 billion
I am an oldy and have considerable personal experience in this field, and can tell 'Jon' not one oldy goes into care until all the other choices have been explored and it is the last resort
Notable that there do not seem to have been many soft-focus, Rishi-branded Tweets about the tax on the low paid to subsidise the wealthy he has signed off on.
It has been odd messaging so far, no doubt about it. This tax increase is going directly to the NHS initially and then is going to be used to fund SC for those who cannot afford to pay for it. The cost of having a life time limit of £86k of contributions will be a tiny part of the package. Most will not live long enough to get anywhere near that level and the few that do are likely to die very shortly afterwards.
But the government has allowed the meme of this being all about protecting wealthy pensioners to take a firm hold and it will be almost impossible to shift now. It is a curious error.
It will be fascinating to see how quickly the Tory invulnerability is swept away - if we are seeing the start of it.
So far they have been able to lie and break the law and have been practically applauded for doing so by the Cult of Boris. Yes its marvellous that he lied to the Queen etc.
So this week's lies - that the tax increase is to pay for social care, and that its progressive - shouldn't have been any concern. Tory voters like being lied to. And yet suddenly it appears they don't.
One possible angle. We saw the zeal for Brexit. That was seen as doing something to someone else - the man, the powers that be, the EU, the bureaucrats. Easy to support something that supposedly only hits Other People.
But this tax hike hits everyone. And the people who felt hard done by when we were in the EU get hard done the hardest. And thats before working families get scalped by the UC cut. And to cap it all off, they can't even see what benefit there is - the NHS will be on its knees again this winter and keep getting worse according to Javid.
Like I said, this is the Tories apocalpseofuck.
The last point is the one that will have the biggest impact come the next election.
The NHS won't be visibly better, at best it will have caught up with the backlog, but perhaps not even that. Social care coverage will actually be worse.
Visible, successful signs of levelling up before the next GE will be few and far between. The same applies to improvements to the NHS and social care. Energy bills will be higher. Working people will be paying more tax for worse services. Johnson's pitch will be "Trust Me" after having consistently and demonstrably lied for a number of years.
Nah, it will be you cant trust Starmer to stand up to the Frenchies and Scots.
Is that it? Is that really all it boils down to these days? Thou shalt hate thy neighbour as thyself.
Oh well, I’m now more likely to lose £100 to @Philip_Thompson, than I thought I was going to be 48 hours ago!
On September 8th Sandpit wrote:
"She has no chance of winning SPoTY."
Sometimes you just need to admit you got something badly wrong.
I'm even beginning to wonder if the real reason you're hell-bent on this stance is that she looks and sounds something other than a WASP?
I hope that's not the case but otherwise you're coming across as ridiculous and a sore loser.
Err, what?
I said last week that she had no chance, and I’m now saying she has a much better chance having won the tournament.
Do you even understand what the English words 'no chance' mean? If you write no chance you don't suddenly get the right to revise the words into 'by no chance I really meant not a lot of chance.' Your kind of langauge is dangerous in betting circles.
I said at the time that you'd written something silly.
The context to my comment was that she had no chance *unless she wins the tournament*.
How not to admit you were wrong. Now you're adding words that you didn't put.
We all make mistakes. The secret to success is to admit them, if not to others at least to yourself. To attempt to re-write what you said belittles yourself. Take some time out and reflect.
So, I wonder who will land the big sponsorship deal with Emma? Someone is going to pay her an enormous amount of money for the modern face of a global superstar.
Emma Raducanu can have more than one sponsor, and from inside and outside the tennis world. Look at the logos plastered all over Lewis Hamilton when he wins the Italian Grand Prix this afternoon. And she can appear in adverts separately from sponsorship. Since she is fluent in Mandarin as well as English, the huge Chinese market is also open to her.
I expect that she also may well change perceptions of the British-Romanian community. Even Nigel Farage seems to be changing his mind over having Romanians as neighbours.
I note she came here aged 2, which would have been 2005 or so. Did her father come on his Romanian passport under FOM, with his Chinese spouse?
Seems a tad unlikely given Romania didn't join the EU until 2007.
What DO her parents do? All Wikipedia says is that they 'work in finance'. They seem to have a bob or two, anyway.
It will be fascinating to see how quickly the Tory invulnerability is swept away - if we are seeing the start of it.
So far they have been able to lie and break the law and have been practically applauded for doing so by the Cult of Boris. Yes its marvellous that he lied to the Queen etc.
So this week's lies - that the tax increase is to pay for social care, and that its progressive - shouldn't have been any concern. Tory voters like being lied to. And yet suddenly it appears they don't.
One possible angle. We saw the zeal for Brexit. That was seen as doing something to someone else - the man, the powers that be, the EU, the bureaucrats. Easy to support something that supposedly only hits Other People.
But this tax hike hits everyone. And the people who felt hard done by when we were in the EU get hard done the hardest. And thats before working families get scalped by the UC cut. And to cap it all off, they can't even see what benefit there is - the NHS will be on its knees again this winter and keep getting worse according to Javid.
Like I said, this is the Tories apocalpseofuck.
I doubt it. They have many xenophobic and populist rabbits they can pull out of the hat.
According to Google, Hamilton has an estimated net worth of $825m.
Serena Williams is on, apparently $210m.
I find that hard to believe with all the endorsements she must have had.
Hamilton will be being paid a lot more though. At about $55 million a year, that’s probably 4-5 times what a tennis player could earn in prize money even if they won every tournament. Plus he will be having all his coaching, nutritionists, physio etc provided by McLaren and Serena will have to pay for her own.
I'm not surprised hes wealthier, but how low her wealth is despite such a long career.
Lots of people don't like Serena Williams, she's nowhere near as popular and marketable as Lewis. His sponsorship deals will be an order of magnitude larger than hers because of that. Comparing like for like I'd expect that Roger Federer will have similar career and sponsorship earnings to Lewis.
You would expect wrongly. Estimated worth $450 million so around half of what Hamilton has.
Have you given any thought to the reliability of the sources for that information? It must be an easy ride, submitting history essays to you. I wouldn't bet 5p on it being the right OOM.
Mr. Dickson, he's just an airhead spender desperate for popularity and quite willing to throw money (not his) away to get nice headlines that rapidly fade.
Right, that’s Andrew and Nigel covered, but what do you think about Boris?
Breaking
Police Scotland granted warrant to seize evidence in the £600,000 SNP fraud enquiry including accounts and any relevant materials from Johnston Carmichael hired by the SNP
Sturgeon's husband Peter Murrell is to be interviewed by Police Scotland also
You feeling alright Big G?
Leaving the womb been harsh on the old soul?
I am fine and insults do not make this story go away
What story?
You provided no link, and when I googled your gobbledegook it churned out some stale Unionist duffers from the Silly Season.
It is in today's Scottish Daily Mail and why are you so defensive
Oh well, I’m now more likely to lose £100 to @Philip_Thompson, than I thought I was going to be 48 hours ago!
Congratulations to Miss Raducanu, but I still think prices like 1/10 are ridiculous. Yes she won the tournament, but got an easy run at it. If she’d beaten Serena in the final, I might have thought differently.
I am now praying that Lewis Hamilton wins his record 8th championship on the day of the SPoTY vote, cementing his reputation as the driving GOAT.
Raducanu beat the players rated 12 (the Olympic gold medalist) and 18 in the world, but you would rate her higher if she had beaten the world's no. 22 (who will be the world's no. 41 tomorrow)? Each to his own.
She could only beat the players in front of her. She did so and became the first qualifier ever to win a grand slam event. Great achievement.
A couple of other records I would expect she has broken (at least in the modern era) but not seen confirmed:
Least career tour matches played before winning a grand slam Least career tour losses before winning a grand slam
It is not just that she is a qualifier, or is young, it is that she has not really played any senior tennis bar Wimbledon (retired injured) and winning the US Open.
How much of that was because of COVID? If a qualifier was ever going to come through and win, it would be in these circumstances
Possibly true, but she has also been studying for her A levels and driving test in that time! Whilst her competitors getting match practice and experience, most players have had a reasonably full tournament schedule in 2021 (not so much in 2020).
If it was a normal year, yes she would have played a handful more tour level tournaments.
A curious phrasing. Once the vote was done why would they need to 'flee' the Commons? Quite from being hostile, it had just shown its approval of them.
It will be fascinating to see how quickly the Tory invulnerability is swept away - if we are seeing the start of it.
So far they have been able to lie and break the law and have been practically applauded for doing so by the Cult of Boris. Yes its marvellous that he lied to the Queen etc.
So this week's lies - that the tax increase is to pay for social care, and that its progressive - shouldn't have been any concern. Tory voters like being lied to. And yet suddenly it appears they don't.
One possible angle. We saw the zeal for Brexit. That was seen as doing something to someone else - the man, the powers that be, the EU, the bureaucrats. Easy to support something that supposedly only hits Other People.
But this tax hike hits everyone. And the people who felt hard done by when we were in the EU get hard done the hardest. And thats before working families get scalped by the UC cut. And to cap it all off, they can't even see what benefit there is - the NHS will be on its knees again this winter and keep getting worse according to Javid.
Like I said, this is the Tories apocalpseofuck.
Interestingly - the reason it's not included within National insurance was because Rishi wanted it to be obvious on every payslip.
Which means if Labour gets its messaging right on every payslip there is a deduction to allow the Southern pensioners to keep their home
I get the rationale. Its not a tax rise, its a "Social Care Levy". Same as the "Adult Social Care Levy" 2% on your council tax.
The problem is that people see straight through it. With council tax the complaint is why am I having to pay for something someone else needs (direct repeated horse's mouth quotes from the doorstep before anyone picks at it).
So why would this NI levy be any different? Its a tax. Explicitly called out and supposedly hypothecated. With the money openly wasted.
BTW, southern pensioners DO NOT keep their home. The iniquity of social care was that people have to liquidate their kids inheritance to pay for their own care. They still need to pay £86k - which means selling their home. "Ah but not when they are alive" I heard some clown apologist say on here.
Yes, so after they die the house gets sold to pay for their care. No inheritance.
Its literally the apocalypseofuck. A massive tax rise. On the hardest working (which in punter land is "me"). To fix something that isn't fixed in 3 years. To patch the NHS before then so where the fuck is the Brexit money.
Rishi needs to get his brilliant spin machine on it. Boris produced the plan. Its his team not mine. I warned him not to. Or he goes down with the clown.
It is a tax rise. Of course it is - how can tackling social care not be a tax rise.
There seems to be some confusion as to the position of the home when someone permanently goes to a care home.
The house is either completely in or completely out of the assessment.
These are the main circumstances that prevent the home being brought into the finance assessment, under CURRENT rules:
- It is it's still occupied by spouse - it is still occupied by a relative (typically child) who is over 60 - it is still occupied by any relative who is disabled (of any age) - the first 12 weeks' care home costs are always disregarded
To repeat - these are the rules now.
The change - and it is a big change - that is coming Autumn 2023 is the £86k cap. This means that even when the property is brought into the assessment the maximum that can be taken of its value (in combination with other asset and income contributions to care) is £86k.
So where you say: "So why would this NI levy be any different? Its a tax. Explicitly called out and supposedly hypothecated. With the money openly wasted" what do you mean? Money is clearly going to be needed to cover care home hosts when the £86k cap is reached. Are you suggesting that the Autumn 2023 date will not be adhered to? You must be or your comment makes no sense.
Jon Ashworth on Marr refusing to say labour will scrap the new NI tax and labour's magic answer to care is to prevent people going into care in the first place, apparently saving 2.5 billion
I am an oldy and have considerable personal experience in this field, and can tell 'Jon' not one oldy goes into care until all the other choices have been explored and it is the last resort
Most SC is not provided in a care setting, it is provided to those who are still in their own homes or living with relatives. The object of most SC is to help people to do that so they don't have to go into residential care at all. That answer is disingenuous, bordering on ignorant.
Oh well, I’m now more likely to lose £100 to @Philip_Thompson, than I thought I was going to be 48 hours ago!
On September 8th Sandpit wrote:
"She has no chance of winning SPoTY."
Sometimes you just need to admit you got something badly wrong.
I'm even beginning to wonder if the real reason you're hell-bent on this stance is that she looks and sounds something other than a WASP?
I hope that's not the case but otherwise you're coming across as ridiculous and a sore loser.
Err, what?
I said last week that she had no chance, and I’m now saying she has a much better chance having won the tournament.
Do you even understand what the English words 'no chance' mean? If you write no chance you don't suddenly get the right to revise the words into 'by no chance I really meant not a lot of chance.' Your kind of langauge is dangerous in betting circles.
I said at the time that you'd written something silly.
The context to my comment was that she had no chance *unless she wins the tournament*.
How not to admit you were wrong. Now you're adding words that you didn't put.
We all make mistakes. The secret to success is to admit them, if not to others at least to yourself. To attempt to re-write what you said belittles yourself. Take some time out and reflect.
So, I wonder who will land the big sponsorship deal with Emma? Someone is going to pay her an enormous amount of money for the modern face of a global superstar.
Emma Raducanu can have more than one sponsor, and from inside and outside the tennis world. Look at the logos plastered all over Lewis Hamilton when he wins the Italian Grand Prix this afternoon. And she can appear in adverts separately from sponsorship. Since she is fluent in Mandarin as well as English, the huge Chinese market is also open to her.
I expect that she also may well change perceptions of the British-Romanian community. Even Nigel Farage seems to be changing his mind over having Romanians as neighbours.
I note she came here aged 2, which would have been 2005 or so. Did her father come on his Romanian passport under FOM, with his Chinese spouse?
Seems a tad unlikely given Romania didn't join the EU until 2007.
Well I'm sure we can find a way to crowbar in views on the immigration debate somehow else.
Oh well, I’m now more likely to lose £100 to @Philip_Thompson, than I thought I was going to be 48 hours ago!
On September 8th Sandpit wrote:
"She has no chance of winning SPoTY."
Sometimes you just need to admit you got something badly wrong.
I'm even beginning to wonder if the real reason you're hell-bent on this stance is that she looks and sounds something other than a WASP?
I hope that's not the case but otherwise you're coming across as ridiculous and a sore loser.
Err, what?
I said last week that she had no chance, and I’m now saying she has a much better chance having won the tournament.
Do you even understand what the English words 'no chance' mean? If you write no chance you don't suddenly get the right to revise the words into 'by no chance I really meant not a lot of chance.' Your kind of langauge is dangerous in betting circles.
I said at the time that you'd written something silly.
The context to my comment was that she had no chance *unless she wins the tournament*.
How not to admit you were wrong. Now you're adding words that you didn't put.
We all make mistakes. The secret to success is to admit them, if not to others at least to yourself. To attempt to re-write what you said belittles yourself. Take some time out and reflect.
So, I wonder who will land the big sponsorship deal with Emma? Someone is going to pay her an enormous amount of money for the modern face of a global superstar.
Emma Raducanu can have more than one sponsor, and from inside and outside the tennis world. Look at the logos plastered all over Lewis Hamilton when he wins the Italian Grand Prix this afternoon. And she can appear in adverts separately from sponsorship. Since she is fluent in Mandarin as well as English, the huge Chinese market is also open to her.
I expect that she also may well change perceptions of the British-Romanian community. Even Nigel Farage seems to be changing his mind over having Romanians as neighbours.
I note she came here aged 2, which would have been 2005 or so. Did her father come on his Romanian passport under FOM, with his Chinese spouse?
Seems a tad unlikely given Romania didn't join the EU until 2007.
What DO her parents do? All Wikipedia says is that they 'work in finance'. They seem to have a bob or two, anyway.
Probably work in the City if they live in Kent. Easy commute.
I expect they arrived in 2005 via skilled migration route requiring a tier 2 visa.
It will be fascinating to see how quickly the Tory invulnerability is swept away - if we are seeing the start of it.
So far they have been able to lie and break the law and have been practically applauded for doing so by the Cult of Boris. Yes its marvellous that he lied to the Queen etc.
So this week's lies - that the tax increase is to pay for social care, and that its progressive - shouldn't have been any concern. Tory voters like being lied to. And yet suddenly it appears they don't.
One possible angle. We saw the zeal for Brexit. That was seen as doing something to someone else - the man, the powers that be, the EU, the bureaucrats. Easy to support something that supposedly only hits Other People.
But this tax hike hits everyone. And the people who felt hard done by when we were in the EU get hard done the hardest. And thats before working families get scalped by the UC cut. And to cap it all off, they can't even see what benefit there is - the NHS will be on its knees again this winter and keep getting worse according to Javid.
Like I said, this is the Tories apocalpseofuck.
The last point is the one that will have the biggest impact come the next election.
The NHS won't be visibly better, at best it will have caught up with the backlog, but perhaps not even that. Social care coverage will actually be worse.
Visible, successful signs of levelling up before the next GE will be few and far between. The same applies to improvements to the NHS and social care. Energy bills will be higher. Working people will be paying more tax for worse services. Johnson's pitch will be "Trust Me" after having consistently and demonstrably lied for a number of years.
Nah, it will be you cant trust Starmer to stand up to the Frenchies and Scots.
Yep - that's the message for the 35% that the Tories have baked in.
Novak Djokovic may make history today winning the four Grand Slam events in one year …. But he will never ,ever win the US Open AND the Sundridge Park Tennis Club ‘Kent Player of the Year’in the same 12 months. Just won’t happen …@EmmaRaducanu will always have that on him . https://twitter.com/markaustintv/status/1436955212439248898
There was a better stat underneath that tweet - the only play to win 2040 tour points in a single tournament (she earn 40 for qualifying)
It will be fascinating to see how quickly the Tory invulnerability is swept away - if we are seeing the start of it.
So far they have been able to lie and break the law and have been practically applauded for doing so by the Cult of Boris. Yes its marvellous that he lied to the Queen etc.
So this week's lies - that the tax increase is to pay for social care, and that its progressive - shouldn't have been any concern. Tory voters like being lied to. And yet suddenly it appears they don't.
One possible angle. We saw the zeal for Brexit. That was seen as doing something to someone else - the man, the powers that be, the EU, the bureaucrats. Easy to support something that supposedly only hits Other People.
But this tax hike hits everyone. And the people who felt hard done by when we were in the EU get hard done the hardest. And thats before working families get scalped by the UC cut. And to cap it all off, they can't even see what benefit there is - the NHS will be on its knees again this winter and keep getting worse according to Javid.
Like I said, this is the Tories apocalpseofuck.
The last point is the one that will have the biggest impact come the next election.
The NHS won't be visibly better, at best it will have caught up with the backlog, but perhaps not even that. Social care coverage will actually be worse.
Visible, successful signs of levelling up before the next GE will be few and far between. The same applies to improvements to the NHS and social care. Energy bills will be higher. Working people will be paying more tax for worse services. Johnson's pitch will be "Trust Me" after having consistently and demonstrably lied for a number of years.
Nah, it will be you cant trust Starmer to stand up to the Frenchies and Scots.
Is that it? Is that really all it boils down to these days? Thou shalt hate thy neighbour as thyself.
Oh well, I’m now more likely to lose £100 to @Philip_Thompson, than I thought I was going to be 48 hours ago!
On September 8th Sandpit wrote:
"She has no chance of winning SPoTY."
Sometimes you just need to admit you got something badly wrong.
I'm even beginning to wonder if the real reason you're hell-bent on this stance is that she looks and sounds something other than a WASP?
I hope that's not the case but otherwise you're coming across as ridiculous and a sore loser.
Err, what?
I said last week that she had no chance, and I’m now saying she has a much better chance having won the tournament.
Do you even understand what the English words 'no chance' mean? If you write no chance you don't suddenly get the right to revise the words into 'by no chance I really meant not a lot of chance.' Your kind of langauge is dangerous in betting circles.
I said at the time that you'd written something silly.
The context to my comment was that she had no chance *unless she wins the tournament*.
How not to admit you were wrong. Now you're adding words that you didn't put.
We all make mistakes. The secret to success is to admit them, if not to others at least to yourself. To attempt to re-write what you said belittles yourself. Take some time out and reflect.
So, I wonder who will land the big sponsorship deal with Emma? Someone is going to pay her an enormous amount of money for the modern face of a global superstar.
Emma Raducanu can have more than one sponsor, and from inside and outside the tennis world. Look at the logos plastered all over Lewis Hamilton when he wins the Italian Grand Prix this afternoon. And she can appear in adverts separately from sponsorship. Since she is fluent in Mandarin as well as English, the huge Chinese market is also open to her.
I expect that she also may well change perceptions of the British-Romanian community. Even Nigel Farage seems to be changing his mind over having Romanians as neighbours.
I note she came here aged 2, which would have been 2005 or so. Did her father come on his Romanian passport under FOM, with his Chinese spouse?
Seems a tad unlikely given Romania didn't join the EU until 2007.
What DO her parents do? All Wikipedia says is that they 'work in finance'. They seem to have a bob or two, anyway.
I would imagine it is working in the city if you can both work as a foreigners in canada, then UK, when no FoM. You don't do that if you are a lowly bank teller.
Jon Ashworth on Marr refusing to say labour will scrap the new NI tax and labour's magic answer to care is to prevent people going into care in the first place, apparently saving 2.5 billion
I am an oldy and have considerable personal experience in this field, and can tell 'Jon' not one oldy goes into care until all the other choices have been explored and it is the last resort
We discussed this recently, did we not, and I can assure you that while other choices are considered there are, and I have seen, people in Homes who don't really need to be there, but for whom it's more convenient. And, of course. 'care' covers a range of options.
Oh well, I’m now more likely to lose £100 to @Philip_Thompson, than I thought I was going to be 48 hours ago!
On September 8th Sandpit wrote:
"She has no chance of winning SPoTY."
Sometimes you just need to admit you got something badly wrong.
I'm even beginning to wonder if the real reason you're hell-bent on this stance is that she looks and sounds something other than a WASP?
I hope that's not the case but otherwise you're coming across as ridiculous and a sore loser.
Err, what?
I said last week that she had no chance, and I’m now saying she has a much better chance having won the tournament.
Do you even understand what the English words 'no chance' mean? If you write no chance you don't suddenly get the right to revise the words into 'by no chance I really meant not a lot of chance.' Your kind of langauge is dangerous in betting circles.
I said at the time that you'd written something silly.
The context to my comment was that she had no chance *unless she wins the tournament*.
How not to admit you were wrong. Now you're adding words that you didn't put.
We all make mistakes. The secret to success is to admit them, if not to others at least to yourself. To attempt to re-write what you said belittles yourself. Take some time out and reflect.
So, I wonder who will land the big sponsorship deal with Emma? Someone is going to pay her an enormous amount of money for the modern face of a global superstar.
Emma Raducanu can have more than one sponsor, and from inside and outside the tennis world. Look at the logos plastered all over Lewis Hamilton when he wins the Italian Grand Prix this afternoon. And she can appear in adverts separately from sponsorship. Since she is fluent in Mandarin as well as English, the huge Chinese market is also open to her.
I expect that she also may well change perceptions of the British-Romanian community. Even Nigel Farage seems to be changing his mind over having Romanians as neighbours.
I note she came here aged 2, which would have been 2005 or so. Did her father come on his Romanian passport under FOM, with his Chinese spouse?
Seems a tad unlikely given Romania didn't join the EU until 2007.
What DO her parents do? All Wikipedia says is that they 'work in finance'.
God only knows, all I know is best not call them bankers as the finance bods on here seem very sensitive being lumped in with bankers.
A curious phrasing. Once the vote was done why would they need to 'flee' the Commons? Quite from being hostile, it had just shown its approval of them.
Is it perhaps just that they 'left' the Commons?
Also, a pedant would point out that as that headline is worded "a glittering fundraising event" could refer to the NI rise. But shirley the interesting point is that this is a Mail headline, not Mirror?
Oh well, I’m now more likely to lose £100 to @Philip_Thompson, than I thought I was going to be 48 hours ago!
On September 8th Sandpit wrote:
"She has no chance of winning SPoTY."
Sometimes you just need to admit you got something badly wrong.
I'm even beginning to wonder if the real reason you're hell-bent on this stance is that she looks and sounds something other than a WASP?
I hope that's not the case but otherwise you're coming across as ridiculous and a sore loser.
Sandpit is married to a Ukrainian and lives in Dubai. You can stop wondering because it isn’t that.
Why does being married to a Ukranian and living in Dubai make any difference to anything? Not that I am interested in the original question which seems very silly, but I do not understand your thinking, those facts would more likely support the point , ie white wife and working in tax haven that treats migrant workers ( non white ) like crap.
Oh well, I’m now more likely to lose £100 to @Philip_Thompson, than I thought I was going to be 48 hours ago!
On September 8th Sandpit wrote:
"She has no chance of winning SPoTY."
Sometimes you just need to admit you got something badly wrong.
I'm even beginning to wonder if the real reason you're hell-bent on this stance is that she looks and sounds something other than a WASP?
I hope that's not the case but otherwise you're coming across as ridiculous and a sore loser.
Err, what?
I said last week that she had no chance, and I’m now saying she has a much better chance having won the tournament.
Do you even understand what the English words 'no chance' mean? If you write no chance you don't suddenly get the right to revise the words into 'by no chance I really meant not a lot of chance.' Your kind of langauge is dangerous in betting circles.
I said at the time that you'd written something silly.
The context to my comment was that she had no chance *unless she wins the tournament*.
How not to admit you were wrong. Now you're adding words that you didn't put.
We all make mistakes. The secret to success is to admit them, if not to others at least to yourself. To attempt to re-write what you said belittles yourself. Take some time out and reflect.
So, I wonder who will land the big sponsorship deal with Emma? Someone is going to pay her an enormous amount of money for the modern face of a global superstar.
Emma Raducanu can have more than one sponsor, and from inside and outside the tennis world. Look at the logos plastered all over Lewis Hamilton when he wins the Italian Grand Prix this afternoon. And she can appear in adverts separately from sponsorship. Since she is fluent in Mandarin as well as English, the huge Chinese market is also open to her.
I expect that she also may well change perceptions of the British-Romanian community. Even Nigel Farage seems to be changing his mind over having Romanians as neighbours.
I note she came here aged 2, which would have been 2005 or so. Did her father come on his Romanian passport under FOM, with his Chinese spouse?
Seems a tad unlikely given Romania didn't join the EU until 2007.
What DO her parents do? All Wikipedia says is that they 'work in finance'. They seem to have a bob or two, anyway.
Probably work in the City if they live in Kent. Easy commute.
I expect they arrived in 2005 via skilled migration route requiring a tier 2 visa.
It will be fascinating to see how quickly the Tory invulnerability is swept away - if we are seeing the start of it.
So far they have been able to lie and break the law and have been practically applauded for doing so by the Cult of Boris. Yes its marvellous that he lied to the Queen etc.
So this week's lies - that the tax increase is to pay for social care, and that its progressive - shouldn't have been any concern. Tory voters like being lied to. And yet suddenly it appears they don't.
One possible angle. We saw the zeal for Brexit. That was seen as doing something to someone else - the man, the powers that be, the EU, the bureaucrats. Easy to support something that supposedly only hits Other People.
But this tax hike hits everyone. And the people who felt hard done by when we were in the EU get hard done the hardest. And thats before working families get scalped by the UC cut. And to cap it all off, they can't even see what benefit there is - the NHS will be on its knees again this winter and keep getting worse according to Javid.
Like I said, this is the Tories apocalpseofuck.
Interestingly - the reason it's not included within National insurance was because Rishi wanted it to be obvious on every payslip.
Which means if Labour gets its messaging right on every payslip there is a deduction to allow the Southern pensioners to keep their home
I get the rationale. Its not a tax rise, its a "Social Care Levy". Same as the "Adult Social Care Levy" 2% on your council tax.
The problem is that people see straight through it. With council tax the complaint is why am I having to pay for something someone else needs (direct repeated horse's mouth quotes from the doorstep before anyone picks at it).
So why would this NI levy be any different? Its a tax. Explicitly called out and supposedly hypothecated. With the money openly wasted.
BTW, southern pensioners DO NOT keep their home. The iniquity of social care was that people have to liquidate their kids inheritance to pay for their own care. They still need to pay £86k - which means selling their home. "Ah but not when they are alive" I heard some clown apologist say on here.
Yes, so after they die the house gets sold to pay for their care. No inheritance.
Its literally the apocalypseofuck. A massive tax rise. On the hardest working (which in punter land is "me"). To fix something that isn't fixed in 3 years. To patch the NHS before then so where the fuck is the Brexit money.
Rishi needs to get his brilliant spin machine on it. Boris produced the plan. Its his team not mine. I warned him not to. Or he goes down with the clown.
It will be fascinating to see how quickly the Tory invulnerability is swept away - if we are seeing the start of it.
So far they have been able to lie and break the law and have been practically applauded for doing so by the Cult of Boris. Yes its marvellous that he lied to the Queen etc.
So this week's lies - that the tax increase is to pay for social care, and that its progressive - shouldn't have been any concern. Tory voters like being lied to. And yet suddenly it appears they don't.
One possible angle. We saw the zeal for Brexit. That was seen as doing something to someone else - the man, the powers that be, the EU, the bureaucrats. Easy to support something that supposedly only hits Other People.
But this tax hike hits everyone. And the people who felt hard done by when we were in the EU get hard done the hardest. And thats before working families get scalped by the UC cut. And to cap it all off, they can't even see what benefit there is - the NHS will be on its knees again this winter and keep getting worse according to Javid.
Like I said, this is the Tories apocalpseofuck.
Interestingly - the reason it's not included within National insurance was because Rishi wanted it to be obvious on every payslip.
Which means if Labour gets its messaging right on every payslip there is a deduction to allow the Southern pensioners to keep their home
I get the rationale. Its not a tax rise, its a "Social Care Levy". Same as the "Adult Social Care Levy" 2% on your council tax.
The problem is that people see straight through it. With council tax the complaint is why am I having to pay for something someone else needs (direct repeated horse's mouth quotes from the doorstep before anyone picks at it).
So why would this NI levy be any different? Its a tax. Explicitly called out and supposedly hypothecated. With the money openly wasted.
BTW, southern pensioners DO NOT keep their home. The iniquity of social care was that people have to liquidate their kids inheritance to pay for their own care. They still need to pay £86k - which means selling their home. "Ah but not when they are alive" I heard some clown apologist say on here.
Yes, so after they die the house gets sold to pay for their care. No inheritance.
Its literally the apocalypseofuck. A massive tax rise. On the hardest working (which in punter land is "me"). To fix something that isn't fixed in 3 years. To patch the NHS before then so where the fuck is the Brexit money.
Rishi needs to get his brilliant spin machine on it. Boris produced the plan. Its his team not mine. I warned him not to. Or he goes down with the clown.
It is a tax rise. Of course it is - how can tackling social care not be a tax rise.
There seems to be some confusion as to the position of the home when someone permanently goes to a care home.
The house is either completely in or completely out of the assessment.
These are the main circumstances that prevent the home being brought into the finance assessment, under CURRENT rules:
- It is it's still occupied by spouse - it is still occupied by a relative (typically child) who is over 60 - it is still occupied by any relative who is disabled (of any age) - the first 12 weeks' care home costs are always disregarded
To repeat - these are the rules now.
The change - and it is a big change - that is coming Autumn 2023 is the £86k cap. This means that even when the property is brought into the assessment the maximum that can be taken of its value (in combination with other asset and income contributions to care) is £86k.
So where you say: "So why would this NI levy be any different? Its a tax. Explicitly called out and supposedly hypothecated. With the money openly wasted" what do you mean? Money is clearly going to be needed to cover care home hosts when the £86k cap is reached. Are you suggesting that the Autumn 2023 date will not be adhered to? You must be or your comment makes no sense.
An excellent explanation and some need to learn the detail before commenting
Jon Ashworth on Marr refusing to say labour will scrap the new NI tax and labour's magic answer to care is to prevent people going into care in the first place, apparently saving 2.5 billion
I am an oldy and have considerable personal experience in this field, and can tell 'Jon' not one oldy goes into care until all the other choices have been explored and it is the last resort
According to Google, Hamilton has an estimated net worth of $825m.
Serena Williams is on, apparently $210m.
I find that hard to believe with all the endorsements she must have had.
Hamilton will be being paid a lot more though. At about $55 million a year, that’s probably 4-5 times what a tennis player could earn in prize money even if they won every tournament. Plus he will be having all his coaching, nutritionists, physio etc provided by McLaren and Serena will have to pay for her own.
I'm not surprised hes wealthier, but how low her wealth is despite such a long career.
Lots of people don't like Serena Williams, she's nowhere near as popular and marketable as Lewis. His sponsorship deals will be an order of magnitude larger than hers because of that. Comparing like for like I'd expect that Roger Federer will have similar career and sponsorship earnings to Lewis.
You would expect wrongly. Estimated worth $450 million so around half of what Hamilton has.
Have you given any thought to the reliability of the sources for that information? It must be an easy ride, submitting history essays to you. I wouldn't bet 5p on it being the right OOM.
*Shrugs*
All estimates of wealth are just that - estimates. Unless you have access to their private accounts (which I'm assuming you don't).
But Lewis Hamilton's current annual earnings including endorsements are around 60% of Federer's entire career prize money (source - Forbes). He also gets for free from his employers many things Federer will have to pay for himself. Federer's largest commercial endorsement is with Uniqlo, which has so far paid him $60 million of a $300 million ten year contract.
So although people may be surprised, it's not crazily far out or implausible that Hamilton has double the wealth of even tennis' greatest players.
I think what it really does show is just how much money is sloshing around in F1.
According to Google, Hamilton has an estimated net worth of $825m.
Serena Williams is on, apparently $210m.
I find that hard to believe with all the endorsements she must have had.
Hamilton will be being paid a lot more though. At about $55 million a year, that’s probably 4-5 times what a tennis player could earn in prize money even if they won every tournament. Plus he will be having all his coaching, nutritionists, physio etc provided by McLaren and Serena will have to pay for her own.
I'm not surprised hes wealthier, but how low her wealth is despite such a long career.
She will have earnt much more than that. So either the figure quoted is wrong or she has spent/lost a lot of money. She has invested in a lot of businesses from her own clothes line to the likes of UFC and Miami Dolphins.
Oh well, I’m now more likely to lose £100 to @Philip_Thompson, than I thought I was going to be 48 hours ago!
On September 8th Sandpit wrote:
"She has no chance of winning SPoTY."
Sometimes you just need to admit you got something badly wrong.
I'm even beginning to wonder if the real reason you're hell-bent on this stance is that she looks and sounds something other than a WASP?
I hope that's not the case but otherwise you're coming across as ridiculous and a sore loser.
Err, what?
I said last week that she had no chance, and I’m now saying she has a much better chance having won the tournament.
Do you even understand what the English words 'no chance' mean? If you write no chance you don't suddenly get the right to revise the words into 'by no chance I really meant not a lot of chance.' Your kind of langauge is dangerous in betting circles.
I said at the time that you'd written something silly.
The context to my comment was that she had no chance *unless she wins the tournament*.
How not to admit you were wrong. Now you're adding words that you didn't put.
We all make mistakes. The secret to success is to admit them, if not to others at least to yourself. To attempt to re-write what you said belittles yourself. Take some time out and reflect.
So, I wonder who will land the big sponsorship deal with Emma? Someone is going to pay her an enormous amount of money for the modern face of a global superstar.
Emma Raducanu can have more than one sponsor, and from inside and outside the tennis world. Look at the logos plastered all over Lewis Hamilton when he wins the Italian Grand Prix this afternoon. And she can appear in adverts separately from sponsorship. Since she is fluent in Mandarin as well as English, the huge Chinese market is also open to her.
I expect that she also may well change perceptions of the British-Romanian community. Even Nigel Farage seems to be changing his mind over having Romanians as neighbours.
I note she came here aged 2, which would have been 2005 or so. Did her father come on his Romanian passport under FOM, with his Chinese spouse?
Seems a tad unlikely given Romania didn't join the EU until 2007.
What DO her parents do? All Wikipedia says is that they 'work in finance'. They seem to have a bob or two, anyway.
Dunno. Look them up on linkedin or wait for a week of wall-to-wall interviews and two unauthorised biographies out in time for Christmas. Offhand I'm not sure I know what any sportsperson's parents do.
Oh well, I’m now more likely to lose £100 to @Philip_Thompson, than I thought I was going to be 48 hours ago!
On September 8th Sandpit wrote:
"She has no chance of winning SPoTY."
Sometimes you just need to admit you got something badly wrong.
I'm even beginning to wonder if the real reason you're hell-bent on this stance is that she looks and sounds something other than a WASP?
I hope that's not the case but otherwise you're coming across as ridiculous and a sore loser.
Err, what?
I said last week that she had no chance, and I’m now saying she has a much better chance having won the tournament.
Do you even understand what the English words 'no chance' mean? If you write no chance you don't suddenly get the right to revise the words into 'by no chance I really meant not a lot of chance.' Your kind of langauge is dangerous in betting circles.
I said at the time that you'd written something silly.
The context to my comment was that she had no chance *unless she wins the tournament*.
How not to admit you were wrong. Now you're adding words that you didn't put.
We all make mistakes. The secret to success is to admit them, if not to others at least to yourself. To attempt to re-write what you said belittles yourself. Take some time out and reflect.
So, I wonder who will land the big sponsorship deal with Emma? Someone is going to pay her an enormous amount of money for the modern face of a global superstar.
Emma Raducanu can have more than one sponsor, and from inside and outside the tennis world. Look at the logos plastered all over Lewis Hamilton when he wins the Italian Grand Prix this afternoon. And she can appear in adverts separately from sponsorship. Since she is fluent in Mandarin as well as English, the huge Chinese market is also open to her.
I expect that she also may well change perceptions of the British-Romanian community. Even Nigel Farage seems to be changing his mind over having Romanians as neighbours.
I note she came here aged 2, which would have been 2005 or so. Did her father come on his Romanian passport under FOM, with his Chinese spouse?
I believe her family is reasonably well off. I don't know why that makes a significant difference, but apparently it can do.
Edit. And her parents work in the City.
Only people who have money get the chance to spend the time and money required to get anywhere. It is the desperation to try and claim any person no matter what country they or their parents come from as English when they win anything and want anyone else similar to be deported at the first opportunity.
Oh well, I’m now more likely to lose £100 to @Philip_Thompson, than I thought I was going to be 48 hours ago!
On September 8th Sandpit wrote:
"She has no chance of winning SPoTY."
Sometimes you just need to admit you got something badly wrong.
I'm even beginning to wonder if the real reason you're hell-bent on this stance is that she looks and sounds something other than a WASP?
I hope that's not the case but otherwise you're coming across as ridiculous and a sore loser.
Err, what?
I said last week that she had no chance, and I’m now saying she has a much better chance having won the tournament.
Do you even understand what the English words 'no chance' mean? If you write no chance you don't suddenly get the right to revise the words into 'by no chance I really meant not a lot of chance.' Your kind of langauge is dangerous in betting circles.
I said at the time that you'd written something silly.
The context to my comment was that she had no chance *unless she wins the tournament*.
How not to admit you were wrong. Now you're adding words that you didn't put.
We all make mistakes. The secret to success is to admit them, if not to others at least to yourself. To attempt to re-write what you said belittles yourself. Take some time out and reflect.
So, I wonder who will land the big sponsorship deal with Emma? Someone is going to pay her an enormous amount of money for the modern face of a global superstar.
Emma Raducanu can have more than one sponsor, and from inside and outside the tennis world. Look at the logos plastered all over Lewis Hamilton when he wins the Italian Grand Prix this afternoon. And she can appear in adverts separately from sponsorship. Since she is fluent in Mandarin as well as English, the huge Chinese market is also open to her.
I expect that she also may well change perceptions of the British-Romanian community. Even Nigel Farage seems to be changing his mind over having Romanians as neighbours.
I note she came here aged 2, which would have been 2005 or so. Did her father come on his Romanian passport under FOM, with his Chinese spouse?
Seems a tad unlikely given Romania didn't join the EU until 2007.
What DO her parents do? All Wikipedia says is that they 'work in finance'. They seem to have a bob or two, anyway.
Dunno. Look them up on linkedin or wait for a week of wall-to-wall interviews and two unauthorised biographies out in time for Christmas. Offhand I'm not sure I know what any sportsperson's parents do.
Oh well, I’m now more likely to lose £100 to @Philip_Thompson, than I thought I was going to be 48 hours ago!
On September 8th Sandpit wrote:
"She has no chance of winning SPoTY."
Sometimes you just need to admit you got something badly wrong.
I'm even beginning to wonder if the real reason you're hell-bent on this stance is that she looks and sounds something other than a WASP?
I hope that's not the case but otherwise you're coming across as ridiculous and a sore loser.
Err, what?
I said last week that she had no chance, and I’m now saying she has a much better chance having won the tournament.
Do you even understand what the English words 'no chance' mean? If you write no chance you don't suddenly get the right to revise the words into 'by no chance I really meant not a lot of chance.' Your kind of langauge is dangerous in betting circles.
I said at the time that you'd written something silly.
The context to my comment was that she had no chance *unless she wins the tournament*.
Well guess what, she won the tournament, and she now has a good chance.
I also put my money where my mouth is, and have a £100 bet with @Philip_Thompson on the SPoTY result.
Anyway, more productive uses of my time beckon this fine Sunday morning.
A very measured retort to a complete wombat. I thought Sunday was effectively Tuesday where you are, though?
Morning. I wondered if there has been any thinking on the 'reform party' rise, 5% in a recent poll. Looks like a continuation of the Brexit party. Thanks to the NI apocolypsef**k (as someone described it on here, accurately); they now have 2 unique policies of being low tax, against Covid Passports, and there is some low key anti woke stuff going on according to their website, a bit of a bonus. This does look, to me, like rather fertile political ground - maybe a new home for @Casino_Royale; and other disillusioned tories.
Oh well, I’m now more likely to lose £100 to @Philip_Thompson, than I thought I was going to be 48 hours ago!
On September 8th Sandpit wrote:
"She has no chance of winning SPoTY."
Sometimes you just need to admit you got something badly wrong.
I'm even beginning to wonder if the real reason you're hell-bent on this stance is that she looks and sounds something other than a WASP?
I hope that's not the case but otherwise you're coming across as ridiculous and a sore loser.
Sandpit is married to a Ukrainian and lives in Dubai. You can stop wondering because it isn’t that.
As an economic migrant himself he seems very willing to deny that opportunity to others.
That’s out of order.
Is it? Migration is either good or bad. Personally enjoying the benefits of migration and the ability to live elsewhere whilst insisting that others do not is hypocrisy. I'm not pointing the finger at Sandpit here but its a vibe that was all too common in English expats in Spain who lived there, spoke minimal Spanish and integrated as little as possible. Loud beach care conversations about "bloody migrants" back home who come in to sponge and don't speak the language.
Migration is not either good or bad. You seem to be saying that if something is good then more of it would be better. I can’t actually think of a single thing (with the possible exception of money) for which that stays true past a certain point.
According to Google, Hamilton has an estimated net worth of $825m.
Serena Williams is on, apparently $210m.
I find that hard to believe with all the endorsements she must have had.
Hamilton will be being paid a lot more though. At about $55 million a year, that’s probably 4-5 times what a tennis player could earn in prize money even if they won every tournament. Plus he will be having all his coaching, nutritionists, physio etc provided by McLaren and Serena will have to pay for her own.
I'm not surprised hes wealthier, but how low her wealth is despite such a long career.
Lots of people don't like Serena Williams, she's nowhere near as popular and marketable as Lewis. His sponsorship deals will be an order of magnitude larger than hers because of that. Comparing like for like I'd expect that Roger Federer will have similar career and sponsorship earnings to Lewis.
You would expect wrongly. Estimated worth $450 million so around half of what Hamilton has.
Have you given any thought to the reliability of the sources for that information? It must be an easy ride, submitting history essays to you. I wouldn't bet 5p on it being the right OOM.
*Shrugs*
All estimates of wealth are just that - estimates. Unless you have access to their private accounts (which I'm assuming you don't).
But Lewis Hamilton's current annual earnings including endorsements are around 60% of Federer's entire career prize money (source - Forbes). He also gets for free from his employers many things Federer will have to pay for himself. Federer's largest commercial endorsement is with Uniqlo, which has so far paid him $60 million of a $300 million ten year contract.
So although people may be surprised, it's not crazily far out or implausible that Hamilton has double the wealth of even tennis' greatest players.
I think what it really does show is just how much money is sloshing around in F1.
Sorry. On reflection that was snarky.
But I wouldn't hang a dog on what the internet thinks someone is worth.
Oh well, I’m now more likely to lose £100 to @Philip_Thompson, than I thought I was going to be 48 hours ago!
On September 8th Sandpit wrote:
"She has no chance of winning SPoTY."
Sometimes you just need to admit you got something badly wrong.
I'm even beginning to wonder if the real reason you're hell-bent on this stance is that she looks and sounds something other than a WASP?
I hope that's not the case but otherwise you're coming across as ridiculous and a sore loser.
Err, what?
I said last week that she had no chance, and I’m now saying she has a much better chance having won the tournament.
Do you even understand what the English words 'no chance' mean? If you write no chance you don't suddenly get the right to revise the words into 'by no chance I really meant not a lot of chance.' Your kind of langauge is dangerous in betting circles.
I said at the time that you'd written something silly.
The context to my comment was that she had no chance *unless she wins the tournament*.
How not to admit you were wrong. Now you're adding words that you didn't put.
We all make mistakes. The secret to success is to admit them, if not to others at least to yourself. To attempt to re-write what you said belittles yourself. Take some time out and reflect.
So, I wonder who will land the big sponsorship deal with Emma? Someone is going to pay her an enormous amount of money for the modern face of a global superstar.
Emma Raducanu can have more than one sponsor, and from inside and outside the tennis world. Look at the logos plastered all over Lewis Hamilton when he wins the Italian Grand Prix this afternoon. And she can appear in adverts separately from sponsorship. Since she is fluent in Mandarin as well as English, the huge Chinese market is also open to her.
I expect that she also may well change perceptions of the British-Romanian community. Even Nigel Farage seems to be changing his mind over having Romanians as neighbours.
I note she came here aged 2, which would have been 2005 or so. Did her father come on his Romanian passport under FOM, with his Chinese spouse?
I believe her family is reasonably well off. I don't know why that makes a significant difference, but apparently it can do.
Edit. And her parents work in the City.
Probably one of her parents employers sorted out the visa issues they needed to come work in London.
Here's another question. Who pays the travel costs and accommodation bills for F1 drivers? Is it the driver or the team?
If not, there's another huge expense that individual tournament players (e.g. snooker or tennis) have that Hamilton doesn't. Bearing in mind once you've paid the costs of a really top class hotel* with a decent fitness suite and possibly swimming pool, and booked all your entourage in, and paid the travel costs, and paid the entry fee for the tournament, there's a big hole in your winnings right there.
*I don't think Serena Williams will be staying at Feltham Travelodge somehow.
Oh well, I’m now more likely to lose £100 to @Philip_Thompson, than I thought I was going to be 48 hours ago!
On September 8th Sandpit wrote:
"She has no chance of winning SPoTY."
Sometimes you just need to admit you got something badly wrong.
I'm even beginning to wonder if the real reason you're hell-bent on this stance is that she looks and sounds something other than a WASP?
I hope that's not the case but otherwise you're coming across as ridiculous and a sore loser.
Err, what?
I said last week that she had no chance, and I’m now saying she has a much better chance having won the tournament.
Do you even understand what the English words 'no chance' mean? If you write no chance you don't suddenly get the right to revise the words into 'by no chance I really meant not a lot of chance.' Your kind of langauge is dangerous in betting circles.
I said at the time that you'd written something silly.
The context to my comment was that she had no chance *unless she wins the tournament*.
How not to admit you were wrong. Now you're adding words that you didn't put.
We all make mistakes. The secret to success is to admit them, if not to others at least to yourself. To attempt to re-write what you said belittles yourself. Take some time out and reflect.
So, I wonder who will land the big sponsorship deal with Emma? Someone is going to pay her an enormous amount of money for the modern face of a global superstar.
Emma Raducanu can have more than one sponsor, and from inside and outside the tennis world. Look at the logos plastered all over Lewis Hamilton when he wins the Italian Grand Prix this afternoon. And she can appear in adverts separately from sponsorship. Since she is fluent in Mandarin as well as English, the huge Chinese market is also open to her.
I expect that she also may well change perceptions of the British-Romanian community. Even Nigel Farage seems to be changing his mind over having Romanians as neighbours.
I note she came here aged 2, which would have been 2005 or so. Did her father come on his Romanian passport under FOM, with his Chinese spouse?
I believe her family is reasonably well off. I don't know why that makes a significant difference, but apparently it can do.
Edit. And her parents work in the City.
Only people who have money get the chance to spend the time and money required to get anywhere. It is the desperation to try and claim any person no matter what country they or their parents come from as English when they win anything and want anyone else similar to be deported at the first opportunity.
I don't think many countries on the planet have a problem with rallying behind and claiming kinship with a successful sports star, even if they otherwise want very strict migration rules. No one cares if X is born in England, Scotland, Nigeria, Qatar etc, so long as they represent the flag and win.
That's why efforts on linking it to immigration debates don't work, since virtually no one supports zero immigration stances, even if they are very very harsh, so even those people will be able to say they'd have had no problem with star X coming.
Here's another question. Who pays the travel costs and accommodation bills for F1 drivers? Is it the driver or the team?
If not, there's another huge expense that individual tournament players (e.g. snooker or tennis) have that Hamilton doesn't. Bearing in mind once you've paid the costs of a really top class hotel* with a decent fitness suite and possibly swimming pool, and booked all your entourage in, and paid the travel costs, and paid the entry fee for the tournament, there's a big hole in your winnings right there.
*I don't think Serena Williams will be staying at Feltham Travelodge somehow.
That's nothing compared to who pays the insurance bills for F1 drivers....i imagine that is many many millions per year.
I highly doubt F1 drivers pay for anything, e.g. accomodation costs, virtually no elite team sports competitors do. And even individual sports, like golf and tennis, often there is a group deal done and they pay virtually nothing (or their sponsors already agree to the tab).
According to Google, Hamilton has an estimated net worth of $825m.
Serena Williams is on, apparently $210m.
I find that hard to believe with all the endorsements she must have had.
Hamilton will be being paid a lot more though. At about $55 million a year, that’s probably 4-5 times what a tennis player could earn in prize money even if they won every tournament. Plus he will be having all his coaching, nutritionists, physio etc provided by McLaren and Serena will have to pay for her own.
I'm not surprised hes wealthier, but how low her wealth is despite such a long career.
Lots of people don't like Serena Williams, she's nowhere near as popular and marketable as Lewis. His sponsorship deals will be an order of magnitude larger than hers because of that. Comparing like for like I'd expect that Roger Federer will have similar career and sponsorship earnings to Lewis.
You would expect wrongly. Estimated worth $450 million so around half of what Hamilton has.
Have you given any thought to the reliability of the sources for that information? It must be an easy ride, submitting history essays to you. I wouldn't bet 5p on it being the right OOM.
*Shrugs*
All estimates of wealth are just that - estimates. Unless you have access to their private accounts (which I'm assuming you don't).
But Lewis Hamilton's current annual earnings including endorsements are around 60% of Federer's entire career prize money (source - Forbes). He also gets for free from his employers many things Federer will have to pay for himself. Federer's largest commercial endorsement is with Uniqlo, which has so far paid him $60 million of a $300 million ten year contract.
So although people may be surprised, it's not crazily far out or implausible that Hamilton has double the wealth of even tennis' greatest players.
I think what it really does show is just how much money is sloshing around in F1.
Sorry. On reflection that was snarky.
But I wouldn't hang a dog on what the internet thinks someone is worth.
Well, I'm glad to hear it. Dogs are lovely animals and don't deserve capital punishment (unless they're Akitas).
But at the same time, there are very good reasons why Federer has probably accumulated less wealth than Hamilton. I don't find the figure quoted implausible or especially surprising, and incidentally, that is generally how an historian critiques sources for reliability.
Oh well, I’m now more likely to lose £100 to @Philip_Thompson, than I thought I was going to be 48 hours ago!
On September 8th Sandpit wrote:
"She has no chance of winning SPoTY."
Sometimes you just need to admit you got something badly wrong.
I'm even beginning to wonder if the real reason you're hell-bent on this stance is that she looks and sounds something other than a WASP?
I hope that's not the case but otherwise you're coming across as ridiculous and a sore loser.
Err, what?
I said last week that she had no chance, and I’m now saying she has a much better chance having won the tournament.
Do you even understand what the English words 'no chance' mean? If you write no chance you don't suddenly get the right to revise the words into 'by no chance I really meant not a lot of chance.' Your kind of langauge is dangerous in betting circles.
I said at the time that you'd written something silly.
The context to my comment was that she had no chance *unless she wins the tournament*.
How not to admit you were wrong. Now you're adding words that you didn't put.
We all make mistakes. The secret to success is to admit them, if not to others at least to yourself. To attempt to re-write what you said belittles yourself. Take some time out and reflect.
So, I wonder who will land the big sponsorship deal with Emma? Someone is going to pay her an enormous amount of money for the modern face of a global superstar.
Emma Raducanu can have more than one sponsor, and from inside and outside the tennis world. Look at the logos plastered all over Lewis Hamilton when he wins the Italian Grand Prix this afternoon. And she can appear in adverts separately from sponsorship. Since she is fluent in Mandarin as well as English, the huge Chinese market is also open to her.
I expect that she also may well change perceptions of the British-Romanian community. Even Nigel Farage seems to be changing his mind over having Romanians as neighbours.
I note she came here aged 2, which would have been 2005 or so. Did her father come on his Romanian passport under FOM, with his Chinese spouse?
Why is this even being discussed? As you say, she came here at the age of two and obviously qualifies to represent Britain or she wouldn't be allowed to represent Britain.
We should just be celebrating her remarkable achievement.
Mr. Dickson, he's just an airhead spender desperate for popularity and quite willing to throw money (not his) away to get nice headlines that rapidly fade.
Right, that’s Andrew and Nigel covered, but what do you think about Boris?
Breaking
Police Scotland granted warrant to seize evidence in the £600,000 SNP fraud enquiry including accounts and any relevant materials from Johnston Carmichael hired by the SNP
Sturgeon's husband Peter Murrell is to be interviewed by Police Scotland also
Interesting, I wonder how this will play out.
Could you explain?
Do they have the office sealed already, or was it announced when they turned up to do the seizure?
Surely they haven't announced that they are coming?
Or is this a technical meaning of "seize" ie "legal permission to look at stuff they have already taken into custody"?
I think that is a mistake. Not a mistake like renewing Cressida Dick's appointment, which made me sick to my stomach, but a mistake. We need to build defences that can operate short of lockdowns if England follows the same trend as Scotland did once the schools went back. The ability to control the congregation of people with vaccine passports is an obvious intermediate step. We will not have that in our armoury. Mistake.
It will be fascinating to see how quickly the Tory invulnerability is swept away - if we are seeing the start of it.
So far they have been able to lie and break the law and have been practically applauded for doing so by the Cult of Boris. Yes its marvellous that he lied to the Queen etc.
So this week's lies - that the tax increase is to pay for social care, and that its progressive - shouldn't have been any concern. Tory voters like being lied to. And yet suddenly it appears they don't.
One possible angle. We saw the zeal for Brexit. That was seen as doing something to someone else - the man, the powers that be, the EU, the bureaucrats. Easy to support something that supposedly only hits Other People.
But this tax hike hits everyone. And the people who felt hard done by when we were in the EU get hard done the hardest. And thats before working families get scalped by the UC cut. And to cap it all off, they can't even see what benefit there is - the NHS will be on its knees again this winter and keep getting worse according to Javid.
Like I said, this is the Tories apocalpseofuck.
Interestingly - the reason it's not included within National insurance was because Rishi wanted it to be obvious on every payslip.
Which means if Labour gets its messaging right on every payslip there is a deduction to allow the Southern pensioners to keep their home
I get the rationale. Its not a tax rise, its a "Social Care Levy". Same as the "Adult Social Care Levy" 2% on your council tax.
The problem is that people see straight through it. With council tax the complaint is why am I having to pay for something someone else needs (direct repeated horse's mouth quotes from the doorstep before anyone picks at it).
So why would this NI levy be any different? Its a tax. Explicitly called out and supposedly hypothecated. With the money openly wasted.
BTW, southern pensioners DO NOT keep their home. The iniquity of social care was that people have to liquidate their kids inheritance to pay for their own care. They still need to pay £86k - which means selling their home. "Ah but not when they are alive" I heard some clown apologist say on here.
Yes, so after they die the house gets sold to pay for their care. No inheritance.
Its literally the apocalypseofuck. A massive tax rise. On the hardest working (which in punter land is "me"). To fix something that isn't fixed in 3 years. To patch the NHS before then so where the fuck is the Brexit money.
Rishi needs to get his brilliant spin machine on it. Boris produced the plan. Its his team not mine. I warned him not to. Or he goes down with the clown.
So capping social care costs at £86k means most of the value of the average family home would not be taken in care costs
It is a long time since I sat O level maths, but isn't median an unusual metric to use to demonstrate your point. I would have thought mean/average would be more appropriate. I don't know what difference this might make, just making an observation.
Though I expect some swine to try and bring it back.
Mr. Doethur, the Romans used to crucify dogs. Not often, but to commemorate their failure to warn of the Gauls (unlike the geese, who gave us the word money through Juno Moneta). The joke of crucifying a dog playing Jesus in a nativity play is cu from the DVD of Blackadder but included in the audiobook.
Morning. I wondered if there has been any thinking on the 'reform party' rise, 5% in a recent poll. Looks like a continuation of the Brexit party. Thanks to the NI apocolypsef**k (as someone described it on here, accurately); they now have 2 unique policies of being low tax, against Covid Passports, and there is some low key anti woke stuff going on according to their website, a bit of a bonus. This does look, to me, like rather fertile political ground - maybe a new home for @Casino_Royale; and other disillusioned tories.
It was interesting this morning that Jon Ashworth for Labour refused to commit to abolishing the NI tax rise and covid passports in England, unlike Scotland, have been abandoned
It really needs the lib dems to provide their response and detail how they would deal with the NHS and social care crisis
According to Google, Hamilton has an estimated net worth of $825m.
Serena Williams is on, apparently $210m.
I find that hard to believe with all the endorsements she must have had.
Hamilton will be being paid a lot more though. At about $55 million a year, that’s probably 4-5 times what a tennis player could earn in prize money even if they won every tournament. Plus he will be having all his coaching, nutritionists, physio etc provided by McLaren and Serena will have to pay for her own.
I'm not surprised hes wealthier, but how low her wealth is despite such a long career.
Lots of people don't like Serena Williams, she's nowhere near as popular and marketable as Lewis. His sponsorship deals will be an order of magnitude larger than hers because of that. Comparing like for like I'd expect that Roger Federer will have similar career and sponsorship earnings to Lewis.
You would expect wrongly. Estimated worth $450 million so around half of what Hamilton has.
Have you given any thought to the reliability of the sources for that information? It must be an easy ride, submitting history essays to you. I wouldn't bet 5p on it being the right OOM.
*Shrugs*
All estimates of wealth are just that - estimates. Unless you have access to their private accounts (which I'm assuming you don't).
But Lewis Hamilton's current annual earnings including endorsements are around 60% of Federer's entire career prize money (source - Forbes). He also gets for free from his employers many things Federer will have to pay for himself. Federer's largest commercial endorsement is with Uniqlo, which has so far paid him $60 million of a $300 million ten year contract.
So although people may be surprised, it's not crazily far out or implausible that Hamilton has double the wealth of even tennis' greatest players.
I think what it really does show is just how much money is sloshing around in F1.
Sorry. On reflection that was snarky.
But I wouldn't hang a dog on what the internet thinks someone is worth.
Well, I'm glad to hear it. Dogs are lovely animals and don't deserve capital punishment (unless they're Akitas).
But at the same time, there are very good reasons why Federer has probably accumulated less wealth than Hamilton. I don't find the figure quoted implausible or especially surprising, and incidentally, that is generally how an historian critiques sources for reliability.
There's also the fact that Formula 1 is the most unashamedly, unabashed commercialised of all sports. At least outside of America.
Hamilton can go into a press conference, or drive around during his race wearing 12 different logos and nobody will bat an eye.
If Federer did that it would be regarded as incredibly tacky.
Those scumbags at MOS pretending they had anything to do with it when in fact the media ignored it for years and it was only when several people reported it to the police that anything was done about it and even then the police had to be dragged screaming and kicking for months to really look at it. It was so blatant even they could not ignore it much to eth chagrin of Sturgeon. The Magpie has not been seen since.
Oh well, I’m now more likely to lose £100 to @Philip_Thompson, than I thought I was going to be 48 hours ago!
On September 8th Sandpit wrote:
"She has no chance of winning SPoTY."
Sometimes you just need to admit you got something badly wrong.
I'm even beginning to wonder if the real reason you're hell-bent on this stance is that she looks and sounds something other than a WASP?
I hope that's not the case but otherwise you're coming across as ridiculous and a sore loser.
Err, what?
I said last week that she had no chance, and I’m now saying she has a much better chance having won the tournament.
Do you even understand what the English words 'no chance' mean? If you write no chance you don't suddenly get the right to revise the words into 'by no chance I really meant not a lot of chance.' Your kind of langauge is dangerous in betting circles.
I said at the time that you'd written something silly.
The context to my comment was that she had no chance *unless she wins the tournament*.
How not to admit you were wrong. Now you're adding words that you didn't put.
We all make mistakes. The secret to success is to admit them, if not to others at least to yourself. To attempt to re-write what you said belittles yourself. Take some time out and reflect.
So, I wonder who will land the big sponsorship deal with Emma? Someone is going to pay her an enormous amount of money for the modern face of a global superstar.
Emma Raducanu can have more than one sponsor, and from inside and outside the tennis world. Look at the logos plastered all over Lewis Hamilton when he wins the Italian Grand Prix this afternoon. And she can appear in adverts separately from sponsorship. Since she is fluent in Mandarin as well as English, the huge Chinese market is also open to her.
I expect that she also may well change perceptions of the British-Romanian community. Even Nigel Farage seems to be changing his mind over having Romanians as neighbours.
I note she came here aged 2, which would have been 2005 or so. Did her father come on his Romanian passport under FOM, with his Chinese spouse?
I believe her family is reasonably well off. I don't know why that makes a significant difference, but apparently it can do.
Edit. And her parents work in the City.
Probably one of her parents employers sorted out the visa issues they needed to come work in London.
Mr. Dickson, he's just an airhead spender desperate for popularity and quite willing to throw money (not his) away to get nice headlines that rapidly fade.
Right, that’s Andrew and Nigel covered, but what do you think about Boris?
Breaking
Police Scotland granted warrant to seize evidence in the £600,000 SNP fraud enquiry including accounts and any relevant materials from Johnston Carmichael hired by the SNP
Sturgeon's husband Peter Murrell is to be interviewed by Police Scotland also
Interesting, I wonder how this will play out.
Could you explain?
Do they have the office sealed already, or was it announced when they turned up to do the seizure?
Surely they haven't announced that they are coming?
Or is this a technical meaning of "seize" ie "legal permission to look at stuff they have already taken into custody"?
Ha ha, how would I know. I’m just curious as to what happens, especially it’s impact on betting opportunities. I’m interested in what other peoples takes are. Scottxp has posted a link to the press report.
Oh well, I’m now more likely to lose £100 to @Philip_Thompson, than I thought I was going to be 48 hours ago!
On September 8th Sandpit wrote:
"She has no chance of winning SPoTY."
Sometimes you just need to admit you got something badly wrong.
I'm even beginning to wonder if the real reason you're hell-bent on this stance is that she looks and sounds something other than a WASP?
I hope that's not the case but otherwise you're coming across as ridiculous and a sore loser.
Err, what?
I said last week that she had no chance, and I’m now saying she has a much better chance having won the tournament.
Do you even understand what the English words 'no chance' mean? If you write no chance you don't suddenly get the right to revise the words into 'by no chance I really meant not a lot of chance.' Your kind of langauge is dangerous in betting circles.
I said at the time that you'd written something silly.
The context to my comment was that she had no chance *unless she wins the tournament*.
How not to admit you were wrong. Now you're adding words that you didn't put.
We all make mistakes. The secret to success is to admit them, if not to others at least to yourself. To attempt to re-write what you said belittles yourself. Take some time out and reflect.
So, I wonder who will land the big sponsorship deal with Emma? Someone is going to pay her an enormous amount of money for the modern face of a global superstar.
Emma Raducanu can have more than one sponsor, and from inside and outside the tennis world. Look at the logos plastered all over Lewis Hamilton when he wins the Italian Grand Prix this afternoon. And she can appear in adverts separately from sponsorship. Since she is fluent in Mandarin as well as English, the huge Chinese market is also open to her.
I expect that she also may well change perceptions of the British-Romanian community. Even Nigel Farage seems to be changing his mind over having Romanians as neighbours.
I note she came here aged 2, which would have been 2005 or so. Did her father come on his Romanian passport under FOM, with his Chinese spouse?
Seems a tad unlikely given Romania didn't join the EU until 2007.
No doubt they would have come as Tories with a wedge of cash. You can bet they did not come as refugee's and get social housing.
Oh well, I’m now more likely to lose £100 to @Philip_Thompson, than I thought I was going to be 48 hours ago!
On September 8th Sandpit wrote:
"She has no chance of winning SPoTY."
Sometimes you just need to admit you got something badly wrong.
I'm even beginning to wonder if the real reason you're hell-bent on this stance is that she looks and sounds something other than a WASP?
I hope that's not the case but otherwise you're coming across as ridiculous and a sore loser.
Err, what?
I said last week that she had no chance, and I’m now saying she has a much better chance having won the tournament.
Do you even understand what the English words 'no chance' mean? If you write no chance you don't suddenly get the right to revise the words into 'by no chance I really meant not a lot of chance.' Your kind of langauge is dangerous in betting circles.
I said at the time that you'd written something silly.
The context to my comment was that she had no chance *unless she wins the tournament*.
How not to admit you were wrong. Now you're adding words that you didn't put.
We all make mistakes. The secret to success is to admit them, if not to others at least to yourself. To attempt to re-write what you said belittles yourself. Take some time out and reflect.
So, I wonder who will land the big sponsorship deal with Emma? Someone is going to pay her an enormous amount of money for the modern face of a global superstar.
Emma Raducanu can have more than one sponsor, and from inside and outside the tennis world. Look at the logos plastered all over Lewis Hamilton when he wins the Italian Grand Prix this afternoon. And she can appear in adverts separately from sponsorship. Since she is fluent in Mandarin as well as English, the huge Chinese market is also open to her.
I expect that she also may well change perceptions of the British-Romanian community. Even Nigel Farage seems to be changing his mind over having Romanians as neighbours.
I note she came here aged 2, which would have been 2005 or so. Did her father come on his Romanian passport under FOM, with his Chinese spouse?
Why is this even being discussed? As you say, she came here at the age of two and obviously qualifies to represent Britain or she wouldn't be allowed to represent Britain.
We should just be celebrating her remarkable achievement.
Foxy from time to time gets a bit strange over these things e.g. posting link to a dubious tweet about basically all the England footballers "wouldn't play for England if not for immigration"....
I don't think even the most brexity Brexit person is against international financial workers coming to work in the UK under visa schemes for highly skilled workers.
Personally, the only time an individual birthplace comes into consideration when talking about representing England, Britain, UK, is if they played international sport for another country then switched.
Coincidentally, or not, Raducanu was dressed in the colours of the Romanian flag last night. As for how her parents got to the UK - I thought the narrative was that Labour let anyone in.
Why do you say that? I would think that the threat has motivated some to get jabbed.
It has emboldened the anti-vaxxers and entrenched conspiracy theory thinking. I've seen this over and over with people.
Just tell them that vaccination = much less chance of getting seriously ill or dying. Don't create a load of guilt tripping stuff about taking the vaccine to save granny, or threaten to enforce compliance through a new centralised ID system.
Comments
Secondly, I suspect most souther pensioners with a house have an asset worth substantially more than £86K, so they wont be losing all the inheritance, for the personal care side of costs. What Johnson skipped over is that the cap has no affect on the 'hotel' costs as they are called e.g. food, heating for the care home etc. So some people with dementia who don't have sufficient pension coming in to cover these hotel costs will rack up large bills if they are ill for years on end.
But, if you have a decent final salary pension then you will be able to pass on most of the family home to the (ageing) kids.
And that's before we get into a discussion about the emergence of an insurance market for the £86K costs.
We cannot be sure whether her parents would have met the points system requirement we now have for all migrants I don't think. However also should be noted she was educated at a grammar school so good news for grammar supporters too as well as maybe EEA supporters
They may well not switch to Labour or LD, or even Reform, but just not vote.
They came hear from Canada where I imagine they were citizens.
And Romania didn’t join the EU until 2007, when Labour did impose a transition. Who can forget Keith Vaz turning up at an airport to welcome the first Romanians and Bulgarians to come under FOM?
https://www.itv.com/news/update/2014-01-01/keith-vaz-mp-greet-romanians-off-the-plane-at-luton/
"She has no chance of winning SPoTY."
Sometimes you just need to admit you got something badly wrong.
And I am not allowed to bring up @Heathener's record on Covid predictions?
The direction of travel is key. And it appears to be sweeping away from your boy Boris.
You cannot trademark her with your fucking logo. Appalling. https://twitter.com/conservatives/status/1436822780201295876
You provided no link, and when I googled your gobbledegook it churned out some stale Unionist duffers from the Silly Season.
Least career tour matches played before winning a grand slam
Least career tour losses before winning a grand slam
It is not just that she is a qualifier, or is young, it is that she has not really played any senior tennis bar Wimbledon (retired injured) and winning the US Open.
https://twitter.com/markaustintv/status/1436955212439248898
2.5 million working families stand to lose over £1,000 a year if they cut the £20 uplift to Universal Credit.
They must cancel the cut.
https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1436970424064151556
On another note we were in Newcastle by the swing bridge yesterday and the sight of the little bairns running around the key side was wonderful. It’s a great event for the city.
Yes, direction is key. If we really are getting back to “normal politics” Johnson is screwed.
Edit - mind you, I daresay most of us could just about manage on around $450 million.
I am an oldy and have considerable personal experience in this field, and can tell 'Jon' not one oldy goes into care until all the other choices have been explored and it is the last resort
But the government has allowed the meme of this being all about protecting wealthy pensioners to take a firm hold and it will be almost impossible to shift now. It is a curious error.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9981229/PM-Rishi-Sunak-fled-Commons-key-vote-glittering-fundraising-event.html
RIP the Conservative and Unionist Party
They seem to have a bob or two, anyway.
If it was a normal year, yes she would have played a handful more tour level tournaments.
Is it perhaps just that they 'left' the Commons?
It is a tax rise. Of course it is - how can tackling social care not be a tax rise.
There seems to be some confusion as to the position of the home when someone permanently goes to a care home.
The house is either completely in or completely out of the assessment.
These are the main circumstances that prevent the home being brought into the finance assessment, under CURRENT rules:
- It is it's still occupied by spouse
- it is still occupied by a relative (typically child) who is over 60
- it is still occupied by any relative who is disabled (of any age)
- the first 12 weeks' care home costs are always disregarded
To repeat - these are the rules now.
The change - and it is a big change - that is coming Autumn 2023 is the £86k cap. This means that even when the
property is brought into the assessment the maximum that can be taken of its value (in combination with other asset and income contributions to care) is £86k.
So where you say: "So why would this NI levy be any different? Its a tax. Explicitly called out and supposedly hypothecated. With the money openly wasted" what do you mean? Money is clearly going to be needed to cover care home hosts when the £86k cap is reached. Are you suggesting that the Autumn 2023 date will not be adhered to? You must be or your comment makes no sense.
I expect they arrived in 2005 via skilled migration route requiring a tier 2 visa.
That, I suspect will never to matched
And, of course. 'care' covers a range of options.
@tumcarayol another unique fact: even if she wins the US Open next year, she will *still* lose ranking points (because she came in as a qualifier).
https://lginform.local.gov.uk/reports/lgastandard?mod-metric=5230&mod-area=E92000001&mod-group=AllRegions_England&mod-type=namedComparisonGroup
So capping social care costs at £86k means most of the value of the average family home would not be taken in care costs
He wants to move back to the UK but as a contractor can’t prove to Uk immigration satisfaction that he earns enough to bro g his wife with him
All estimates of wealth are just that - estimates. Unless you have access to their private accounts (which I'm assuming you don't).
But Lewis Hamilton's current annual earnings including endorsements are around 60% of Federer's entire career prize money (source - Forbes). He also gets for free from his employers many things Federer will have to pay for himself. Federer's largest commercial endorsement is with Uniqlo, which has so far paid him $60 million of a $300 million ten year contract.
So although people may be surprised, it's not crazily far out or implausible that Hamilton has double the wealth of even tennis' greatest players.
I think what it really does show is just how much money is sloshing around in F1.
Just kidding.
But I wouldn't hang a dog on what the internet thinks someone is worth.
If not, there's another huge expense that individual tournament players (e.g. snooker or tennis) have that Hamilton doesn't. Bearing in mind once you've paid the costs of a really top class hotel* with a decent fitness suite and possibly swimming pool, and booked all your entourage in, and paid the travel costs, and paid the entry fee for the tournament, there's a big hole in your winnings right there.
*I don't think Serena Williams will be staying at Feltham Travelodge somehow.
That's why efforts on linking it to immigration debates don't work, since virtually no one supports zero immigration stances, even if they are very very harsh, so even those people will be able to say they'd have had no problem with star X coming.
I highly doubt F1 drivers pay for anything, e.g. accomodation costs, virtually no elite team sports competitors do. And even individual sports, like golf and tennis, often there is a group deal done and they pay virtually nothing (or their sponsors already agree to the tab).
But at the same time, there are very good reasons why Federer has probably accumulated less wealth than Hamilton. I don't find the figure quoted implausible or especially surprising, and incidentally, that is generally how an historian critiques sources for reliability.
We should just be celebrating her remarkable achievement.
Very "tax efficient"
Do they have the office sealed already, or was it announced when they turned up to do the seizure?
Surely they haven't announced that they are coming?
Or is this a technical meaning of "seize" ie "legal permission to look at stuff they have already taken into custody"?
Will I ever get anything wrong? It's getting silly.
Though I expect some swine to try and bring it back.
Mr. Doethur, the Romans used to crucify dogs. Not often, but to commemorate their failure to warn of the Gauls (unlike the geese, who gave us the word money through Juno Moneta). The joke of crucifying a dog playing Jesus in a nativity play is cu from the DVD of Blackadder but included in the audiobook.
It really needs the lib dems to provide their response and detail how they would deal with the NHS and social care crisis
I am genuinely interested
Hamilton can go into a press conference, or drive around during his race wearing 12 different logos and nobody will bat an eye.
If Federer did that it would be regarded as incredibly tacky.
“We do need more carers, there is a shortage of carers.”
Govt has so far been reluctant to address the shortage. #Marr
https://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/1436977658781474820
I don't think even the most brexity Brexit person is against international financial workers coming to work in the UK under visa schemes for highly skilled workers.
Personally, the only time an individual birthplace comes into consideration when talking about representing England, Britain, UK, is if they played international sport for another country then switched.
Just tell them that vaccination = much less chance of getting seriously ill or dying. Don't create a load of guilt tripping stuff about taking the vaccine to save granny, or threaten to enforce compliance through a new centralised ID system.