Howdy, Stranger!

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

When the rules are the main event: Smarkets covid restrictions market – politicalbetting.com

24

Comments

  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,862
    Stocky said:

    kinabalu said:

    Morning all, thanks @Quincel, interesting situation and here's my take on it:

    The 're-introduction' point is a red herring. That has a reasonable general as opposed to specific interpretation. So it's ok to settle the market as Yes for a rule which is new and wasn't seen during previous Covid restrictions. Eg the Not Happening Event of vaxports for nightclubs would, if I'm wrong and it were to happen, rightly settle as Yes.

    But I would feel VERY hard done by if I'd backed No and the sole instance of 'vaxports for care home workers' settled it for Yes. The market sub-heading clearly says 'social contact' and this isn't social contact. It's professional contact - ie specifically NOT social contact. Why put the word 'social' in there unless to exclude contact which is non-social? Total balls and just plain wrong. I'd fight this one all the way to the House of Lords if necessary.

    However, if the rule brought in for care homes is wider and also covers friends & family visiting residents, then this is fair dues. That's a restriction on social contact. That should settle as Yes. No argument whatsoever there.

    Even then not if the legislation was already passed prior to the market launch. If so then Smarkets is running a false market.
    Yep that makes our case a slam dunk. Don't even need a QC, me or you can do it. But let's say you as the safer choice.
  • HYUFD said:

    Do Britons want to see the return of COVID-19 restrictions?

    Compulsory face masks in shops/on public transport: 76%
    Govt advice to work from home where possible: 69%
    Vaccine passports for large events: 69%
    Pubs/restaurants closed: 22%
    Schools closed: 19%

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1451830429951086592?s=20

    Totally unconnected to what people *really* think.
  • Wow. Only just caught up with the musings of this lady:

    https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/tv/conservative-host-candace-owens-calls-for-us-to-invade-australia-to-free-people-from-tyranny/news-story/9a487acac0dbafefaa0945d2aa7284cc

    Surely this suggests that AUUUKUS is finished should Trump - or indeed any GOP candidate - prevail in 2024.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,719
    edited October 2021

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Watching this makes me feel pity for Greta. Who could let this happen to a little girl?

    Must say, I do quite like the Australian style points based response to the "selfish, badly educated, virtue signalling little turds"

    Patrick Moore
    @EcoSenseNow
    Watch as Sky News Australia rips a new one for Greta. This would never happen in Canada, USA, or Europe. Three Cheers!

    Haven't followed the link as I'm immune to Blimpish clickbait. But it's interesting what hostility Greta arouses. Nearly everyone agrees she's got a point, though we can debate how far we need to go to turn the ship round before it hits the rocks. Instead of discussing that, let's have a go at a teenager...
    But he wasn't having a go at a teenager, Greta.

    He was having a go at teenagers, Australian teenagers.
    Nick’s comment still applies.
    It doesn't.

    Modern western middle class teenagers have a very indulged and pampered lifestyle and most will struggle to maintain that when they have to fund it themselves.

    Its not really their fault but rather that of their parents, who would be better advised saving money for their kids rather than spending so much on them.
    It does - and your response is any event directed at their parents.

    As far as Australia’s CO2 output is concerned, this has little or nothing to do with teenagers and their mobile phone usage - indeed there is already one state (Tasmania) with 100% renewable electricity.
    Being one of the world’s largest coal producers is rather more germane.

    It is blimpish clickbait par excellence, and frankly embarrassing to watch.
    Embarrassing because he points out some inconvenient truths ?

    Without watching it again didn't he make points about aircon usage and travel by cars.

    A more UK or US equivalent could also mention the amount of air travel the modern lifestyle includes.
    If he feels so strongly about a consumerist lifestyle then surely he ought to be agreeing with their sentiments while fulminating about their behaviour ?
    No, it's just ignorant dyspepsia.
    Oh I'm sure he lives it up and that his own upbringing wasn't something out of an Australian Hovis advert.

    But so what - few of us fully match our deeds to our thoughts - and the fundamental point remains that the modern middle class teenager has a pampered, privileged lifestyle, A lifestyle, at least in the UK, they will struggle to maintain when they have to fund it themselves.
    A lifestyle they will struggle to maintain after their rentier parents and grandparents have extorted sufficient rents and taxes from them.
    Indeed.

    Their parents and grandparents generations are indulging them at the wrong time and will exploit them at the wrong time.

    The younger generation are having their current expectations raised and their future means reduced.
    The younger generation will inherit more than any generation before them thanks to the assets and savings their parents and grandparents have built up
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,005
    I have to say I am quite disappointed with my employer's approach to the vaccination. Not least because it is the civil service. According to my union rep we are expected to try to rearrange a vaccination outside working hours and if we can't do that then we can get vaccinated in working time. There is nothing particularly unusual about the sort of 9-5pm work we do that suggests we would desperately need to rearrange our vaccination time. Although we can use working time I know many people - perhaps most - who are working flexibly so that if they take two hours off in the afternoon to get the vaccine they'll do an extra two hours work in the evening. I have a team member who is thinking of taking half a day annual leave as he estimates that it may be 3 hours for him to get to the vaccination centre and back again. I know more flexible ways of working are increasingly the norm but the impression is of an employer that isn't too bothered about us getting vaccinated and that it's for our own benefit that we do so. Given the refusal of many people to get the vaccine is a large part of the reason we are in the mess we are I find it very disappointing. Why would you want to put any barriers in the way of people getting vaccinated?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,590

    Mr. Sandpit, I'm excited to discover whether the PS5 becomes actually possible to buy before the PS6 is released.

    *sighs*

    There's a thriving market in stolen ones, apparently.
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 4,748
    edited October 2021
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:


    It’s difficult, but necessary for those wanting change to bring along the general public with them.

    As an example, we know that prettty much all of the delegates to the COP26 conference are going to turn up on private or government planes, then tell everyone how we all need to do less flying, swap our cars for electric ones and replace boilers with heat sinks at a cost of thousands - as China and Russia don’t even bother to show up, and the USA and India won’t implement an agreement to any meaningful degree.

    The problem is, that for a huge number of people in the country, the cost of transport and energy are significant. Millions of people use old cars to get to minimum-wage jobs working antisocial hours. People advocating petrol being £3 a litre and petrol cars being banned don’t appear to have any understanding of the impact of those policies on the working classes.

    Yes, agreed, except for people who combine a green agenda with a redistributive agenda, which is (even if completely thought out) a complex argument to put across.

    I have the same problem in my day job. There isn't much dispute that factory farming produces cheap meat and lots of suffering and environmental damage. If we just argue against it on the grounds of the damage, it runs into the perfectly legitimate "but what about the impact on poorer people?" argument. As a non-political charity, we can't say "so combine it with higher universal credit and a wealth tax", so we argue that the answer is to tax meat to reflect the indirect costs but ring-fence the proceeds to subsidise healthy non-meat alternatives and high-welfare meat, so that people on low incomes have healthy affordable options with few downsides. But say the words "meat tax" and people just switch off before you finish the sentence.

    That's why Henry Dimbleby's National Food strategy advocates a 30% reduction in meat consumption over 10 years (on sustainability grounds as well as welfare) but explicitly shies away from a meat tax, instead favouring vague things like higher procurement standards, which are a Good Thing but (a) probably won't achieve the 30% cut and (b) also have indirect effects, as it's school and hospital budgets you're hitting.

    It's tricky, but of course unhelpful when people like Patrick Moore just throw out random sneers.
    Yes, there’s an issue with many in the environmental movement being barely-disguised socialists, which I’m sure you’re happy with but many of us aren’t.

    Those on the centre-right see improving technology as the answer, rather than higher taxes and increased state control, and will rally against those who see only increases in the cost of living as proposals put forward.

    There’s also the hypocracy angle, with many of the socialist green advocates living very middle-class lifestyles, as we have seen with the road-closing protestors in recent weeks. They appear to have litttle intention to change their own behaviour, in the same way as they expect everyone else to do so. To be flippant, it won’t be long before someone writes a lengthy opinion piece in the Guardian, celebrating the fact that there’s now a much nicer crowd than there used to be on the Ryanair to Florence.
    Yeah, well exactly. The climate crisis is real, but a lot of the solutions foisted upon us are actually middle class lifestyle/consumer preferences. The war on cheap petrol cars is nothing more than a class issue, an elite of EV drivers wanting to clear the roads of knackered old cars and white vans and the poor people in them to help them get around more quickly; whilst conveniently overlooking the fact that they are still driving a 1.5 tonne lump of metal with a giant battery to do journeys that largely completely unnecessary, or could be done on public transport, foot or bike.

    My neighbour is seriously green, he votes green, recycles everything down to christmas wrapping paper, has never been on a plane as far as I know, goes on holiday camping. His carbon footprint is less than most people, but they are still a two car family (8 year old dacia sandero and a diesel van). Necessary in both cases to get to work - they could in one case switch to an ebike but the roads are too dangerous for cycling.




  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,719

    Wow. Only just caught up with the musings of this lady:

    https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/tv/conservative-host-candace-owens-calls-for-us-to-invade-australia-to-free-people-from-tyranny/news-story/9a487acac0dbafefaa0945d2aa7284cc

    Surely this suggests that AUUUKUS is finished should Trump - or indeed any GOP candidate - prevail in 2024.

    No because such a GOP candidate would also invade China too, especially if Taiwan was attacked and use Australia as a base for that (in any case most Australian states are now easing restrictions)
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 7,463
    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Watching this makes me feel pity for Greta. Who could let this happen to a little girl?

    Must say, I do quite like the Australian style points based response to the "selfish, badly educated, virtue signalling little turds"

    Patrick Moore
    @EcoSenseNow
    Watch as Sky News Australia rips a new one for Greta. This would never happen in Canada, USA, or Europe. Three Cheers!

    Haven't followed the link as I'm immune to Blimpish clickbait. But it's interesting what hostility Greta arouses. Nearly everyone agrees she's got a point, though we can debate how far we need to go to turn the ship round before it hits the rocks. Instead of discussing that, let's have a go at a teenager...
    But he wasn't having a go at a teenager, Greta.

    He was having a go at teenagers, Australian teenagers.
    Nick’s comment still applies.
    It doesn't.

    Modern western middle class teenagers have a very indulged and pampered lifestyle and most will struggle to maintain that when they have to fund it themselves.

    Its not really their fault but rather that of their parents, who would be better advised saving money for their kids rather than spending so much on them.
    It does - and your response is any event directed at their parents.

    As far as Australia’s CO2 output is concerned, this has little or nothing to do with teenagers and their mobile phone usage - indeed there is already one state (Tasmania) with 100% renewable electricity.
    Being one of the world’s largest coal producers is rather more germane.

    It is blimpish clickbait par excellence, and frankly embarrassing to watch.
    Embarrassing because he points out some inconvenient truths ?

    Without watching it again didn't he make points about aircon usage and travel by cars.

    A more UK or US equivalent could also mention the amount of air travel the modern lifestyle includes.
    If he feels so strongly about a consumerist lifestyle then surely he ought to be agreeing with their sentiments while fulminating about their behaviour ?
    No, it's just ignorant dyspepsia.
    Oh I'm sure he lives it up and that his own upbringing wasn't something out of an Australian Hovis advert.

    But so what - few of us fully match our deeds to our thoughts - and the fundamental point remains that the modern middle class teenager has a pampered, privileged lifestyle, A lifestyle, at least in the UK, they will struggle to maintain when they have to fund it themselves.
    A lifestyle they will struggle to maintain after their rentier parents and grandparents have extorted sufficient rents and taxes from them.
    Indeed.

    Their parents and grandparents generations are indulging them at the wrong time and will exploit them at the wrong time.

    The younger generation are having their current expectations raised and their future means reduced.
    The younger generation will inherit more than any generation before them thanks to the assets and savings their parents and grandparents have built up
    That's fine then. We can all look forward to a society where the quality of your life depends upon the size of your inheritance. No unfairness or inequity at all in that.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,590
    edited October 2021
    Dura_Ace said:

    geoffw said:

    Dura_Ace said:



    But so what - few of us fully match our deeds to our thoughts - and the fundamental point remains that the modern middle class teenager has a pampered, privileged lifestyle, A lifestyle, at least in the UK, they will struggle to maintain when they have to fund it themselves.

    I tutor (almost exclusively middle class) teenagers and I feel like they have significantly worse prospects than the generation that preceded them. They are going to have shitloads of student debt, a hyper inflated housing market, the curse of precarcity in the workplace, evironmental ruin and Brexit to deal with.
    What do you mean? They could all drive HGVs for £100k a year. I read it on PB.
    Under Dura's tutelage?

    My pedagogy is limited to French, Russian and being vile to tories.

    I do like the optimism, energy, lack of cynicism and slang rich manias of teenagers. They also seem way more civilised and decorous than I was at that age.
    And perhaps even now ? :smile:

    But agreed, my children and their friends seem a great deal more civilised than I can dimly remember being.
  • Clarkson back to being a Remoaner quisling

    https://twitter.com/britishsave/status/1451814958979760133?s=21

    He’s been a very strident Remainer since Day One, as I understand it. He supports a federal Europe I think.
    A Remainer and good pals with Dave - certainly no reason to think he'd give Boris or his government any change.
  • Wow. Only just caught up with the musings of this lady:

    https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/tv/conservative-host-candace-owens-calls-for-us-to-invade-australia-to-free-people-from-tyranny/news-story/9a487acac0dbafefaa0945d2aa7284cc

    Surely this suggests that AUUUKUS is finished should Trump - or indeed any GOP candidate - prevail in 2024.

    AUKUS has really upset you hasn't it
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,719
    edited October 2021

    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Watching this makes me feel pity for Greta. Who could let this happen to a little girl?

    Must say, I do quite like the Australian style points based response to the "selfish, badly educated, virtue signalling little turds"

    Patrick Moore
    @EcoSenseNow
    Watch as Sky News Australia rips a new one for Greta. This would never happen in Canada, USA, or Europe. Three Cheers!

    Haven't followed the link as I'm immune to Blimpish clickbait. But it's interesting what hostility Greta arouses. Nearly everyone agrees she's got a point, though we can debate how far we need to go to turn the ship round before it hits the rocks. Instead of discussing that, let's have a go at a teenager...
    But he wasn't having a go at a teenager, Greta.

    He was having a go at teenagers, Australian teenagers.
    Nick’s comment still applies.
    It doesn't.

    Modern western middle class teenagers have a very indulged and pampered lifestyle and most will struggle to maintain that when they have to fund it themselves.

    Its not really their fault but rather that of their parents, who would be better advised saving money for their kids rather than spending so much on them.
    It does - and your response is any event directed at their parents.

    As far as Australia’s CO2 output is concerned, this has little or nothing to do with teenagers and their mobile phone usage - indeed there is already one state (Tasmania) with 100% renewable electricity.
    Being one of the world’s largest coal producers is rather more germane.

    It is blimpish clickbait par excellence, and frankly embarrassing to watch.
    Embarrassing because he points out some inconvenient truths ?

    Without watching it again didn't he make points about aircon usage and travel by cars.

    A more UK or US equivalent could also mention the amount of air travel the modern lifestyle includes.
    If he feels so strongly about a consumerist lifestyle then surely he ought to be agreeing with their sentiments while fulminating about their behaviour ?
    No, it's just ignorant dyspepsia.
    Oh I'm sure he lives it up and that his own upbringing wasn't something out of an Australian Hovis advert.

    But so what - few of us fully match our deeds to our thoughts - and the fundamental point remains that the modern middle class teenager has a pampered, privileged lifestyle, A lifestyle, at least in the UK, they will struggle to maintain when they have to fund it themselves.
    A lifestyle they will struggle to maintain after their rentier parents and grandparents have extorted sufficient rents and taxes from them.
    Indeed.

    Their parents and grandparents generations are indulging them at the wrong time and will exploit them at the wrong time.

    The younger generation are having their current expectations raised and their future means reduced.
    The younger generation will inherit more than any generation before them thanks to the assets and savings their parents and grandparents have built up
    That's fine then. We can all look forward to a society where the quality of your life depends upon the size of your inheritance. No unfairness or inequity at all in that.
    Most young people have parents or grandparents who own properties they will inherit at least part of, even if they don't have much savings.

    Only a few young people will end up in the top 10% of earners by contrast
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 14,916
    geoffw said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    geoffw said:

    Dura_Ace said:



    But so what - few of us fully match our deeds to our thoughts - and the fundamental point remains that the modern middle class teenager has a pampered, privileged lifestyle, A lifestyle, at least in the UK, they will struggle to maintain when they have to fund it themselves.

    I tutor (almost exclusively middle class) teenagers and I feel like they have significantly worse prospects than the generation that preceded them. They are going to have shitloads of student debt, a hyper inflated housing market, the curse of precarcity in the workplace, evironmental ruin and Brexit to deal with.
    What do you mean? They could all drive HGVs for £100k a year. I read it on PB.
    Under Dura's tutelage?

    My pedagogy is limited to French, Russian and being vile to tories.

    I do like the optimism, energy, lack of cynicism and slang rich manias of teenagers. They also seem way more civilised and decorous than I was at that age.
    I thought being vile to tories was innate, not something that needs to be taught.
    Surely it can be nurtured.
  • Wow. Only just caught up with the musings of this lady:

    https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/tv/conservative-host-candace-owens-calls-for-us-to-invade-australia-to-free-people-from-tyranny/news-story/9a487acac0dbafefaa0945d2aa7284cc

    Surely this suggests that AUUUKUS is finished should Trump - or indeed any GOP candidate - prevail in 2024.

    To be fair, it's a reductio ad absurdum from Afghanistan, and knowingly used as such. Liked the line about prisoners being detained against their will, which is sort of the point.
  • HYUFD said:

    Do Britons want to see the return of COVID-19 restrictions?

    Compulsory face masks in shops/on public transport: 76%
    Govt advice to work from home where possible: 69%
    Vaccine passports for large events: 69%
    Pubs/restaurants closed: 22%
    Schools closed: 19%

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1451830429951086592?s=20

    Translates as 'restrictions on other people' with a middle class side of 'I want the same money for doing less work and fewer hours'.
  • Clarkson back to being a Remoaner quisling

    https://twitter.com/britishsave/status/1451814958979760133?s=21

    Quisling perhaps but mentions neither the EU nor Brexit, merely that HMG is cocking everything up.
  • HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Watching this makes me feel pity for Greta. Who could let this happen to a little girl?

    Must say, I do quite like the Australian style points based response to the "selfish, badly educated, virtue signalling little turds"

    Patrick Moore
    @EcoSenseNow
    Watch as Sky News Australia rips a new one for Greta. This would never happen in Canada, USA, or Europe. Three Cheers!

    Haven't followed the link as I'm immune to Blimpish clickbait. But it's interesting what hostility Greta arouses. Nearly everyone agrees she's got a point, though we can debate how far we need to go to turn the ship round before it hits the rocks. Instead of discussing that, let's have a go at a teenager...
    But he wasn't having a go at a teenager, Greta.

    He was having a go at teenagers, Australian teenagers.
    Nick’s comment still applies.
    It doesn't.

    Modern western middle class teenagers have a very indulged and pampered lifestyle and most will struggle to maintain that when they have to fund it themselves.

    Its not really their fault but rather that of their parents, who would be better advised saving money for their kids rather than spending so much on them.
    It does - and your response is any event directed at their parents.

    As far as Australia’s CO2 output is concerned, this has little or nothing to do with teenagers and their mobile phone usage - indeed there is already one state (Tasmania) with 100% renewable electricity.
    Being one of the world’s largest coal producers is rather more germane.

    It is blimpish clickbait par excellence, and frankly embarrassing to watch.
    Embarrassing because he points out some inconvenient truths ?

    Without watching it again didn't he make points about aircon usage and travel by cars.

    A more UK or US equivalent could also mention the amount of air travel the modern lifestyle includes.
    If he feels so strongly about a consumerist lifestyle then surely he ought to be agreeing with their sentiments while fulminating about their behaviour ?
    No, it's just ignorant dyspepsia.
    Oh I'm sure he lives it up and that his own upbringing wasn't something out of an Australian Hovis advert.

    But so what - few of us fully match our deeds to our thoughts - and the fundamental point remains that the modern middle class teenager has a pampered, privileged lifestyle, A lifestyle, at least in the UK, they will struggle to maintain when they have to fund it themselves.
    A lifestyle they will struggle to maintain after their rentier parents and grandparents have extorted sufficient rents and taxes from them.
    Indeed.

    Their parents and grandparents generations are indulging them at the wrong time and will exploit them at the wrong time.

    The younger generation are having their current expectations raised and their future means reduced.
    The younger generation will inherit more than any generation before them thanks to the assets and savings their parents and grandparents have built up
    The expected age for someone born in the 1980s to lose their last parent is 64. Only in Tory HQ would that be considered young.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,862
    HYUFD said:

    Wow. Only just caught up with the musings of this lady:

    https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/tv/conservative-host-candace-owens-calls-for-us-to-invade-australia-to-free-people-from-tyranny/news-story/9a487acac0dbafefaa0945d2aa7284cc

    Surely this suggests that AUUUKUS is finished should Trump - or indeed any GOP candidate - prevail in 2024.

    No because such a GOP candidate would also invade China too, especially if Taiwan was attacked and use Australia as a base for that (in any case most Australian states are now easing restrictions)
    Think I prefer a world without AUKUS to a world that has AUKUS and little else.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614

    Wow. Only just caught up with the musings of this lady:

    https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/tv/conservative-host-candace-owens-calls-for-us-to-invade-australia-to-free-people-from-tyranny/news-story/9a487acac0dbafefaa0945d2aa7284cc

    Surely this suggests that AUUUKUS is finished should Trump - or indeed any GOP candidate - prevail in 2024.

    American Conservatives find it’s much easier ground to be criticising Aussie police for beating people up, rather than American police who do the same.

    I have Candace Owens on the long-odds outsider list for GOP presidential nomination. She really winds up a certain type of liberal commentator, who have a hard time with the fact that a black woman can be right-wing and against identity politics.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 14,916
    Scott_xP said:

    Clarkson back to being a Remoaner quisling

    https://twitter.com/britishsave/status/1451814958979760133?s=21

    ** Our Peterborough diary in the Telegraph this weekend **

    Meet the Remoaners taking over the taxpayer-funded 'Festival of Brexit'

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/10/22/meet-remoaners-taking-taxpayer-funded-festival-brexit/
    I'm surprised that any self respecting Remoaner would touch this with a shitty stick.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,136
    HYUFD said:

    Wow. Only just caught up with the musings of this lady:

    https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/tv/conservative-host-candace-owens-calls-for-us-to-invade-australia-to-free-people-from-tyranny/news-story/9a487acac0dbafefaa0945d2aa7284cc

    Surely this suggests that AUUUKUS is finished should Trump - or indeed any GOP candidate - prevail in 2024.

    No because such a GOP candidate would also invade China too, especially if Taiwan was attacked and use Australia as a base for that (in any case most Australian states are now easing restrictions)
    Trump has no principles except self-glorification and not giving a fuck about foreigners. If China wanted to invade Taiwan they'd flatter him and buy him off.
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Watching this makes me feel pity for Greta. Who could let this happen to a little girl?

    Must say, I do quite like the Australian style points based response to the "selfish, badly educated, virtue signalling little turds"

    Patrick Moore
    @EcoSenseNow
    Watch as Sky News Australia rips a new one for Greta. This would never happen in Canada, USA, or Europe. Three Cheers!

    Haven't followed the link as I'm immune to Blimpish clickbait. But it's interesting what hostility Greta arouses. Nearly everyone agrees she's got a point, though we can debate how far we need to go to turn the ship round before it hits the rocks. Instead of discussing that, let's have a go at a teenager...
    But he wasn't having a go at a teenager, Greta.

    He was having a go at teenagers, Australian teenagers.
    Nick’s comment still applies.
    It doesn't.

    Modern western middle class teenagers have a very indulged and pampered lifestyle and most will struggle to maintain that when they have to fund it themselves.

    Its not really their fault but rather that of their parents, who would be better advised saving money for their kids rather than spending so much on them.
    It does - and your response is any event directed at their parents.

    As far as Australia’s CO2 output is concerned, this has little or nothing to do with teenagers and their mobile phone usage - indeed there is already one state (Tasmania) with 100% renewable electricity.
    Being one of the world’s largest coal producers is rather more germane.

    It is blimpish clickbait par excellence, and frankly embarrassing to watch.
    Embarrassing because he points out some inconvenient truths ?

    Without watching it again didn't he make points about aircon usage and travel by cars.

    A more UK or US equivalent could also mention the amount of air travel the modern lifestyle includes.
    If he feels so strongly about a consumerist lifestyle then surely he ought to be agreeing with their sentiments while fulminating about their behaviour ?
    No, it's just ignorant dyspepsia.
    Oh I'm sure he lives it up and that his own upbringing wasn't something out of an Australian Hovis advert.

    But so what - few of us fully match our deeds to our thoughts - and the fundamental point remains that the modern middle class teenager has a pampered, privileged lifestyle, A lifestyle, at least in the UK, they will struggle to maintain when they have to fund it themselves.
    A lifestyle they will struggle to maintain after their rentier parents and grandparents have extorted sufficient rents and taxes from them.
    Indeed.

    Their parents and grandparents generations are indulging them at the wrong time and will exploit them at the wrong time.

    The younger generation are having their current expectations raised and their future means reduced.
    The younger generation will inherit more than any generation before them thanks to the assets and savings their parents and grandparents have built up
    That's fine then. We can all look forward to a society where the quality of your life depends upon the size of your inheritance. No unfairness or inequity at all in that.
    Most young people have parents or grandparents who own properties they will inherit at least part of, even if they don't have much savings.

    Only a few young people will end up in the top 10% of earners by contrast
    I reckon it will be about 10%. Poor show from the government there, failing 90% of the population. Where is the levelling up?
  • I have to say I am quite disappointed with my employer's approach to the vaccination. Not least because it is the civil service. According to my union rep we are expected to try to rearrange a vaccination outside working hours and if we can't do that then we can get vaccinated in working time. There is nothing particularly unusual about the sort of 9-5pm work we do that suggests we would desperately need to rearrange our vaccination time. Although we can use working time I know many people - perhaps most - who are working flexibly so that if they take two hours off in the afternoon to get the vaccine they'll do an extra two hours work in the evening. I have a team member who is thinking of taking half a day annual leave as he estimates that it may be 3 hours for him to get to the vaccination centre and back again. I know more flexible ways of working are increasingly the norm but the impression is of an employer that isn't too bothered about us getting vaccinated and that it's for our own benefit that we do so. Given the refusal of many people to get the vaccine is a large part of the reason we are in the mess we are I find it very disappointing. Why would you want to put any barriers in the way of people getting vaccinated?

    Sounds fair. This was raised as an issue with the initial vaccination round. Not everyone can drop everything, arrange time off work and/or childcare, at short notice, sometimes less than 24 hours' notice.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 14,916
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Watching this makes me feel pity for Greta. Who could let this happen to a little girl?

    Must say, I do quite like the Australian style points based response to the "selfish, badly educated, virtue signalling little turds"

    Patrick Moore
    @EcoSenseNow
    Watch as Sky News Australia rips a new one for Greta. This would never happen in Canada, USA, or Europe. Three Cheers!

    Haven't followed the link as I'm immune to Blimpish clickbait. But it's interesting what hostility Greta arouses. Nearly everyone agrees she's got a point, though we can debate how far we need to go to turn the ship round before it hits the rocks. Instead of discussing that, let's have a go at a teenager...
    But he wasn't having a go at a teenager, Greta.

    He was having a go at teenagers, Australian teenagers.
    Nick’s comment still applies.
    It doesn't.

    Modern western middle class teenagers have a very indulged and pampered lifestyle and most will struggle to maintain that when they have to fund it themselves.

    Its not really their fault but rather that of their parents, who would be better advised saving money for their kids rather than spending so much on them.
    It does - and your response is any event directed at their parents.

    As far as Australia’s CO2 output is concerned, this has little or nothing to do with teenagers and their mobile phone usage - indeed there is already one state (Tasmania) with 100% renewable electricity.
    Being one of the world’s largest coal producers is rather more germane.

    It is blimpish clickbait par excellence, and frankly embarrassing to watch.
    Embarrassing because he points out some inconvenient truths ?

    Without watching it again didn't he make points about aircon usage and travel by cars.

    A more UK or US equivalent could also mention the amount of air travel the modern lifestyle includes.
    If he feels so strongly about a consumerist lifestyle then surely he ought to be agreeing with their sentiments while fulminating about their behaviour ?
    No, it's just ignorant dyspepsia.
    Oh I'm sure he lives it up and that his own upbringing wasn't something out of an Australian Hovis advert.

    But so what - few of us fully match our deeds to our thoughts - and the fundamental point remains that the modern middle class teenager has a pampered, privileged lifestyle, A lifestyle, at least in the UK, they will struggle to maintain when they have to fund it themselves.
    A lifestyle they will struggle to maintain after their rentier parents and grandparents have extorted sufficient rents and taxes from them.
    Indeed.

    Their parents and grandparents generations are indulging them at the wrong time and will exploit them at the wrong time.

    The younger generation are having their current expectations raised and their future means reduced.
    The younger generation will inherit more than any generation before them thanks to the assets and savings their parents and grandparents have built up
    That's fine then. We can all look forward to a society where the quality of your life depends upon the size of your inheritance. No unfairness or inequity at all in that.
    Most young people have parents or grandparents who own properties they will inherit at least part of, even if they don't have much savings.

    Only a few young people will end up in the top 10% of earners by contrast
    Yeah probably only about 10% of them I would guess.
  • Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:


    It’s difficult, but necessary for those wanting change to bring along the general public with them.

    As an example, we know that prettty much all of the delegates to the COP26 conference are going to turn up on private or government planes, then tell everyone how we all need to do less flying, swap our cars for electric ones and replace boilers with heat sinks at a cost of thousands - as China and Russia don’t even bother to show up, and the USA and India won’t implement an agreement to any meaningful degree.

    The problem is, that for a huge number of people in the country, the cost of transport and energy are significant. Millions of people use old cars to get to minimum-wage jobs working antisocial hours. People advocating petrol being £3 a litre and petrol cars being banned don’t appear to have any understanding of the impact of those policies on the working classes.

    Yes, agreed, except for people who combine a green agenda with a redistributive agenda, which is (even if completely thought out) a complex argument to put across.

    I have the same problem in my day job. There isn't much dispute that factory farming produces cheap meat and lots of suffering and environmental damage. If we just argue against it on the grounds of the damage, it runs into the perfectly legitimate "but what about the impact on poorer people?" argument. As a non-political charity, we can't say "so combine it with higher universal credit and a wealth tax", so we argue that the answer is to tax meat to reflect the indirect costs but ring-fence the proceeds to subsidise healthy non-meat alternatives and high-welfare meat, so that people on low incomes have healthy affordable options with few downsides. But say the words "meat tax" and people just switch off before you finish the sentence.

    That's why Henry Dimbleby's National Food strategy advocates a 30% reduction in meat consumption over 10 years (on sustainability grounds as well as welfare) but explicitly shies away from a meat tax, instead favouring vague things like higher procurement standards, which are a Good Thing but (a) probably won't achieve the 30% cut and (b) also have indirect effects, as it's school and hospital budgets you're hitting.

    It's tricky, but of course unhelpful when people like Patrick Moore just throw out random sneers.
    That's a fair summary Nick.

    Though in recent weeks we've had people raging at the possibility of higher pay for abattoir workers because it might lead to higher meat prices.

    People who would, I suspect, be happy for meat prices to rise for environmental or animal welfare reasons.
    Have we? I don't recall anyone objecting to higher pay for meat processing workers.
    In which case you'll take future opportunities to condemn calls for more visas for migrant workers and instead suggest higher pay to attract a workforce.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 24,603

    Clarkson back to being a Remoaner quisling

    https://twitter.com/britishsave/status/1451814958979760133?s=21

    Quisling perhaps but mentions neither the EU nor Brexit, merely that HMG is cocking everything up.
    So a simple "traitor" tag would suffice.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. B, I'm not surprised. It's almost a year since release and they're still very difficult to find.

    It's not fantastic. Although I am enjoying my Shadow Hearts: Covenant replay. I'd forgotten there was a MGS style stealth section starring Blanca (who is a wolf).
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,630

    I have to say I am quite disappointed with my employer's approach to the vaccination. Not least because it is the civil service. According to my union rep we are expected to try to rearrange a vaccination outside working hours and if we can't do that then we can get vaccinated in working time. There is nothing particularly unusual about the sort of 9-5pm work we do that suggests we would desperately need to rearrange our vaccination time. Although we can use working time I know many people - perhaps most - who are working flexibly so that if they take two hours off in the afternoon to get the vaccine they'll do an extra two hours work in the evening. I have a team member who is thinking of taking half a day annual leave as he estimates that it may be 3 hours for him to get to the vaccination centre and back again. I know more flexible ways of working are increasingly the norm but the impression is of an employer that isn't too bothered about us getting vaccinated and that it's for our own benefit that we do so. Given the refusal of many people to get the vaccine is a large part of the reason we are in the mess we are I find it very disappointing. Why would you want to put any barriers in the way of people getting vaccinated?

    Contrast that with the attitude in a private investment bank - someone mentioned that he was going out to get the vaccination. The management attitude was cool plus if you feel a bit off afterwards don't be a hero and take sick leave....
  • Wow. Only just caught up with the musings of this lady:

    https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/tv/conservative-host-candace-owens-calls-for-us-to-invade-australia-to-free-people-from-tyranny/news-story/9a487acac0dbafefaa0945d2aa7284cc

    Surely this suggests that AUUUKUS is finished should Trump - or indeed any GOP candidate - prevail in 2024.

    AUKUS has really upset you hasn't it
    I'm just peering deep into the GOP soul. It's clear that they now see Australia as a libtard, Bidenite tyranny. AUUKUS will be seen as a sinister Democrat ruse to facilitate that. I can therefore imagine Trump rescinding AUUUKUS purely to spite Biden and energize the base.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,082

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:


    It’s difficult, but necessary for those wanting change to bring along the general public with them.

    As an example, we know that prettty much all of the delegates to the COP26 conference are going to turn up on private or government planes, then tell everyone how we all need to do less flying, swap our cars for electric ones and replace boilers with heat sinks at a cost of thousands - as China and Russia don’t even bother to show up, and the USA and India won’t implement an agreement to any meaningful degree.

    The problem is, that for a huge number of people in the country, the cost of transport and energy are significant. Millions of people use old cars to get to minimum-wage jobs working antisocial hours. People advocating petrol being £3 a litre and petrol cars being banned don’t appear to have any understanding of the impact of those policies on the working classes.

    Yes, agreed, except for people who combine a green agenda with a redistributive agenda, which is (even if completely thought out) a complex argument to put across.

    I have the same problem in my day job. There isn't much dispute that factory farming produces cheap meat and lots of suffering and environmental damage. If we just argue against it on the grounds of the damage, it runs into the perfectly legitimate "but what about the impact on poorer people?" argument. As a non-political charity, we can't say "so combine it with higher universal credit and a wealth tax", so we argue that the answer is to tax meat to reflect the indirect costs but ring-fence the proceeds to subsidise healthy non-meat alternatives and high-welfare meat, so that people on low incomes have healthy affordable options with few downsides. But say the words "meat tax" and people just switch off before you finish the sentence.

    That's why Henry Dimbleby's National Food strategy advocates a 30% reduction in meat consumption over 10 years (on sustainability grounds as well as welfare) but explicitly shies away from a meat tax, instead favouring vague things like higher procurement standards, which are a Good Thing but (a) probably won't achieve the 30% cut and (b) also have indirect effects, as it's school and hospital budgets you're hitting.

    It's tricky, but of course unhelpful when people like Patrick Moore just throw out random sneers.
    That's a fair summary Nick.

    Though in recent weeks we've had people raging at the possibility of higher pay for abattoir workers because it might lead to higher meat prices.

    People who would, I suspect, be happy for meat prices to rise for environmental or animal welfare reasons.
    Have we? I don't recall anyone objecting to higher pay for meat processing workers.
    In which case you'll take future opportunities to condemn calls for more visas for migrant workers and instead suggest higher pay to attract a workforce.
    Yes indeed. I support that entirely, and for my own and Mrs Foxys profession too.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,630

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Watching this makes me feel pity for Greta. Who could let this happen to a little girl?

    Must say, I do quite like the Australian style points based response to the "selfish, badly educated, virtue signalling little turds"

    Patrick Moore
    @EcoSenseNow
    Watch as Sky News Australia rips a new one for Greta. This would never happen in Canada, USA, or Europe. Three Cheers!

    Haven't followed the link as I'm immune to Blimpish clickbait. But it's interesting what hostility Greta arouses. Nearly everyone agrees she's got a point, though we can debate how far we need to go to turn the ship round before it hits the rocks. Instead of discussing that, let's have a go at a teenager...
    But he wasn't having a go at a teenager, Greta.

    He was having a go at teenagers, Australian teenagers.
    Nick’s comment still applies.
    It doesn't.

    Modern western middle class teenagers have a very indulged and pampered lifestyle and most will struggle to maintain that when they have to fund it themselves.

    Its not really their fault but rather that of their parents, who would be better advised saving money for their kids rather than spending so much on them.
    It does - and your response is any event directed at their parents.

    As far as Australia’s CO2 output is concerned, this has little or nothing to do with teenagers and their mobile phone usage - indeed there is already one state (Tasmania) with 100% renewable electricity.
    Being one of the world’s largest coal producers is rather more germane.

    It is blimpish clickbait par excellence, and frankly embarrassing to watch.
    Embarrassing because he points out some inconvenient truths ?

    Without watching it again didn't he make points about aircon usage and travel by cars.

    A more UK or US equivalent could also mention the amount of air travel the modern lifestyle includes.
    Interestingly, air-conditioning is one area that has de-carbonised rapidly in Australia.

    Due to the style of many houses - single storey - the ratio of roof to space is ideal for solar panels to run the air-conditioning. Due to the fairly high prices for electricity, the payback time in many places is within a year or 2.
  • Clarkson back to being a Remoaner quisling

    https://twitter.com/britishsave/status/1451814958979760133?s=21

    Quisling perhaps but mentions neither the EU nor Brexit, merely that HMG is cocking everything up.
    So a simple "traitor" tag would suffice.
    It is dangerously close to the official spin, surely. Nothing is the fault of Brexit. Everything bad is due to Covid or IR35 or the media or the damn fool public panicking at the drop of a toilet roll. Clarkson blames the government but (at least in that clip) not Brexit.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,739
    New U.K. Foreign Secretary Liz Truss warns of the importance of not becoming overly reliant upon China
    https://trib.al/srg7yi4

    Maybe we could enter a trade partnership with our closest neighbours instead...
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,884



    I'm just peering deep into the GOP soul. It's clear that they now see Australia as a libtard, Bidenite tyranny. AUUKUS will be seen as a sinister Democrat ruse to facilitate that. I can therefore imagine Trump rescinding AUUUKUS purely to spite Biden and energize the base.

    It involves a vast transfer of wealth from Australian tax payers to US companies so, no...
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,590

    I am still angry about these rumours re. the Government messing with the student loan repayment thresholds to pay for protecting the wealthy, property owning older generation.

    The deal was we paid X% over Y for 30 years. That was bad enough, never mind extending the term by a third and reducing Y when it suits.

    Tax the f*cking wealth ffs, not 20 something people getting by on circa 25-30k a year.

    Would the retrospective nature of such a thing even be legal ?
    (Of course Parliament can legislate to make it so, but it would be astonishingly bad policy.)
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    edited October 2021
    Scott_xP said:

    New U.K. Foreign Secretary Liz Truss warns of the importance of not becoming overly reliant upon China
    https://trib.al/srg7yi4

    Maybe we could enter a trade partnership with our closest neighbours instead...

    The UK has a trade deal with the EU, with no tarrifs and no quotas on anything. Part of the UK even sits inside their much-vaunted Single Market.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 18,100
    edited October 2021

    Watching this makes me feel pity for Greta. Who could let this happen to a little girl?

    Must say, I do quite like the Australian style points based response to the "selfish, badly educated, virtue signalling little turds"

    Patrick Moore
    @EcoSenseNow
    Watch as Sky News Australia rips a new one for Greta. This would never happen in Canada, USA, or Europe. Three Cheers!

    Haven't followed the link as I'm immune to Blimpish clickbait. But it's interesting what hostility Greta arouses. Nearly everyone agrees she's got a point, though we can debate how far we need to go to turn the ship round before it hits the rocks. Instead of discussing that, let's have a go at a teenager...
    Chap is Patrick Moore a past president, and co-founder, of Greenpeace.

    Its fair to say that no love is lost, however :smile:

    Patrick Albert Moore (born June 15, 1947) is a Canadian industry consultant, former activist, and past president of Greenpeace. Since leaving Greenpeace in 1986, Moore has criticized the environmental movement for what he sees as scare tactics and disinformation, saying that the environmental movement "abandoned science and logic in favor of emotion and sensationalism". According to Greenpeace, Moore is "a paid spokesman for the nuclear industry, the logging industry, and genetic engineering industry" who "exploits long-gone ties with Greenpeace to sell himself as a speaker and pro-corporate spokesperson".
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Moore_(consultant)
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,082

    Wow. Only just caught up with the musings of this lady:

    https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/tv/conservative-host-candace-owens-calls-for-us-to-invade-australia-to-free-people-from-tyranny/news-story/9a487acac0dbafefaa0945d2aa7284cc

    Surely this suggests that AUUUKUS is finished should Trump - or indeed any GOP candidate - prevail in 2024.

    AUKUS has really upset you hasn't it
    I'm just peering deep into the GOP soul. It's clear that they now see Australia as a libtard, Bidenite tyranny. AUUKUS will be seen as a sinister Democrat ruse to facilitate that. I can therefore imagine Trump rescinding AUUUKUS purely to spite Biden and energize the base.
    Does AUUKUS consist of more that the Aussies exploring the possibility of a nuclear submarine deal? I haven't heard of anything else.

    I wouldn't think Australia a great base to invade China from. They are 4,600 miles apart, a thousand miles further than UK to Afghanistan.
  • I have to say I am quite disappointed with my employer's approach to the vaccination. Not least because it is the civil service. According to my union rep we are expected to try to rearrange a vaccination outside working hours and if we can't do that then we can get vaccinated in working time. There is nothing particularly unusual about the sort of 9-5pm work we do that suggests we would desperately need to rearrange our vaccination time. Although we can use working time I know many people - perhaps most - who are working flexibly so that if they take two hours off in the afternoon to get the vaccine they'll do an extra two hours work in the evening. I have a team member who is thinking of taking half a day annual leave as he estimates that it may be 3 hours for him to get to the vaccination centre and back again. I know more flexible ways of working are increasingly the norm but the impression is of an employer that isn't too bothered about us getting vaccinated and that it's for our own benefit that we do so. Given the refusal of many people to get the vaccine is a large part of the reason we are in the mess we are I find it very disappointing. Why would you want to put any barriers in the way of people getting vaccinated?

    I'm all for employers encouraging their workers to get vaccinated but I don't see where yours is putting up barriers.

    I had my vaccinations at the weekend and pretty much everyone I know got theirs in their own time.

    Now some people might have time constraints or travel difficulties and that explains them delaying vaccination by a few weeks.

    But after that its an excuse which runs thin.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,160
    Nigelb said:

    I am still angry about these rumours re. the Government messing with the student loan repayment thresholds to pay for protecting the wealthy, property owning older generation.

    The deal was we paid X% over Y for 30 years. That was bad enough, never mind extending the term by a third and reducing Y when it suits.

    Tax the f*cking wealth ffs, not 20 something people getting by on circa 25-30k a year.

    Would the retrospective nature of such a thing even be legal ?
    (Of course Parliament can legislate to make it so, but it would be astonishingly bad policy.)
    Hasn't something of the sort already happened with student loans? I'm not clear on that, though.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,165
    Nigelb said:

    I am still angry about these rumours re. the Government messing with the student loan repayment thresholds to pay for protecting the wealthy, property owning older generation.

    The deal was we paid X% over Y for 30 years. That was bad enough, never mind extending the term by a third and reducing Y when it suits.

    Tax the f*cking wealth ffs, not 20 something people getting by on circa 25-30k a year.

    Would the retrospective nature of such a thing even be legal ?
    (Of course Parliament can legislate to make it so, but it would be astonishingly bad policy.)
    I’d argue a wealth tax is a retrospective tax.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 18,100
    Anecdata:

    Just back from the topup / booster jab at my local GP - Pfizer - and they are doing 300 this morning.

    Organisation as clean a whistle.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 24,603

    HYUFD said:

    Do Britons want to see the return of COVID-19 restrictions?

    Compulsory face masks in shops/on public transport: 76%
    Govt advice to work from home where possible: 69%
    Vaccine passports for large events: 69%
    Pubs/restaurants closed: 22%
    Schools closed: 19%

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1451830429951086592?s=20

    Translates as 'restrictions on other people' with a middle class side of 'I want the same money for doing less work and fewer hours'.
    Well, I don't demand " restrictions on other people" but not myself, but as a lazy middle class centrist former Remainer I am happy enough to go along with your later statement. Sadly as someone reliant on my own endeavours, the lazier I am the less I earn.

    Covid restrictions or otherwise, I like to think I work quite hard and I am remunerated for my time handsomely, although I can't claim to work as long or as hard as some who are tasked with posting the Brexit/Tory message on PB all day . Respect!
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,082
    Carnyx said:

    Nigelb said:

    I am still angry about these rumours re. the Government messing with the student loan repayment thresholds to pay for protecting the wealthy, property owning older generation.

    The deal was we paid X% over Y for 30 years. That was bad enough, never mind extending the term by a third and reducing Y when it suits.

    Tax the f*cking wealth ffs, not 20 something people getting by on circa 25-30k a year.

    Would the retrospective nature of such a thing even be legal ?
    (Of course Parliament can legislate to make it so, but it would be astonishingly bad policy.)
    Hasn't something of the sort already happened with student loans? I'm not clear on that, though.
    Yes, on interest rates, and early repayment penalties.

    Sooner or later a government is going to abolish the scheme, and write off outstanding debt IMO.

  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 10,775
    Scott_xP said:

    New U.K. Foreign Secretary Liz Truss warns of the importance of not becoming overly reliant upon China
    https://trib.al/srg7yi4

    Maybe we could enter a trade partnership with our closest neighbours instead...

    I believe such talk is treachery
  • MattWMattW Posts: 18,100

    Clarkson back to being a Remoaner quisling

    https://twitter.com/britishsave/status/1451814958979760133?s=21

    Back?

    When did he support leave?
  • I am still angry about these rumours re. the Government messing with the student loan repayment thresholds to pay for protecting the wealthy, property owning older generation.

    The deal was we paid X% over Y for 30 years. That was bad enough, never mind extending the term by a third and reducing Y when it suits.

    Tax the f*cking wealth ffs, not 20 something people getting by on circa 25-30k a year.

    It was done in 2015 by George Osborne:

    In details released as part of Osborne’s autumn statement on Wednesday, the government confirmed the earnings threshold at which student loan repayments began would be frozen for five years instead of raised in line with average earnings, as promised in 2010.

    The Treasury said the freeze would be backdated to include the terms of loans to students who started courses from 2012 and, in some cases, graduated this year.

    The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) estimates the retrospective freezing of the threshold at earnings of £21,000 would mean an average graduate would pay back about £3,000 extra, while disadvantaged students who had previously been eligible for support grants would be even worse off. Those earning close to median incomes for graduates would pay back an extra £6,000, the IFS said.


    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2015/nov/25/osborne-student-loan-tuition-fees-university-higher-education-autumn-statement

    But was then cancelled after the 2017 election IIRC.
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 10,775

    HYUFD said:

    Do Britons want to see the return of COVID-19 restrictions?

    Compulsory face masks in shops/on public transport: 76%
    Govt advice to work from home where possible: 69%
    Vaccine passports for large events: 69%
    Pubs/restaurants closed: 22%
    Schools closed: 19%

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1451830429951086592?s=20

    Translates as 'restrictions on other people' with a middle class side of 'I want the same money for doing less work and fewer hours'.
    ??
  • MattW said:

    Anecdata:

    Just back from the topup / booster jab at my local GP - Pfizer - and they are doing 300 this morning.

    Organisation as clean a whistle.

    Same with me yesterday
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,630

    I noticed @AlistairM 's prediction on the previous thread, and the factor he was least confident about (schoolkids).

    As it happens, I'd been looking at this. Taking the ONS prevalence counts amongst Yr7-15, assuming infection lasts for an average of 11.5 days (an assumption taken from comparing their prevalence estimates with their incidence estimates; it makes the numbers fit best and it matches reported data), counting from late August to ensure minimal shift in their own processes and maximum comparability, and using ratio of hospitalisations prior to that point (ie x hospitalisations came from y infections between August and December; assume the ratio was constant before and the proportion of infections was constant; cross-checking with the ratio of Age 6-17 hospitalisations to infections available after October)...

    Further assuming that prior infection has an effective efficacy of 80% (from the ONS reinfection surveys), so some of the infections are in the previously infected (backed up by anecdotal evidence from people I've spoken with)

    I get infections looking like this since the start of August in that age group:



    (Central prediction and 95% ranges high and low, with dotted lines as a projection from the latest. Obviously, the rate will bend down as it approaches 100%, but this gives an indication).

    Then add vaccinations. Too slow so far, but assuming those currently infected do not receive doses and doses are randomly spread between the previously infected and the not-yet-infected, and taking doses from 2 weeks prior as being "active," you get the rise of "non-immune-naive" looking like this:




    Now, neither infection nor vaccination provide 100% immunity, but if you assume 80% or so from either, and 90%+ from either hybrid immunity or the reinfected-and-recovered, when the bar hits around 100%, you should have herd immunity in that group.

    This does, of course, assume infections proceed as before even over half-term, but I think 2 weeks looks promising for this "engine room" to finally stall for good.

    My only thought on this excellent work, is that if we are at antibody level of 85% or so *now* in the 7-15 how do we explain -

    image

    15-19 fell back to the pattern (mostly) of the vaccinated groups quite quickly once 16-17 started being vaccinated.....
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,669
    darkage said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:


    It’s difficult, but necessary for those wanting change to bring along the general public with them.

    As an example, we know that prettty much all of the delegates to the COP26 conference are going to turn up on private or government planes, then tell everyone how we all need to do less flying, swap our cars for electric ones and replace boilers with heat sinks at a cost of thousands - as China and Russia don’t even bother to show up, and the USA and India won’t implement an agreement to any meaningful degree.

    The problem is, that for a huge number of people in the country, the cost of transport and energy are significant. Millions of people use old cars to get to minimum-wage jobs working antisocial hours. People advocating petrol being £3 a litre and petrol cars being banned don’t appear to have any understanding of the impact of those policies on the working classes.

    Yes, agreed, except for people who combine a green agenda with a redistributive agenda, which is (even if completely thought out) a complex argument to put across.

    I have the same problem in my day job. There isn't much dispute that factory farming produces cheap meat and lots of suffering and environmental damage. If we just argue against it on the grounds of the damage, it runs into the perfectly legitimate "but what about the impact on poorer people?" argument. As a non-political charity, we can't say "so combine it with higher universal credit and a wealth tax", so we argue that the answer is to tax meat to reflect the indirect costs but ring-fence the proceeds to subsidise healthy non-meat alternatives and high-welfare meat, so that people on low incomes have healthy affordable options with few downsides. But say the words "meat tax" and people just switch off before you finish the sentence.

    That's why Henry Dimbleby's National Food strategy advocates a 30% reduction in meat consumption over 10 years (on sustainability grounds as well as welfare) but explicitly shies away from a meat tax, instead favouring vague things like higher procurement standards, which are a Good Thing but (a) probably won't achieve the 30% cut and (b) also have indirect effects, as it's school and hospital budgets you're hitting.

    It's tricky, but of course unhelpful when people like Patrick Moore just throw out random sneers.
    Yes, there’s an issue with many in the environmental movement being barely-disguised socialists, which I’m sure you’re happy with but many of us aren’t.

    Those on the centre-right see improving technology as the answer, rather than higher taxes and increased state control, and will rally against those who see only increases in the cost of living as proposals put forward.

    There’s also the hypocracy angle, with many of the socialist green advocates living very middle-class lifestyles, as we have seen with the road-closing protestors in recent weeks. They appear to have litttle intention to change their own behaviour, in the same way as they expect everyone else to do so. To be flippant, it won’t be long before someone writes a lengthy opinion piece in the Guardian, celebrating the fact that there’s now a much nicer crowd than there used to be on the Ryanair to Florence.
    Yeah, well exactly. The climate crisis is real, but a lot of the solutions foisted upon us are actually middle class lifestyle/consumer preferences. The war on cheap petrol cars is nothing more than a class issue, an elite of EV drivers wanting to clear the roads of knackered old cars and white vans and the poor people in them to help them get around more quickly; whilst conveniently overlooking the fact that they are still driving a 1.5 tonne lump of metal with a giant battery to do journeys that largely completely unnecessary, or could be done on public transport, foot or bike.

    My neighbour is seriously green, he votes green, recycles everything down to christmas wrapping paper, has never been on a plane as far as I know, goes on holiday camping. His carbon footprint is less than most people, but they are still a two car family (8 year old dacia sandero and a diesel van). Necessary in both cases to get to work - they could in one case switch to an ebike but the roads are too dangerous for cycling.




    Sorry you're hopelessly mistaken about electric cars. Think about the first mobile phones, internet charges when new, almost all technology when it first comes out is expensive, not that feature rich and not 100% reliable. Adoption of new technologies follows an 'S' curve as more people buy into it. We are on the exponential rise part of the 'S' curve as far as electric cars are concerned and price parity of new cars is not far off. Given all the other advantages of electric cars including cost of ownership and fewer things to go wrong, it won't be long before sales of ICE cars start dipping (maybe that's already happening).
    As night follows day, new electric cars will become older and cheaper and available on the 2nd hand car market. We aren't there yet, so my 'new' car is a 6 year old Golf GTE which only does 28 miles on electricity, but that already means I use hardly any petrol and had no issues with the recent fuel availability problems.
    https://www.visualcapitalist.com/rising-speed-technological-adoption/
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 10,775
    tlg86 said:

    Nigelb said:

    I am still angry about these rumours re. the Government messing with the student loan repayment thresholds to pay for protecting the wealthy, property owning older generation.

    The deal was we paid X% over Y for 30 years. That was bad enough, never mind extending the term by a third and reducing Y when it suits.

    Tax the f*cking wealth ffs, not 20 something people getting by on circa 25-30k a year.

    Would the retrospective nature of such a thing even be legal ?
    (Of course Parliament can legislate to make it so, but it would be astonishingly bad policy.)
    I’d argue a wealth tax is a retrospective tax.
    If you tax people on the wealth they had in previous years, yes.
    If it's based on current wealth, obviously not.
  • Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:


    It’s difficult, but necessary for those wanting change to bring along the general public with them.

    As an example, we know that prettty much all of the delegates to the COP26 conference are going to turn up on private or government planes, then tell everyone how we all need to do less flying, swap our cars for electric ones and replace boilers with heat sinks at a cost of thousands - as China and Russia don’t even bother to show up, and the USA and India won’t implement an agreement to any meaningful degree.

    The problem is, that for a huge number of people in the country, the cost of transport and energy are significant. Millions of people use old cars to get to minimum-wage jobs working antisocial hours. People advocating petrol being £3 a litre and petrol cars being banned don’t appear to have any understanding of the impact of those policies on the working classes.

    Yes, agreed, except for people who combine a green agenda with a redistributive agenda, which is (even if completely thought out) a complex argument to put across.

    I have the same problem in my day job. There isn't much dispute that factory farming produces cheap meat and lots of suffering and environmental damage. If we just argue against it on the grounds of the damage, it runs into the perfectly legitimate "but what about the impact on poorer people?" argument. As a non-political charity, we can't say "so combine it with higher universal credit and a wealth tax", so we argue that the answer is to tax meat to reflect the indirect costs but ring-fence the proceeds to subsidise healthy non-meat alternatives and high-welfare meat, so that people on low incomes have healthy affordable options with few downsides. But say the words "meat tax" and people just switch off before you finish the sentence.

    That's why Henry Dimbleby's National Food strategy advocates a 30% reduction in meat consumption over 10 years (on sustainability grounds as well as welfare) but explicitly shies away from a meat tax, instead favouring vague things like higher procurement standards, which are a Good Thing but (a) probably won't achieve the 30% cut and (b) also have indirect effects, as it's school and hospital budgets you're hitting.

    It's tricky, but of course unhelpful when people like Patrick Moore just throw out random sneers.
    That's a fair summary Nick.

    Though in recent weeks we've had people raging at the possibility of higher pay for abattoir workers because it might lead to higher meat prices.

    People who would, I suspect, be happy for meat prices to rise for environmental or animal welfare reasons.
    Have we? I don't recall anyone objecting to higher pay for meat processing workers.
    In which case you'll take future opportunities to condemn calls for more visas for migrant workers and instead suggest higher pay to attract a workforce.
    Yes indeed. I support that entirely, and for my own and Mrs Foxys profession too.
    And OKC's former profession.

    Is there a reason why so many of the UK's pharmacists are from Africa or have I experienced a non-representative sample ?
  • EssexitEssexit Posts: 1,956

    Wow. Only just caught up with the musings of this lady:

    https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/tv/conservative-host-candace-owens-calls-for-us-to-invade-australia-to-free-people-from-tyranny/news-story/9a487acac0dbafefaa0945d2aa7284cc

    Surely this suggests that AUUUKUS is finished should Trump - or indeed any GOP candidate - prevail in 2024.

    AUKUS has really upset you hasn't it
    I'm just peering deep into the GOP soul. It's clear that they now see Australia as a libtard, Bidenite tyranny. AUUKUS will be seen as a sinister Democrat ruse to facilitate that. I can therefore imagine Trump rescinding AUUUKUS purely to spite Biden and energize the base.
    I don't think one can take the temperature of a party from the musings of one publicity-grabbing radio host.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 10,468

    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Watching this makes me feel pity for Greta. Who could let this happen to a little girl?

    Must say, I do quite like the Australian style points based response to the "selfish, badly educated, virtue signalling little turds"

    Patrick Moore
    @EcoSenseNow
    Watch as Sky News Australia rips a new one for Greta. This would never happen in Canada, USA, or Europe. Three Cheers!

    Haven't followed the link as I'm immune to Blimpish clickbait. But it's interesting what hostility Greta arouses. Nearly everyone agrees she's got a point, though we can debate how far we need to go to turn the ship round before it hits the rocks. Instead of discussing that, let's have a go at a teenager...
    But he wasn't having a go at a teenager, Greta.

    He was having a go at teenagers, Australian teenagers.
    Nick’s comment still applies.
    It doesn't.

    Modern western middle class teenagers have a very indulged and pampered lifestyle and most will struggle to maintain that when they have to fund it themselves.

    Its not really their fault but rather that of their parents, who would be better advised saving money for their kids rather than spending so much on them.
    It does - and your response is any event directed at their parents.

    As far as Australia’s CO2 output is concerned, this has little or nothing to do with teenagers and their mobile phone usage - indeed there is already one state (Tasmania) with 100% renewable electricity.
    Being one of the world’s largest coal producers is rather more germane.

    It is blimpish clickbait par excellence, and frankly embarrassing to watch.
    Embarrassing because he points out some inconvenient truths ?

    Without watching it again didn't he make points about aircon usage and travel by cars.

    A more UK or US equivalent could also mention the amount of air travel the modern lifestyle includes.
    If he feels so strongly about a consumerist lifestyle then surely he ought to be agreeing with their sentiments while fulminating about their behaviour ?
    No, it's just ignorant dyspepsia.
    Oh I'm sure he lives it up and that his own upbringing wasn't something out of an Australian Hovis advert.

    But so what - few of us fully match our deeds to our thoughts - and the fundamental point remains that the modern middle class teenager has a pampered, privileged lifestyle, A lifestyle, at least in the UK, they will struggle to maintain when they have to fund it themselves.
    A lifestyle they will struggle to maintain after their rentier parents and grandparents have extorted sufficient rents and taxes from them.
    Indeed.

    Their parents and grandparents generations are indulging them at the wrong time and will exploit them at the wrong time.

    The younger generation are having their current expectations raised and their future means reduced.
    The younger generation will inherit more than any generation before them thanks to the assets and savings their parents and grandparents have built up
    The expected age for someone born in the 1980s to lose their last parent is 64. Only in Tory HQ would that be considered young.
    Damn, beat me to it. I went around this loop several weeks ago. I'm still waiting at 67. Do you think I should drop a few hints? Of course I don't need it now. Would have been useful when I was 30. Not sure HYUFD's has a good plan there.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,884
    Foxy said:

    Wow. Only just caught up with the musings of this lady:

    https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/tv/conservative-host-candace-owens-calls-for-us-to-invade-australia-to-free-people-from-tyranny/news-story/9a487acac0dbafefaa0945d2aa7284cc

    Surely this suggests that AUUUKUS is finished should Trump - or indeed any GOP candidate - prevail in 2024.

    AUKUS has really upset you hasn't it
    I'm just peering deep into the GOP soul. It's clear that they now see Australia as a libtard, Bidenite tyranny. AUUKUS will be seen as a sinister Democrat ruse to facilitate that. I can therefore imagine Trump rescinding AUUUKUS purely to spite Biden and energize the base.
    Does AUUKUS consist of more that the Aussies exploring the possibility of a nuclear submarine deal? I haven't heard of anything else.
    Not as yet. There has been a degree of backpedalling on the strident PR that accompanied the initial announcement. Biden just needed at quick foreign policy win following the Kabul business so I suspect the schedule was accelerated without taking the time to mollify Indonesia, Malaysia, India and France.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,719
    edited October 2021

    Wow. Only just caught up with the musings of this lady:

    https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/tv/conservative-host-candace-owens-calls-for-us-to-invade-australia-to-free-people-from-tyranny/news-story/9a487acac0dbafefaa0945d2aa7284cc

    Surely this suggests that AUUUKUS is finished should Trump - or indeed any GOP candidate - prevail in 2024.

    AUKUS has really upset you hasn't it
    I'm just peering deep into the GOP soul. It's clear that they now see Australia as a libtard, Bidenite tyranny. AUUKUS will be seen as a sinister Democrat ruse to facilitate that. I can therefore imagine Trump rescinding AUUUKUS purely to spite Biden and energize the base.
    It is actually mainly Australian Labor state governments that are still keeping restrictions in Australia, Coalition controlled NSW has largely opened up and PM Morrison is also pressing for a reopening.

    If Trump won again Morrison would probably be his closest ally in a major western nation after Boris at the moment so you are talking rubbish, the GOP would be more likely to invade Trudeau's Canada (not that they would of course). Plus Trump takes an even harder line on China than Biden does, even if he is softer on Putin's Russia
  • MattW said:

    Clarkson back to being a Remoaner quisling

    https://twitter.com/britishsave/status/1451814958979760133?s=21

    Back?

    When did he support leave?
    I was really alluding to Clarkson's fanbois; 'Remoaner quisling' is very much part of their denuded verbal armoury, and would likely be instantly deployed if some more woke luvvie had said that this government should be ****ed up the arse (along with the standard phoney outrage of course).
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    darkage said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:


    It’s difficult, but necessary for those wanting change to bring along the general public with them.

    As an example, we know that prettty much all of the delegates to the COP26 conference are going to turn up on private or government planes, then tell everyone how we all need to do less flying, swap our cars for electric ones and replace boilers with heat sinks at a cost of thousands - as China and Russia don’t even bother to show up, and the USA and India won’t implement an agreement to any meaningful degree.

    The problem is, that for a huge number of people in the country, the cost of transport and energy are significant. Millions of people use old cars to get to minimum-wage jobs working antisocial hours. People advocating petrol being £3 a litre and petrol cars being banned don’t appear to have any understanding of the impact of those policies on the working classes.

    Yes, agreed, except for people who combine a green agenda with a redistributive agenda, which is (even if completely thought out) a complex argument to put across.

    I have the same problem in my day job. There isn't much dispute that factory farming produces cheap meat and lots of suffering and environmental damage. If we just argue against it on the grounds of the damage, it runs into the perfectly legitimate "but what about the impact on poorer people?" argument. As a non-political charity, we can't say "so combine it with higher universal credit and a wealth tax", so we argue that the answer is to tax meat to reflect the indirect costs but ring-fence the proceeds to subsidise healthy non-meat alternatives and high-welfare meat, so that people on low incomes have healthy affordable options with few downsides. But say the words "meat tax" and people just switch off before you finish the sentence.

    That's why Henry Dimbleby's National Food strategy advocates a 30% reduction in meat consumption over 10 years (on sustainability grounds as well as welfare) but explicitly shies away from a meat tax, instead favouring vague things like higher procurement standards, which are a Good Thing but (a) probably won't achieve the 30% cut and (b) also have indirect effects, as it's school and hospital budgets you're hitting.

    It's tricky, but of course unhelpful when people like Patrick Moore just throw out random sneers.
    Yes, there’s an issue with many in the environmental movement being barely-disguised socialists, which I’m sure you’re happy with but many of us aren’t.

    Those on the centre-right see improving technology as the answer, rather than higher taxes and increased state control, and will rally against those who see only increases in the cost of living as proposals put forward.

    There’s also the hypocracy angle, with many of the socialist green advocates living very middle-class lifestyles, as we have seen with the road-closing protestors in recent weeks. They appear to have litttle intention to change their own behaviour, in the same way as they expect everyone else to do so. To be flippant, it won’t be long before someone writes a lengthy opinion piece in the Guardian, celebrating the fact that there’s now a much nicer crowd than there used to be on the Ryanair to Florence.
    Yeah, well exactly. The climate crisis is real, but a lot of the solutions foisted upon us are actually middle class lifestyle/consumer preferences. The war on cheap petrol cars is nothing more than a class issue, an elite of EV drivers wanting to clear the roads of knackered old cars and white vans and the poor people in them to help them get around more quickly; whilst conveniently overlooking the fact that they are still driving a 1.5 tonne lump of metal with a giant battery to do journeys that largely completely unnecessary, or could be done on public transport, foot or bike.

    My neighbour is seriously green, he votes green, recycles everything down to christmas wrapping paper, has never been on a plane as far as I know, goes on holiday camping. His carbon footprint is less than most people, but they are still a two car family (8 year old dacia sandero and a diesel van). Necessary in both cases to get to work - they could in one case switch to an ebike but the roads are too dangerous for cycling.




    Sorry you're hopelessly mistaken about electric cars. Think about the first mobile phones, internet charges when new, almost all technology when it first comes out is expensive, not that feature rich and not 100% reliable. Adoption of new technologies follows an 'S' curve as more people buy into it. We are on the exponential rise part of the 'S' curve as far as electric cars are concerned and price parity of new cars is not far off. Given all the other advantages of electric cars including cost of ownership and fewer things to go wrong, it won't be long before sales of ICE cars start dipping (maybe that's already happening).
    As night follows day, new electric cars will become older and cheaper and available on the 2nd hand car market. We aren't there yet, so my 'new' car is a 6 year old Golf GTE which only does 28 miles on electricity, but that already means I use hardly any petrol and had no issues with the recent fuel availability problems.
    https://www.visualcapitalist.com/rising-speed-technological-adoption/
    If you only need a 28 mile car do you really need a car at all?

    Electric cars have 95% of the ecological disadvantages of ice - made of steel, need tarmac to run on, use up resources, difficult to dispose of. And I understand are so heavy you can't jack them up to change a wheel. They are feelgood toys. The future is localism and public transport.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 18,100

    Sandpit said:


    It’s difficult, but necessary for those wanting change to bring along the general public with them.

    As an example, we know that prettty much all of the delegates to the COP26 conference are going to turn up on private or government planes, then tell everyone how we all need to do less flying, swap our cars for electric ones and replace boilers with heat sinks at a cost of thousands - as China and Russia don’t even bother to show up, and the USA and India won’t implement an agreement to any meaningful degree.

    The problem is, that for a huge number of people in the country, the cost of transport and energy are significant. Millions of people use old cars to get to minimum-wage jobs working antisocial hours. People advocating petrol being £3 a litre and petrol cars being banned don’t appear to have any understanding of the impact of those policies on the working classes.

    Yes, agreed, except for people who combine a green agenda with a redistributive agenda, which is (even if completely thought out) a complex argument to put across.

    I have the same problem in my day job. There isn't much dispute that factory farming produces cheap meat and lots of suffering and environmental damage. If we just argue against it on the grounds of the damage, it runs into the perfectly legitimate "but what about the impact on poorer people?" argument. As a non-political charity, we can't say "so combine it with higher universal credit and a wealth tax", so we argue that the answer is to tax meat to reflect the indirect costs but ring-fence the proceeds to subsidise healthy non-meat alternatives and high-welfare meat, so that people on low incomes have healthy affordable options with few downsides. But say the words "meat tax" and people just switch off before you finish the sentence.

    That's why Henry Dimbleby's National Food strategy advocates a 30% reduction in meat consumption over 10 years (on sustainability grounds as well as welfare) but explicitly shies away from a meat tax, instead favouring vague things like higher procurement standards, which are a Good Thing but (a) probably won't achieve the 30% cut and (b) also have indirect effects, as it's school and hospital budgets you're hitting.

    It's tricky, but of course unhelpful when people like Patrick Moore just throw out random sneers.
    That's a fair summary Nick.

    Though in recent weeks we've had people raging at the possibility of higher pay for abattoir workers because it might lead to higher meat prices.

    People who would, I suspect, be happy for meat prices to rise for environmental or animal welfare reasons.
    Serious question, Nick.

    Is the non-political bit viewed as a legal requirement or a choice that you make?

    We seem to have plenty of 'political charities'.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,630

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:


    It’s difficult, but necessary for those wanting change to bring along the general public with them.

    As an example, we know that prettty much all of the delegates to the COP26 conference are going to turn up on private or government planes, then tell everyone how we all need to do less flying, swap our cars for electric ones and replace boilers with heat sinks at a cost of thousands - as China and Russia don’t even bother to show up, and the USA and India won’t implement an agreement to any meaningful degree.

    The problem is, that for a huge number of people in the country, the cost of transport and energy are significant. Millions of people use old cars to get to minimum-wage jobs working antisocial hours. People advocating petrol being £3 a litre and petrol cars being banned don’t appear to have any understanding of the impact of those policies on the working classes.

    Yes, agreed, except for people who combine a green agenda with a redistributive agenda, which is (even if completely thought out) a complex argument to put across.

    I have the same problem in my day job. There isn't much dispute that factory farming produces cheap meat and lots of suffering and environmental damage. If we just argue against it on the grounds of the damage, it runs into the perfectly legitimate "but what about the impact on poorer people?" argument. As a non-political charity, we can't say "so combine it with higher universal credit and a wealth tax", so we argue that the answer is to tax meat to reflect the indirect costs but ring-fence the proceeds to subsidise healthy non-meat alternatives and high-welfare meat, so that people on low incomes have healthy affordable options with few downsides. But say the words "meat tax" and people just switch off before you finish the sentence.

    That's why Henry Dimbleby's National Food strategy advocates a 30% reduction in meat consumption over 10 years (on sustainability grounds as well as welfare) but explicitly shies away from a meat tax, instead favouring vague things like higher procurement standards, which are a Good Thing but (a) probably won't achieve the 30% cut and (b) also have indirect effects, as it's school and hospital budgets you're hitting.

    It's tricky, but of course unhelpful when people like Patrick Moore just throw out random sneers.
    That's a fair summary Nick.

    Though in recent weeks we've had people raging at the possibility of higher pay for abattoir workers because it might lead to higher meat prices.

    People who would, I suspect, be happy for meat prices to rise for environmental or animal welfare reasons.
    Have we? I don't recall anyone objecting to higher pay for meat processing workers.
    In which case you'll take future opportunities to condemn calls for more visas for migrant workers and instead suggest higher pay to attract a workforce.
    Yes indeed. I support that entirely, and for my own and Mrs Foxys profession too.
    And OKC's former profession.

    Is there a reason why so many of the UK's pharmacists are from Africa or have I experienced a non-representative sample ?
    Screw up in supply of pharmacists leading to importing lots of staff, just as with NHS

    https://pharmaceutical-journal.com/article/feature/there-is-an-official-shortage-of-pharmacists-what-now

    is interesting....

    "Indeed, the number of students starting an MPharm course rose by 11% in the autumn 2019 intake to 3,743 students, from 3,372 students the previous year. And in 2020–2021, the number rose by a further 10.8% to 4,148 students.

    It is possible that one contributing factor to the increase in 2020 may have been the regrading of A-level results two working days after the results were released, owing to the disruption of the COVID-19 pandemic, with many students seeing their grades raised as a result."

    What extra training is required to turn an MPharm grad into a full Pharmacist?
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,072
    edited October 2021
    IshmaelZ said:

    If you only need a 28 mile car do you really need a car at all?

    Electric cars have 95% of the ecological disadvantages of ice - made of steel, need tarmac to run on, use up resources, difficult to dispose of. And I understand are so heavy you can't jack them up to change a wheel. They are feelgood toys. The future is localism and public transport.

    That doesn't sound like the future at all. Sounds like 100 years in the past.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,719
    edited October 2021

    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Watching this makes me feel pity for Greta. Who could let this happen to a little girl?

    Must say, I do quite like the Australian style points based response to the "selfish, badly educated, virtue signalling little turds"

    Patrick Moore
    @EcoSenseNow
    Watch as Sky News Australia rips a new one for Greta. This would never happen in Canada, USA, or Europe. Three Cheers!

    Haven't followed the link as I'm immune to Blimpish clickbait. But it's interesting what hostility Greta arouses. Nearly everyone agrees she's got a point, though we can debate how far we need to go to turn the ship round before it hits the rocks. Instead of discussing that, let's have a go at a teenager...
    But he wasn't having a go at a teenager, Greta.

    He was having a go at teenagers, Australian teenagers.
    Nick’s comment still applies.
    It doesn't.

    Modern western middle class teenagers have a very indulged and pampered lifestyle and most will struggle to maintain that when they have to fund it themselves.

    Its not really their fault but rather that of their parents, who would be better advised saving money for their kids rather than spending so much on them.
    It does - and your response is any event directed at their parents.

    As far as Australia’s CO2 output is concerned, this has little or nothing to do with teenagers and their mobile phone usage - indeed there is already one state (Tasmania) with 100% renewable electricity.
    Being one of the world’s largest coal producers is rather more germane.

    It is blimpish clickbait par excellence, and frankly embarrassing to watch.
    Embarrassing because he points out some inconvenient truths ?

    Without watching it again didn't he make points about aircon usage and travel by cars.

    A more UK or US equivalent could also mention the amount of air travel the modern lifestyle includes.
    If he feels so strongly about a consumerist lifestyle then surely he ought to be agreeing with their sentiments while fulminating about their behaviour ?
    No, it's just ignorant dyspepsia.
    Oh I'm sure he lives it up and that his own upbringing wasn't something out of an Australian Hovis advert.

    But so what - few of us fully match our deeds to our thoughts - and the fundamental point remains that the modern middle class teenager has a pampered, privileged lifestyle, A lifestyle, at least in the UK, they will struggle to maintain when they have to fund it themselves.
    A lifestyle they will struggle to maintain after their rentier parents and grandparents have extorted sufficient rents and taxes from them.
    Indeed.

    Their parents and grandparents generations are indulging them at the wrong time and will exploit them at the wrong time.

    The younger generation are having their current expectations raised and their future means reduced.
    The younger generation will inherit more than any generation before them thanks to the assets and savings their parents and grandparents have built up
    The expected age for someone born in the 1980s to lose their last parent is 64. Only in Tory HQ would that be considered young.
    Don't forget they will also likely inherit something from their grandparents too in their teens, twenties or thirties
  • Roger said:

    Watching this makes me feel pity for Greta. Who could let this happen to a little girl?

    Must say, I do quite like the Australian style points based response to the "selfish, badly educated, virtue signalling little turds"

    Patrick Moore
    @EcoSenseNow
    Watch as Sky News Australia rips a new one for Greta. This would never happen in Canada, USA, or Europe. Three Cheers!

    Haven't followed the link as I'm immune to Blimpish clickbait. But it's interesting what hostility Greta arouses. Nearly everyone agrees she's got a point, though we can debate how far we need to go to turn the ship round before it hits the rocks. Instead of discussing that, let's have a go at a teenager...
    That's a strong hypothetical argument against a point that isn't made in the video you refuse to watch.

    Don't worry; your virtue is shining brightly through it.
    It's quite funny in a Les Patterson sort of way but spoilt by his inclusion of 'supporting immigration' which rather gives the game away. Where exactly are the immigrants supposed to disappear to?
    Agree with you entirely for what might be the first (and last!) time.

    The old chap does make a couple of half good points to the kids in his rant, but the immigration bit just seems like an entirely irrelevant bit of anti-virtue-signalling. Presumably his audience would lap it up..

    I was just rather tickled by the fact that he was allowed to call them 'little turds' on a news programme.

    And I really do think the whole Thunberg thing is utterly bizarre. Who the hell thought it would be a good idea to make a young child the spokesperson for the planet?!
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,072
    edited October 2021
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Watching this makes me feel pity for Greta. Who could let this happen to a little girl?

    Must say, I do quite like the Australian style points based response to the "selfish, badly educated, virtue signalling little turds"

    Patrick Moore
    @EcoSenseNow
    Watch as Sky News Australia rips a new one for Greta. This would never happen in Canada, USA, or Europe. Three Cheers!

    Haven't followed the link as I'm immune to Blimpish clickbait. But it's interesting what hostility Greta arouses. Nearly everyone agrees she's got a point, though we can debate how far we need to go to turn the ship round before it hits the rocks. Instead of discussing that, let's have a go at a teenager...
    But he wasn't having a go at a teenager, Greta.

    He was having a go at teenagers, Australian teenagers.
    Nick’s comment still applies.
    It doesn't.

    Modern western middle class teenagers have a very indulged and pampered lifestyle and most will struggle to maintain that when they have to fund it themselves.

    Its not really their fault but rather that of their parents, who would be better advised saving money for their kids rather than spending so much on them.
    It does - and your response is any event directed at their parents.

    As far as Australia’s CO2 output is concerned, this has little or nothing to do with teenagers and their mobile phone usage - indeed there is already one state (Tasmania) with 100% renewable electricity.
    Being one of the world’s largest coal producers is rather more germane.

    It is blimpish clickbait par excellence, and frankly embarrassing to watch.
    Embarrassing because he points out some inconvenient truths ?

    Without watching it again didn't he make points about aircon usage and travel by cars.

    A more UK or US equivalent could also mention the amount of air travel the modern lifestyle includes.
    If he feels so strongly about a consumerist lifestyle then surely he ought to be agreeing with their sentiments while fulminating about their behaviour ?
    No, it's just ignorant dyspepsia.
    Oh I'm sure he lives it up and that his own upbringing wasn't something out of an Australian Hovis advert.

    But so what - few of us fully match our deeds to our thoughts - and the fundamental point remains that the modern middle class teenager has a pampered, privileged lifestyle, A lifestyle, at least in the UK, they will struggle to maintain when they have to fund it themselves.
    A lifestyle they will struggle to maintain after their rentier parents and grandparents have extorted sufficient rents and taxes from them.
    Indeed.

    Their parents and grandparents generations are indulging them at the wrong time and will exploit them at the wrong time.

    The younger generation are having their current expectations raised and their future means reduced.
    The younger generation will inherit more than any generation before them thanks to the assets and savings their parents and grandparents have built up
    The expected age for someone born in the 1980s to lose their last parent is 64. Only in Tory HQ would that be considered young.
    Don't forget they will also likely inherit something from their grandparents too in their teens, twenties or thirties
    Not if their grandparents spaff it all on strippers and blow, oh and cruises
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Watching this makes me feel pity for Greta. Who could let this happen to a little girl?

    Must say, I do quite like the Australian style points based response to the "selfish, badly educated, virtue signalling little turds"

    Patrick Moore
    @EcoSenseNow
    Watch as Sky News Australia rips a new one for Greta. This would never happen in Canada, USA, or Europe. Three Cheers!

    Haven't followed the link as I'm immune to Blimpish clickbait. But it's interesting what hostility Greta arouses. Nearly everyone agrees she's got a point, though we can debate how far we need to go to turn the ship round before it hits the rocks. Instead of discussing that, let's have a go at a teenager...
    But he wasn't having a go at a teenager, Greta.

    He was having a go at teenagers, Australian teenagers.
    Nick’s comment still applies.
    It doesn't.

    Modern western middle class teenagers have a very indulged and pampered lifestyle and most will struggle to maintain that when they have to fund it themselves.

    Its not really their fault but rather that of their parents, who would be better advised saving money for their kids rather than spending so much on them.
    It does - and your response is any event directed at their parents.

    As far as Australia’s CO2 output is concerned, this has little or nothing to do with teenagers and their mobile phone usage - indeed there is already one state (Tasmania) with 100% renewable electricity.
    Being one of the world’s largest coal producers is rather more germane.

    It is blimpish clickbait par excellence, and frankly embarrassing to watch.
    Embarrassing because he points out some inconvenient truths ?

    Without watching it again didn't he make points about aircon usage and travel by cars.

    A more UK or US equivalent could also mention the amount of air travel the modern lifestyle includes.
    If he feels so strongly about a consumerist lifestyle then surely he ought to be agreeing with their sentiments while fulminating about their behaviour ?
    No, it's just ignorant dyspepsia.
    Oh I'm sure he lives it up and that his own upbringing wasn't something out of an Australian Hovis advert.

    But so what - few of us fully match our deeds to our thoughts - and the fundamental point remains that the modern middle class teenager has a pampered, privileged lifestyle, A lifestyle, at least in the UK, they will struggle to maintain when they have to fund it themselves.
    A lifestyle they will struggle to maintain after their rentier parents and grandparents have extorted sufficient rents and taxes from them.
    Indeed.

    Their parents and grandparents generations are indulging them at the wrong time and will exploit them at the wrong time.

    The younger generation are having their current expectations raised and their future means reduced.
    The younger generation will inherit more than any generation before them thanks to the assets and savings their parents and grandparents have built up
    The expected age for someone born in the 1980s to lose their last parent is 64. Only in Tory HQ would that be considered young.
    Don't forget they will also likely inherit something from their grandparents too in their teens, twenties or thirties
    Not if their grandparents spaff it all on strippers and blow, oh and cruises
    Bingo and whist evenings for mine.

    But I still got sod all.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 24,603
    .
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Watching this makes me feel pity for Greta. Who could let this happen to a little girl?

    Must say, I do quite like the Australian style points based response to the "selfish, badly educated, virtue signalling little turds"

    Patrick Moore
    @EcoSenseNow
    Watch as Sky News Australia rips a new one for Greta. This would never happen in Canada, USA, or Europe. Three Cheers!

    Haven't followed the link as I'm immune to Blimpish clickbait. But it's interesting what hostility Greta arouses. Nearly everyone agrees she's got a point, though we can debate how far we need to go to turn the ship round before it hits the rocks. Instead of discussing that, let's have a go at a teenager...
    But he wasn't having a go at a teenager, Greta.

    He was having a go at teenagers, Australian teenagers.
    Nick’s comment still applies.
    It doesn't.

    Modern western middle class teenagers have a very indulged and pampered lifestyle and most will struggle to maintain that when they have to fund it themselves.

    Its not really their fault but rather that of their parents, who would be better advised saving money for their kids rather than spending so much on them.
    It does - and your response is any event directed at their parents.

    As far as Australia’s CO2 output is concerned, this has little or nothing to do with teenagers and their mobile phone usage - indeed there is already one state (Tasmania) with 100% renewable electricity.
    Being one of the world’s largest coal producers is rather more germane.

    It is blimpish clickbait par excellence, and frankly embarrassing to watch.
    Embarrassing because he points out some inconvenient truths ?

    Without watching it again didn't he make points about aircon usage and travel by cars.

    A more UK or US equivalent could also mention the amount of air travel the modern lifestyle includes.
    If he feels so strongly about a consumerist lifestyle then surely he ought to be agreeing with their sentiments while fulminating about their behaviour ?
    No, it's just ignorant dyspepsia.
    Oh I'm sure he lives it up and that his own upbringing wasn't something out of an Australian Hovis advert.

    But so what - few of us fully match our deeds to our thoughts - and the fundamental point remains that the modern middle class teenager has a pampered, privileged lifestyle, A lifestyle, at least in the UK, they will struggle to maintain when they have to fund it themselves.
    A lifestyle they will struggle to maintain after their rentier parents and grandparents have extorted sufficient rents and taxes from them.
    Indeed.

    Their parents and grandparents generations are indulging them at the wrong time and will exploit them at the wrong time.

    The younger generation are having their current expectations raised and their future means reduced.
    The younger generation will inherit more than any generation before them thanks to the assets and savings their parents and grandparents have built up
    The expected age for someone born in the 1980s to lose their last parent is 64. Only in Tory HQ would that be considered young.
    Don't forget they will also likely inherit something from their grandparents too in their teens, twenties or thirties
    Which Tory Grandee family empire do you belong too?
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,072
    @MattW et al,

    Anyone know anywhere good online I could get a birch plywood sheet (circa 35mm thickness) cut to size for a reasonable price? Size around 1050 x 400.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,590
    Dura_Ace said:

    Foxy said:

    Wow. Only just caught up with the musings of this lady:

    https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/tv/conservative-host-candace-owens-calls-for-us-to-invade-australia-to-free-people-from-tyranny/news-story/9a487acac0dbafefaa0945d2aa7284cc

    Surely this suggests that AUUUKUS is finished should Trump - or indeed any GOP candidate - prevail in 2024.

    AUKUS has really upset you hasn't it
    I'm just peering deep into the GOP soul. It's clear that they now see Australia as a libtard, Bidenite tyranny. AUUKUS will be seen as a sinister Democrat ruse to facilitate that. I can therefore imagine Trump rescinding AUUUKUS purely to spite Biden and energize the base.
    Does AUUKUS consist of more that the Aussies exploring the possibility of a nuclear submarine deal? I haven't heard of anything else.
    Not as yet. There has been a degree of backpedalling on the strident PR that accompanied the initial announcement. Biden just needed at quick foreign policy win following the Kabul business so I suspect the schedule was accelerated without taking the time to mollify Indonesia, Malaysia, India and France.
    It's OK, they're sending Kamala.
    https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/578060-harris-to-meet-with-macron-in-france-biden-holds-call-with-french
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    IshmaelZ said:

    If you only need a 28 mile car do you really need a car at all?

    Electric cars have 95% of the ecological disadvantages of ice - made of steel, need tarmac to run on, use up resources, difficult to dispose of. And I understand are so heavy you can't jack them up to change a wheel. They are feelgood toys. The future is localism and public transport.

    That doesn't sound like the future at all. Sounds like 100 years in the past.
    Well, yes. And 1,000 and 10,000 years in the past. The past century has been a blip and and unsustainable one
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 14,884

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:


    It’s difficult, but necessary for those wanting change to bring along the general public with them.

    As an example, we know that prettty much all of the delegates to the COP26 conference are going to turn up on private or government planes, then tell everyone how we all need to do less flying, swap our cars for electric ones and replace boilers with heat sinks at a cost of thousands - as China and Russia don’t even bother to show up, and the USA and India won’t implement an agreement to any meaningful degree.

    The problem is, that for a huge number of people in the country, the cost of transport and energy are significant. Millions of people use old cars to get to minimum-wage jobs working antisocial hours. People advocating petrol being £3 a litre and petrol cars being banned don’t appear to have any understanding of the impact of those policies on the working classes.

    Yes, agreed, except for people who combine a green agenda with a redistributive agenda, which is (even if completely thought out) a complex argument to put across.

    I have the same problem in my day job. There isn't much dispute that factory farming produces cheap meat and lots of suffering and environmental damage. If we just argue against it on the grounds of the damage, it runs into the perfectly legitimate "but what about the impact on poorer people?" argument. As a non-political charity, we can't say "so combine it with higher universal credit and a wealth tax", so we argue that the answer is to tax meat to reflect the indirect costs but ring-fence the proceeds to subsidise healthy non-meat alternatives and high-welfare meat, so that people on low incomes have healthy affordable options with few downsides. But say the words "meat tax" and people just switch off before you finish the sentence.

    That's why Henry Dimbleby's National Food strategy advocates a 30% reduction in meat consumption over 10 years (on sustainability grounds as well as welfare) but explicitly shies away from a meat tax, instead favouring vague things like higher procurement standards, which are a Good Thing but (a) probably won't achieve the 30% cut and (b) also have indirect effects, as it's school and hospital budgets you're hitting.

    It's tricky, but of course unhelpful when people like Patrick Moore just throw out random sneers.
    That's a fair summary Nick.

    Though in recent weeks we've had people raging at the possibility of higher pay for abattoir workers because it might lead to higher meat prices.

    People who would, I suspect, be happy for meat prices to rise for environmental or animal welfare reasons.
    Have we? I don't recall anyone objecting to higher pay for meat processing workers.
    In which case you'll take future opportunities to condemn calls for more visas for migrant workers and instead suggest higher pay to attract a workforce.
    Yes indeed. I support that entirely, and for my own and Mrs Foxys profession too.
    And OKC's former profession.

    Is there a reason why so many of the UK's pharmacists are from Africa or have I experienced a non-representative sample ?
    Screw up in supply of pharmacists leading to importing lots of staff, just as with NHS

    https://pharmaceutical-journal.com/article/feature/there-is-an-official-shortage-of-pharmacists-what-now

    is interesting....

    "Indeed, the number of students starting an MPharm course rose by 11% in the autumn 2019 intake to 3,743 students, from 3,372 students the previous year. And in 2020–2021, the number rose by a further 10.8% to 4,148 students.

    It is possible that one contributing factor to the increase in 2020 may have been the regrading of A-level results two working days after the results were released, owing to the disruption of the COVID-19 pandemic, with many students seeing their grades raised as a result."

    What extra training is required to turn an MPharm grad into a full Pharmacist?
    A year of pre-reg (paid) and passing the pre-reg exam (only get three chances). The recent numbers have improved, but the years before that have been tough, as for a while we had a surplus of pharmacists, and thus locum rates were low with the spectre of unemployment. Recruiting became harder. The pandemic, plus an increase in 18 year olds has seen increases again, plus the exam fiasco. We are back over 100 first years at Bath.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,719
    edited October 2021
    Farooq said:

    tlg86 said:

    Nigelb said:

    I am still angry about these rumours re. the Government messing with the student loan repayment thresholds to pay for protecting the wealthy, property owning older generation.

    The deal was we paid X% over Y for 30 years. That was bad enough, never mind extending the term by a third and reducing Y when it suits.

    Tax the f*cking wealth ffs, not 20 something people getting by on circa 25-30k a year.

    Would the retrospective nature of such a thing even be legal ?
    (Of course Parliament can legislate to make it so, but it would be astonishingly bad policy.)
    I’d argue a wealth tax is a retrospective tax.
    If you tax people on the wealth they had in previous years, yes.
    If it's based on current wealth, obviously not.
    Interestingly on property taxes we are already relatively high, the UK comes only 33rd out of 37 OECD nations in the tax competitiveness league for property tax.

    By contrast we are much more competitive in terms of corporation taxes where we are 11th (while we have the super-deduction for capital investment Sunak announced) and are also slightly more competitive in terms of personal taxes where we will be 31st even after the NI rise (compared to 23rd before)

    https://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2021/10/tom-clougherty-tax-rises-will-trash-the-uks-international-competitiveness-but-there-is-a-better-way.html
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,072
    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    If you only need a 28 mile car do you really need a car at all?

    Electric cars have 95% of the ecological disadvantages of ice - made of steel, need tarmac to run on, use up resources, difficult to dispose of. And I understand are so heavy you can't jack them up to change a wheel. They are feelgood toys. The future is localism and public transport.

    That doesn't sound like the future at all. Sounds like 100 years in the past.
    Well, yes. And 1,000 and 10,000 years in the past. The past century has been a blip and and unsustainable one
    It's sustainable with renewable plentiful electricity. We should not regress progress for the sake of it. Personal transport is much better than public transport on almost every level.
  • Foxy said:

    Wow. Only just caught up with the musings of this lady:

    https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/tv/conservative-host-candace-owens-calls-for-us-to-invade-australia-to-free-people-from-tyranny/news-story/9a487acac0dbafefaa0945d2aa7284cc

    Surely this suggests that AUUUKUS is finished should Trump - or indeed any GOP candidate - prevail in 2024.

    AUKUS has really upset you hasn't it
    I'm just peering deep into the GOP soul. It's clear that they now see Australia as a libtard, Bidenite tyranny. AUUKUS will be seen as a sinister Democrat ruse to facilitate that. I can therefore imagine Trump rescinding AUUUKUS purely to spite Biden and energize the base.
    Does AUUKUS consist of more that the Aussies exploring the possibility of a nuclear submarine deal? I haven't heard of anything else.

    I wouldn't think Australia a great base to invade China from. They are 4,600 miles apart, a thousand miles further than UK to Afghanistan.
    Yes, it was essentially an arms agreement, but plenty see it as kind of proto-NATO and a means of asserting an anglophone New World Order in the Far East. Trump's spin writes itself: it's a sinister, Democrat plot to get American servicemen to risks their lives for foreigners and divert billions in US taxes to fund their militaries. Moreover, Trump will see Scott Morrison, previously regarded as a Trumpite ally, as a traitor for sucking up to Biden and will want vengeance. AUUKUS may be short lived.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 14,775

    HYUFD said:

    Wow. Only just caught up with the musings of this lady:

    https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/tv/conservative-host-candace-owens-calls-for-us-to-invade-australia-to-free-people-from-tyranny/news-story/9a487acac0dbafefaa0945d2aa7284cc

    Surely this suggests that AUUUKUS is finished should Trump - or indeed any GOP candidate - prevail in 2024.

    No because such a GOP candidate would also invade China too, especially if Taiwan was attacked and use Australia as a base for that (in any case most Australian states are now easing restrictions)
    Trump has no principles except self-glorification and not giving a fuck about foreigners. If China wanted to invade Taiwan they'd flatter him and buy him off.
    A deal whereby China bought some US steel with which to rebuild the ships sunk during the invasion of Taiwan would suit Trump just fine.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 10,468
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Watching this makes me feel pity for Greta. Who could let this happen to a little girl?

    Must say, I do quite like the Australian style points based response to the "selfish, badly educated, virtue signalling little turds"

    Patrick Moore
    @EcoSenseNow
    Watch as Sky News Australia rips a new one for Greta. This would never happen in Canada, USA, or Europe. Three Cheers!

    Haven't followed the link as I'm immune to Blimpish clickbait. But it's interesting what hostility Greta arouses. Nearly everyone agrees she's got a point, though we can debate how far we need to go to turn the ship round before it hits the rocks. Instead of discussing that, let's have a go at a teenager...
    But he wasn't having a go at a teenager, Greta.

    He was having a go at teenagers, Australian teenagers.
    Nick’s comment still applies.
    It doesn't.

    Modern western middle class teenagers have a very indulged and pampered lifestyle and most will struggle to maintain that when they have to fund it themselves.

    Its not really their fault but rather that of their parents, who would be better advised saving money for their kids rather than spending so much on them.
    It does - and your response is any event directed at their parents.

    As far as Australia’s CO2 output is concerned, this has little or nothing to do with teenagers and their mobile phone usage - indeed there is already one state (Tasmania) with 100% renewable electricity.
    Being one of the world’s largest coal producers is rather more germane.

    It is blimpish clickbait par excellence, and frankly embarrassing to watch.
    Embarrassing because he points out some inconvenient truths ?

    Without watching it again didn't he make points about aircon usage and travel by cars.

    A more UK or US equivalent could also mention the amount of air travel the modern lifestyle includes.
    If he feels so strongly about a consumerist lifestyle then surely he ought to be agreeing with their sentiments while fulminating about their behaviour ?
    No, it's just ignorant dyspepsia.
    Oh I'm sure he lives it up and that his own upbringing wasn't something out of an Australian Hovis advert.

    But so what - few of us fully match our deeds to our thoughts - and the fundamental point remains that the modern middle class teenager has a pampered, privileged lifestyle, A lifestyle, at least in the UK, they will struggle to maintain when they have to fund it themselves.
    A lifestyle they will struggle to maintain after their rentier parents and grandparents have extorted sufficient rents and taxes from them.
    Indeed.

    Their parents and grandparents generations are indulging them at the wrong time and will exploit them at the wrong time.

    The younger generation are having their current expectations raised and their future means reduced.
    The younger generation will inherit more than any generation before them thanks to the assets and savings their parents and grandparents have built up
    The expected age for someone born in the 1980s to lose their last parent is 64. Only in Tory HQ would that be considered young.
    Don't forget they will also likely inherit something from their grandparents too in their teens, twenties or thirties
    I don't know what world you live in HYUFD but my inheritance from my grandparents was: Nil, Nil, £500, £500.

    For my children it is/will be Nil, Nil, £1000 and sometime in the future possibly £5000.
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Watching this makes me feel pity for Greta. Who could let this happen to a little girl?

    Must say, I do quite like the Australian style points based response to the "selfish, badly educated, virtue signalling little turds"

    Patrick Moore
    @EcoSenseNow
    Watch as Sky News Australia rips a new one for Greta. This would never happen in Canada, USA, or Europe. Three Cheers!

    Haven't followed the link as I'm immune to Blimpish clickbait. But it's interesting what hostility Greta arouses. Nearly everyone agrees she's got a point, though we can debate how far we need to go to turn the ship round before it hits the rocks. Instead of discussing that, let's have a go at a teenager...
    But he wasn't having a go at a teenager, Greta.

    He was having a go at teenagers, Australian teenagers.
    Nick’s comment still applies.
    It doesn't.

    Modern western middle class teenagers have a very indulged and pampered lifestyle and most will struggle to maintain that when they have to fund it themselves.

    Its not really their fault but rather that of their parents, who would be better advised saving money for their kids rather than spending so much on them.
    It does - and your response is any event directed at their parents.

    As far as Australia’s CO2 output is concerned, this has little or nothing to do with teenagers and their mobile phone usage - indeed there is already one state (Tasmania) with 100% renewable electricity.
    Being one of the world’s largest coal producers is rather more germane.

    It is blimpish clickbait par excellence, and frankly embarrassing to watch.
    Embarrassing because he points out some inconvenient truths ?

    Without watching it again didn't he make points about aircon usage and travel by cars.

    A more UK or US equivalent could also mention the amount of air travel the modern lifestyle includes.
    If he feels so strongly about a consumerist lifestyle then surely he ought to be agreeing with their sentiments while fulminating about their behaviour ?
    No, it's just ignorant dyspepsia.
    Oh I'm sure he lives it up and that his own upbringing wasn't something out of an Australian Hovis advert.

    But so what - few of us fully match our deeds to our thoughts - and the fundamental point remains that the modern middle class teenager has a pampered, privileged lifestyle, A lifestyle, at least in the UK, they will struggle to maintain when they have to fund it themselves.
    A lifestyle they will struggle to maintain after their rentier parents and grandparents have extorted sufficient rents and taxes from them.
    Indeed.

    Their parents and grandparents generations are indulging them at the wrong time and will exploit them at the wrong time.

    The younger generation are having their current expectations raised and their future means reduced.
    The younger generation will inherit more than any generation before them thanks to the assets and savings their parents and grandparents have built up
    The expected age for someone born in the 1980s to lose their last parent is 64. Only in Tory HQ would that be considered young.
    Don't forget they will also likely inherit something from their grandparents too in their teens, twenties or thirties
    Yes, but that is just likely to be a small weekend pad in Chelsea or Fulham, they really need at least the manor house.
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 10,775

    Foxy said:

    Wow. Only just caught up with the musings of this lady:

    https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/tv/conservative-host-candace-owens-calls-for-us-to-invade-australia-to-free-people-from-tyranny/news-story/9a487acac0dbafefaa0945d2aa7284cc

    Surely this suggests that AUUUKUS is finished should Trump - or indeed any GOP candidate - prevail in 2024.

    AUKUS has really upset you hasn't it
    I'm just peering deep into the GOP soul. It's clear that they now see Australia as a libtard, Bidenite tyranny. AUUKUS will be seen as a sinister Democrat ruse to facilitate that. I can therefore imagine Trump rescinding AUUUKUS purely to spite Biden and energize the base.
    Does AUUKUS consist of more that the Aussies exploring the possibility of a nuclear submarine deal? I haven't heard of anything else.

    I wouldn't think Australia a great base to invade China from. They are 4,600 miles apart, a thousand miles further than UK to Afghanistan.
    Yes, it was essentially an arms agreement, but plenty see it as kind of proto-NATO and a means of asserting an anglophone New World Order in the Far East. Trump's spin writes itself: it's a sinister, Democrat plot to get American servicemen to risks their lives for foreigners and divert billions in US taxes to fund their militaries. Moreover, Trump will see Scott Morrison, previously regarded as a Trumpite ally, as a traitor for sucking up to Biden and will want vengeance. AUUKUS may be short lived.
    Trump is not going to be president again.
  • Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:


    It’s difficult, but necessary for those wanting change to bring along the general public with them.

    As an example, we know that prettty much all of the delegates to the COP26 conference are going to turn up on private or government planes, then tell everyone how we all need to do less flying, swap our cars for electric ones and replace boilers with heat sinks at a cost of thousands - as China and Russia don’t even bother to show up, and the USA and India won’t implement an agreement to any meaningful degree.

    The problem is, that for a huge number of people in the country, the cost of transport and energy are significant. Millions of people use old cars to get to minimum-wage jobs working antisocial hours. People advocating petrol being £3 a litre and petrol cars being banned don’t appear to have any understanding of the impact of those policies on the working classes.

    Yes, agreed, except for people who combine a green agenda with a redistributive agenda, which is (even if completely thought out) a complex argument to put across.

    I have the same problem in my day job. There isn't much dispute that factory farming produces cheap meat and lots of suffering and environmental damage. If we just argue against it on the grounds of the damage, it runs into the perfectly legitimate "but what about the impact on poorer people?" argument. As a non-political charity, we can't say "so combine it with higher universal credit and a wealth tax", so we argue that the answer is to tax meat to reflect the indirect costs but ring-fence the proceeds to subsidise healthy non-meat alternatives and high-welfare meat, so that people on low incomes have healthy affordable options with few downsides. But say the words "meat tax" and people just switch off before you finish the sentence.

    That's why Henry Dimbleby's National Food strategy advocates a 30% reduction in meat consumption over 10 years (on sustainability grounds as well as welfare) but explicitly shies away from a meat tax, instead favouring vague things like higher procurement standards, which are a Good Thing but (a) probably won't achieve the 30% cut and (b) also have indirect effects, as it's school and hospital budgets you're hitting.

    It's tricky, but of course unhelpful when people like Patrick Moore just throw out random sneers.
    That's a fair summary Nick.

    Though in recent weeks we've had people raging at the possibility of higher pay for abattoir workers because it might lead to higher meat prices.

    People who would, I suspect, be happy for meat prices to rise for environmental or animal welfare reasons.
    Have we? I don't recall anyone objecting to higher pay for meat processing workers.
    In which case you'll take future opportunities to condemn calls for more visas for migrant workers and instead suggest higher pay to attract a workforce.
    Yes indeed. I support that entirely, and for my own and Mrs Foxys profession too.
    And OKC's former profession.

    Is there a reason why so many of the UK's pharmacists are from Africa or have I experienced a non-representative sample ?
    Screw up in supply of pharmacists leading to importing lots of staff, just as with NHS

    https://pharmaceutical-journal.com/article/feature/there-is-an-official-shortage-of-pharmacists-what-now

    is interesting....

    "Indeed, the number of students starting an MPharm course rose by 11% in the autumn 2019 intake to 3,743 students, from 3,372 students the previous year. And in 2020–2021, the number rose by a further 10.8% to 4,148 students.

    It is possible that one contributing factor to the increase in 2020 may have been the regrading of A-level results two working days after the results were released, owing to the disruption of the COVID-19 pandemic, with many students seeing their grades raised as a result."

    What extra training is required to turn an MPharm grad into a full Pharmacist?
    Am I correct in thinking that the number of pharmacists has increased massively.

    Back in the day there was chemist near every doctors plus branches of Boots in towns.

    Now they seem to be everywhere and also in supermarkets.

    Perhaps the increase is because of the larger number of oldies and their huge consumption of medications.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    If you only need a 28 mile car do you really need a car at all?

    Electric cars have 95% of the ecological disadvantages of ice - made of steel, need tarmac to run on, use up resources, difficult to dispose of. And I understand are so heavy you can't jack them up to change a wheel. They are feelgood toys. The future is localism and public transport.

    That doesn't sound like the future at all. Sounds like 100 years in the past.
    Well, yes. And 1,000 and 10,000 years in the past. The past century has been a blip and and unsustainable one
    It's sustainable with renewable plentiful electricity. We should not regress progress for the sake of it. Personal transport is much better than public transport on almost every level.
    A bright electric future catalysed by the likes of Elon Musk's Teslas or the Ishmael/Greta hairshirt ?

    Know which one I want to see..
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,004
    edited October 2021

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Watching this makes me feel pity for Greta. Who could let this happen to a little girl?

    Must say, I do quite like the Australian style points based response to the "selfish, badly educated, virtue signalling little turds"

    Patrick Moore
    @EcoSenseNow
    Watch as Sky News Australia rips a new one for Greta. This would never happen in Canada, USA, or Europe. Three Cheers!

    Haven't followed the link as I'm immune to Blimpish clickbait. But it's interesting what hostility Greta arouses. Nearly everyone agrees she's got a point, though we can debate how far we need to go to turn the ship round before it hits the rocks. Instead of discussing that, let's have a go at a teenager...
    But he wasn't having a go at a teenager, Greta.

    He was having a go at teenagers, Australian teenagers.
    Nick’s comment still applies.
    It doesn't.

    Modern western middle class teenagers have a very indulged and pampered lifestyle and most will struggle to maintain that when they have to fund it themselves.

    Its not really their fault but rather that of their parents, who would be better advised saving money for their kids rather than spending so much on them.
    It does - and your response is any event directed at their parents.

    As far as Australia’s CO2 output is concerned, this has little or nothing to do with teenagers and their mobile phone usage - indeed there is already one state (Tasmania) with 100% renewable electricity.
    Being one of the world’s largest coal producers is rather more germane.

    It is blimpish clickbait par excellence, and frankly embarrassing to watch.
    Embarrassing because he points out some inconvenient truths ?

    Without watching it again didn't he make points about aircon usage and travel by cars.

    A more UK or US equivalent could also mention the amount of air travel the modern lifestyle includes.
    If he feels so strongly about a consumerist lifestyle then surely he ought to be agreeing with their sentiments while fulminating about their behaviour ?
    No, it's just ignorant dyspepsia.
    Oh I'm sure he lives it up and that his own upbringing wasn't something out of an Australian Hovis advert.

    But so what - few of us fully match our deeds to our thoughts - and the fundamental point remains that the modern middle class teenager has a pampered, privileged lifestyle, A lifestyle, at least in the UK, they will struggle to maintain when they have to fund it themselves.
    A lifestyle they will struggle to maintain after their rentier parents and grandparents have extorted sufficient rents and taxes from them.
    Indeed.

    Their parents and grandparents generations are indulging them at the wrong time and will exploit them at the wrong time.

    The younger generation are having their current expectations raised and their future means reduced.
    The younger generation will inherit more than any generation before them thanks to the assets and savings their parents and grandparents have built up
    The expected age for someone born in the 1980s to lose their last parent is 64. Only in Tory HQ would that be considered young.
    Don't forget they will also likely inherit something from their grandparents too in their teens, twenties or thirties
    Not if their grandparents spaff it all on strippers and blow, oh and cruises
    @HYUFD is single minded in protecting his inheritance but in our case we spent a lot of money on cruises and 7 round the world trips over the last 15 years with no thought to our family's hope of inheritance

    Furthermore demanding one million inheritance tax free so you can buy a house in the south is the ultimate in selfish self interest
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,265
    edited October 2021
    Sandpit said:


    Yes, there’s an issue with many in the environmental movement being barely-disguised socialists, which I’m sure you’re happy with but many of us aren’t.

    Those on the centre-right see improving technology as the answer, rather than higher taxes and increased state control, and will rally against those who see only increases in the cost of living as proposals put forward.

    There’s also the hypocracy angle, with many of the socialist green advocates living very middle-class lifestyles, as we have seen with the road-closing protestors in recent weeks. They appear to have litttle intention to change their own behaviour, in the same way as they expect everyone else to do so. To be flippant, it won’t be long before someone writes a lengthy opinion piece in the Guardian, celebrating the fact that there’s now a much nicer crowd than there used to be on the Ryanair to Florence.

    Yes, as a charity we have to be careful not to let personal political leanings creep in. I assume anyway that some colleagues vote Conservative, and I'm absolutely certain that many supporters do. But to be taken seriously we do have to suggest viable options rather than just say "Stop this cruel practice" and skate over the fact that stopping it means higher cost. Farmers don't put hens in crowded cages for the fun of it - it's more efficient and hence produces slightly cheaper (a few pence) eggs. I'm not sure there is really a tech solution, though the Kipster system is pretty good. Proposing that farm subsidies (which are substantial already) be slanted to higher-welfare systems is part of our solutions - that's not a novel socialist thing to do, just a policy choice about what sort of farms Defra wants to encourage.

    (Always interesting to discuss anything with you - would be nice to meet sometime.)
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,884
    IshmaelZ said:

    And I understand are so heavy you can't jack them up to change a wheel.

    Of course you can. BEVs aren't double the weight of an ICE car. A Taycan is more or less the same weight as a Panamera.
  • Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 4,793

    I noticed @AlistairM 's prediction on the previous thread, and the factor he was least confident about (schoolkids).

    As it happens, I'd been looking at this. Taking the ONS prevalence counts amongst Yr7-15, assuming infection lasts for an average of 11.5 days (an assumption taken from comparing their prevalence estimates with their incidence estimates; it makes the numbers fit best and it matches reported data), counting from late August to ensure minimal shift in their own processes and maximum comparability, and using ratio of hospitalisations prior to that point (ie x hospitalisations came from y infections between August and December; assume the ratio was constant before and the proportion of infections was constant; cross-checking with the ratio of Age 6-17 hospitalisations to infections available after October)...

    Further assuming that prior infection has an effective efficacy of 80% (from the ONS reinfection surveys), so some of the infections are in the previously infected (backed up by anecdotal evidence from people I've spoken with)

    I get infections looking like this since the start of August in that age group:



    (Central prediction and 95% ranges high and low, with dotted lines as a projection from the latest. Obviously, the rate will bend down as it approaches 100%, but this gives an indication).

    Then add vaccinations. Too slow so far, but assuming those currently infected do not receive doses and doses are randomly spread between the previously infected and the not-yet-infected, and taking doses from 2 weeks prior as being "active," you get the rise of "non-immune-naive" looking like this:




    Now, neither infection nor vaccination provide 100% immunity, but if you assume 80% or so from either, and 90%+ from either hybrid immunity or the reinfected-and-recovered, when the bar hits around 100%, you should have herd immunity in that group.

    This does, of course, assume infections proceed as before even over half-term, but I think 2 weeks looks promising for this "engine room" to finally stall for good.

    My only thought on this excellent work, is that if we are at antibody level of 85% or so *now* in the 7-15 how do we explain -

    image

    15-19 fell back to the pattern (mostly) of the vaccinated groups quite quickly once 16-17 started being vaccinated.....
    My feeling is that 85% multiplied by 80-90% immunity efficacy would give an effective overall group immunity level of 68-76%. This passes the herd immunity threshold for R0 of between 3.1 and 4.2.

    Not quite there yet for Delta. We need to push closer to 100% (a couple of weeks away).

    In contrast to the extremely sluggish rollout of vaccination in the 12-15, we had a far faster leap up towards about 50% vaccinated in the 16-17s. With prior infection, that gets close to the 100% no longer immunologically naive level far faster.

    I would, though, expect to see that curve bending somewhat in the coming days if this is right. If it doesn't, then this is wrong (or, at least, towards the lower error margins)
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,072

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Watching this makes me feel pity for Greta. Who could let this happen to a little girl?

    Must say, I do quite like the Australian style points based response to the "selfish, badly educated, virtue signalling little turds"

    Patrick Moore
    @EcoSenseNow
    Watch as Sky News Australia rips a new one for Greta. This would never happen in Canada, USA, or Europe. Three Cheers!

    Haven't followed the link as I'm immune to Blimpish clickbait. But it's interesting what hostility Greta arouses. Nearly everyone agrees she's got a point, though we can debate how far we need to go to turn the ship round before it hits the rocks. Instead of discussing that, let's have a go at a teenager...
    But he wasn't having a go at a teenager, Greta.

    He was having a go at teenagers, Australian teenagers.
    Nick’s comment still applies.
    It doesn't.

    Modern western middle class teenagers have a very indulged and pampered lifestyle and most will struggle to maintain that when they have to fund it themselves.

    Its not really their fault but rather that of their parents, who would be better advised saving money for their kids rather than spending so much on them.
    It does - and your response is any event directed at their parents.

    As far as Australia’s CO2 output is concerned, this has little or nothing to do with teenagers and their mobile phone usage - indeed there is already one state (Tasmania) with 100% renewable electricity.
    Being one of the world’s largest coal producers is rather more germane.

    It is blimpish clickbait par excellence, and frankly embarrassing to watch.
    Embarrassing because he points out some inconvenient truths ?

    Without watching it again didn't he make points about aircon usage and travel by cars.

    A more UK or US equivalent could also mention the amount of air travel the modern lifestyle includes.
    If he feels so strongly about a consumerist lifestyle then surely he ought to be agreeing with their sentiments while fulminating about their behaviour ?
    No, it's just ignorant dyspepsia.
    Oh I'm sure he lives it up and that his own upbringing wasn't something out of an Australian Hovis advert.

    But so what - few of us fully match our deeds to our thoughts - and the fundamental point remains that the modern middle class teenager has a pampered, privileged lifestyle, A lifestyle, at least in the UK, they will struggle to maintain when they have to fund it themselves.
    A lifestyle they will struggle to maintain after their rentier parents and grandparents have extorted sufficient rents and taxes from them.
    Indeed.

    Their parents and grandparents generations are indulging them at the wrong time and will exploit them at the wrong time.

    The younger generation are having their current expectations raised and their future means reduced.
    The younger generation will inherit more than any generation before them thanks to the assets and savings their parents and grandparents have built up
    The expected age for someone born in the 1980s to lose their last parent is 64. Only in Tory HQ would that be considered young.
    Don't forget they will also likely inherit something from their grandparents too in their teens, twenties or thirties
    Not if their grandparents spaff it all on strippers and blow, oh and cruises
    @HYUFD is single minded in protecting his inheritance but in our case we spent a lot of money on cruises and 7 round the world trips over the last 15 years with no thought to our family's hope of inheritance

    Furthermore demanding one million inheritance tax free so you can buy a house in the south us the ultimate in selfish self interest
    As you should, @Big_G_NorthWales. I hope you enjoy many more years!
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 14,775

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Watching this makes me feel pity for Greta. Who could let this happen to a little girl?

    Must say, I do quite like the Australian style points based response to the "selfish, badly educated, virtue signalling little turds"

    Patrick Moore
    @EcoSenseNow
    Watch as Sky News Australia rips a new one for Greta. This would never happen in Canada, USA, or Europe. Three Cheers!

    Haven't followed the link as I'm immune to Blimpish clickbait. But it's interesting what hostility Greta arouses. Nearly everyone agrees she's got a point, though we can debate how far we need to go to turn the ship round before it hits the rocks. Instead of discussing that, let's have a go at a teenager...
    But he wasn't having a go at a teenager, Greta.

    He was having a go at teenagers, Australian teenagers.
    Nick’s comment still applies.
    It doesn't.

    Modern western middle class teenagers have a very indulged and pampered lifestyle and most will struggle to maintain that when they have to fund it themselves.

    Its not really their fault but rather that of their parents, who would be better advised saving money for their kids rather than spending so much on them.
    It does - and your response is any event directed at their parents.

    As far as Australia’s CO2 output is concerned, this has little or nothing to do with teenagers and their mobile phone usage - indeed there is already one state (Tasmania) with 100% renewable electricity.
    Being one of the world’s largest coal producers is rather more germane.

    It is blimpish clickbait par excellence, and frankly embarrassing to watch.
    Embarrassing because he points out some inconvenient truths ?

    Without watching it again didn't he make points about aircon usage and travel by cars.

    A more UK or US equivalent could also mention the amount of air travel the modern lifestyle includes.
    If he feels so strongly about a consumerist lifestyle then surely he ought to be agreeing with their sentiments while fulminating about their behaviour ?
    No, it's just ignorant dyspepsia.
    Oh I'm sure he lives it up and that his own upbringing wasn't something out of an Australian Hovis advert.

    But so what - few of us fully match our deeds to our thoughts - and the fundamental point remains that the modern middle class teenager has a pampered, privileged lifestyle, A lifestyle, at least in the UK, they will struggle to maintain when they have to fund it themselves.
    A lifestyle they will struggle to maintain after their rentier parents and grandparents have extorted sufficient rents and taxes from them.
    Indeed.

    Their parents and grandparents generations are indulging them at the wrong time and will exploit them at the wrong time.

    The younger generation are having their current expectations raised and their future means reduced.
    The younger generation will inherit more than any generation before them thanks to the assets and savings their parents and grandparents have built up
    The expected age for someone born in the 1980s to lose their last parent is 64. Only in Tory HQ would that be considered young.
    Don't forget they will also likely inherit something from their grandparents too in their teens, twenties or thirties
    Not if their grandparents spaff it all on strippers and blow, oh and cruises
    Bingo and whist evenings for mine.

    But I still got sod all.
    My Dad started playing a lot of online bridge during lockdown. I've no idea if that's as financially perilous as online poker.
  • Roger said:

    Watching this makes me feel pity for Greta. Who could let this happen to a little girl?

    Must say, I do quite like the Australian style points based response to the "selfish, badly educated, virtue signalling little turds"

    Patrick Moore
    @EcoSenseNow
    Watch as Sky News Australia rips a new one for Greta. This would never happen in Canada, USA, or Europe. Three Cheers!

    Haven't followed the link as I'm immune to Blimpish clickbait. But it's interesting what hostility Greta arouses. Nearly everyone agrees she's got a point, though we can debate how far we need to go to turn the ship round before it hits the rocks. Instead of discussing that, let's have a go at a teenager...
    That's a strong hypothetical argument against a point that isn't made in the video you refuse to watch.

    Don't worry; your virtue is shining brightly through it.
    It's quite funny in a Les Patterson sort of way but spoilt by his inclusion of 'supporting immigration' which rather gives the game away. Where exactly are the immigrants supposed to disappear to?
    Agree with you entirely for what might be the first (and last!) time.

    The old chap does make a couple of half good points to the kids in his rant, but the immigration bit just seems like an entirely irrelevant bit of anti-virtue-signalling. Presumably his audience would lap it up..

    I was just rather tickled by the fact that he was allowed to call them 'little turds' on a news programme.

    And I really do think the whole Thunberg thing is utterly bizarre. Who the hell thought it would be a good idea to make a young child the spokesperson for the planet?!
    I feel concerned whenever I hear Greta for her mental state to be fair
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,719
    edited October 2021

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Watching this makes me feel pity for Greta. Who could let this happen to a little girl?

    Must say, I do quite like the Australian style points based response to the "selfish, badly educated, virtue signalling little turds"

    Patrick Moore
    @EcoSenseNow
    Watch as Sky News Australia rips a new one for Greta. This would never happen in Canada, USA, or Europe. Three Cheers!

    Haven't followed the link as I'm immune to Blimpish clickbait. But it's interesting what hostility Greta arouses. Nearly everyone agrees she's got a point, though we can debate how far we need to go to turn the ship round before it hits the rocks. Instead of discussing that, let's have a go at a teenager...
    But he wasn't having a go at a teenager, Greta.

    He was having a go at teenagers, Australian teenagers.
    Nick’s comment still applies.
    It doesn't.

    Modern western middle class teenagers have a very indulged and pampered lifestyle and most will struggle to maintain that when they have to fund it themselves.

    Its not really their fault but rather that of their parents, who would be better advised saving money for their kids rather than spending so much on them.
    It does - and your response is any event directed at their parents.

    As far as Australia’s CO2 output is concerned, this has little or nothing to do with teenagers and their mobile phone usage - indeed there is already one state (Tasmania) with 100% renewable electricity.
    Being one of the world’s largest coal producers is rather more germane.

    It is blimpish clickbait par excellence, and frankly embarrassing to watch.
    Embarrassing because he points out some inconvenient truths ?

    Without watching it again didn't he make points about aircon usage and travel by cars.

    A more UK or US equivalent could also mention the amount of air travel the modern lifestyle includes.
    If he feels so strongly about a consumerist lifestyle then surely he ought to be agreeing with their sentiments while fulminating about their behaviour ?
    No, it's just ignorant dyspepsia.
    Oh I'm sure he lives it up and that his own upbringing wasn't something out of an Australian Hovis advert.

    But so what - few of us fully match our deeds to our thoughts - and the fundamental point remains that the modern middle class teenager has a pampered, privileged lifestyle, A lifestyle, at least in the UK, they will struggle to maintain when they have to fund it themselves.
    A lifestyle they will struggle to maintain after their rentier parents and grandparents have extorted sufficient rents and taxes from them.
    Indeed.

    Their parents and grandparents generations are indulging them at the wrong time and will exploit them at the wrong time.

    The younger generation are having their current expectations raised and their future means reduced.
    The younger generation will inherit more than any generation before them thanks to the assets and savings their parents and grandparents have built up
    The expected age for someone born in the 1980s to lose their last parent is 64. Only in Tory HQ would that be considered young.
    Don't forget they will also likely inherit something from their grandparents too in their teens, twenties or thirties
    Not if their grandparents spaff it all on strippers and blow, oh and cruises
    @HYUFD is single minded in protecting his inheritance but in our case we spent a lot of money on cruises and 7 round the world trips over the last 15 years with no thought to our family's hope of inheritance

    Furthermore demanding one million inheritance tax free so you can buy a house in the south us the ultimate in selfish self interest
    I am a conservative not a liberal and not a socialist and family is important to me. If you wish to spend all your children and grandchildrens' inheritance away that is your affair, however you live in North Wales where most young people on average incomes can afford to buy a house without assistance. That is not the case for those on average incomes in London and most of the South East and Home Counties so parents tend to be more prudent there in protecting the family savings and assets
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,072
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Watching this makes me feel pity for Greta. Who could let this happen to a little girl?

    Must say, I do quite like the Australian style points based response to the "selfish, badly educated, virtue signalling little turds"

    Patrick Moore
    @EcoSenseNow
    Watch as Sky News Australia rips a new one for Greta. This would never happen in Canada, USA, or Europe. Three Cheers!

    Haven't followed the link as I'm immune to Blimpish clickbait. But it's interesting what hostility Greta arouses. Nearly everyone agrees she's got a point, though we can debate how far we need to go to turn the ship round before it hits the rocks. Instead of discussing that, let's have a go at a teenager...
    But he wasn't having a go at a teenager, Greta.

    He was having a go at teenagers, Australian teenagers.
    Nick’s comment still applies.
    It doesn't.

    Modern western middle class teenagers have a very indulged and pampered lifestyle and most will struggle to maintain that when they have to fund it themselves.

    Its not really their fault but rather that of their parents, who would be better advised saving money for their kids rather than spending so much on them.
    It does - and your response is any event directed at their parents.

    As far as Australia’s CO2 output is concerned, this has little or nothing to do with teenagers and their mobile phone usage - indeed there is already one state (Tasmania) with 100% renewable electricity.
    Being one of the world’s largest coal producers is rather more germane.

    It is blimpish clickbait par excellence, and frankly embarrassing to watch.
    Embarrassing because he points out some inconvenient truths ?

    Without watching it again didn't he make points about aircon usage and travel by cars.

    A more UK or US equivalent could also mention the amount of air travel the modern lifestyle includes.
    If he feels so strongly about a consumerist lifestyle then surely he ought to be agreeing with their sentiments while fulminating about their behaviour ?
    No, it's just ignorant dyspepsia.
    Oh I'm sure he lives it up and that his own upbringing wasn't something out of an Australian Hovis advert.

    But so what - few of us fully match our deeds to our thoughts - and the fundamental point remains that the modern middle class teenager has a pampered, privileged lifestyle, A lifestyle, at least in the UK, they will struggle to maintain when they have to fund it themselves.
    A lifestyle they will struggle to maintain after their rentier parents and grandparents have extorted sufficient rents and taxes from them.
    Indeed.

    Their parents and grandparents generations are indulging them at the wrong time and will exploit them at the wrong time.

    The younger generation are having their current expectations raised and their future means reduced.
    The younger generation will inherit more than any generation before them thanks to the assets and savings their parents and grandparents have built up
    The expected age for someone born in the 1980s to lose their last parent is 64. Only in Tory HQ would that be considered young.
    Don't forget they will also likely inherit something from their grandparents too in their teens, twenties or thirties
    Not if their grandparents spaff it all on strippers and blow, oh and cruises
    @HYUFD is single minded in protecting his inheritance but in our case we spent a lot of money on cruises and 7 round the world trips over the last 15 years with no thought to our family's hope of inheritance

    Furthermore demanding one million inheritance tax free so you can buy a house in the south us the ultimate in selfish self interest
    am a Tory and family is important to me. If you wish to spend all your children and grandchildrens' inheritance away that is your affair, however you live in North Wales when most young people on average incomes can afford to buy a house without assistance. That is not the case for those on average incomes in London and the South East so parents tend to be more prudent there in protecting the family savings and assets
    And yet a graduate on 25k is taxed the same in North Wales as they are in London
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Sandpit said:

    Wow. Only just caught up with the musings of this lady:

    https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/tv/conservative-host-candace-owens-calls-for-us-to-invade-australia-to-free-people-from-tyranny/news-story/9a487acac0dbafefaa0945d2aa7284cc

    Surely this suggests that AUUUKUS is finished should Trump - or indeed any GOP candidate - prevail in 2024.

    American Conservatives find it’s much easier ground to be criticising Aussie police for beating people up, rather than American police who do the same.

    I have Candace Owens on the long-odds outsider list for GOP presidential nomination. She really winds up a certain type of liberal commentator, who have a hard time with the fact that a black woman can be right-wing and against identity politics.
    I think she winds people up by being a fucking lunatic grifter liar. Nothing to do with her race or gender.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 24,603

    @MattW et al,

    Anyone know anywhere good online I could get a birch plywood sheet (circa 35mm thickness) cut to size for a reasonable price? Size around 1050 x 400.

    EBay might be worth a look. I got good quality phenolic trailer board cut to size off eBay delivered.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,719
    edited October 2021
    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Watching this makes me feel pity for Greta. Who could let this happen to a little girl?

    Must say, I do quite like the Australian style points based response to the "selfish, badly educated, virtue signalling little turds"

    Patrick Moore
    @EcoSenseNow
    Watch as Sky News Australia rips a new one for Greta. This would never happen in Canada, USA, or Europe. Three Cheers!

    Haven't followed the link as I'm immune to Blimpish clickbait. But it's interesting what hostility Greta arouses. Nearly everyone agrees she's got a point, though we can debate how far we need to go to turn the ship round before it hits the rocks. Instead of discussing that, let's have a go at a teenager...
    But he wasn't having a go at a teenager, Greta.

    He was having a go at teenagers, Australian teenagers.
    Nick’s comment still applies.
    It doesn't.

    Modern western middle class teenagers have a very indulged and pampered lifestyle and most will struggle to maintain that when they have to fund it themselves.

    Its not really their fault but rather that of their parents, who would be better advised saving money for their kids rather than spending so much on them.
    It does - and your response is any event directed at their parents.

    As far as Australia’s CO2 output is concerned, this has little or nothing to do with teenagers and their mobile phone usage - indeed there is already one state (Tasmania) with 100% renewable electricity.
    Being one of the world’s largest coal producers is rather more germane.

    It is blimpish clickbait par excellence, and frankly embarrassing to watch.
    Embarrassing because he points out some inconvenient truths ?

    Without watching it again didn't he make points about aircon usage and travel by cars.

    A more UK or US equivalent could also mention the amount of air travel the modern lifestyle includes.
    If he feels so strongly about a consumerist lifestyle then surely he ought to be agreeing with their sentiments while fulminating about their behaviour ?
    No, it's just ignorant dyspepsia.
    Oh I'm sure he lives it up and that his own upbringing wasn't something out of an Australian Hovis advert.

    But so what - few of us fully match our deeds to our thoughts - and the fundamental point remains that the modern middle class teenager has a pampered, privileged lifestyle, A lifestyle, at least in the UK, they will struggle to maintain when they have to fund it themselves.
    A lifestyle they will struggle to maintain after their rentier parents and grandparents have extorted sufficient rents and taxes from them.
    Indeed.

    Their parents and grandparents generations are indulging them at the wrong time and will exploit them at the wrong time.

    The younger generation are having their current expectations raised and their future means reduced.
    The younger generation will inherit more than any generation before them thanks to the assets and savings their parents and grandparents have built up
    The expected age for someone born in the 1980s to lose their last parent is 64. Only in Tory HQ would that be considered young.
    Don't forget they will also likely inherit something from their grandparents too in their teens, twenties or thirties
    I don't know what world you live in HYUFD but my inheritance from my grandparents was: Nil, Nil, £500, £500.

    For my children it is/will be Nil, Nil, £1000 and sometime in the future possibly £5000.
    You are well over 60 and in your youth most grandparents rented they did not own, now the vast majority of grandparents own properties and have savings some of which will go to their grandchildren. The rest of that inheritance will then filter down to their grandchildren too when their children die in turn (and indeed plenty of parents now use inheritances from their own parents to fund their childrens' first deposit to buy a property).
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,072
    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Watching this makes me feel pity for Greta. Who could let this happen to a little girl?

    Must say, I do quite like the Australian style points based response to the "selfish, badly educated, virtue signalling little turds"

    Patrick Moore
    @EcoSenseNow
    Watch as Sky News Australia rips a new one for Greta. This would never happen in Canada, USA, or Europe. Three Cheers!

    Haven't followed the link as I'm immune to Blimpish clickbait. But it's interesting what hostility Greta arouses. Nearly everyone agrees she's got a point, though we can debate how far we need to go to turn the ship round before it hits the rocks. Instead of discussing that, let's have a go at a teenager...
    But he wasn't having a go at a teenager, Greta.

    He was having a go at teenagers, Australian teenagers.
    Nick’s comment still applies.
    It doesn't.

    Modern western middle class teenagers have a very indulged and pampered lifestyle and most will struggle to maintain that when they have to fund it themselves.

    Its not really their fault but rather that of their parents, who would be better advised saving money for their kids rather than spending so much on them.
    It does - and your response is any event directed at their parents.

    As far as Australia’s CO2 output is concerned, this has little or nothing to do with teenagers and their mobile phone usage - indeed there is already one state (Tasmania) with 100% renewable electricity.
    Being one of the world’s largest coal producers is rather more germane.

    It is blimpish clickbait par excellence, and frankly embarrassing to watch.
    Embarrassing because he points out some inconvenient truths ?

    Without watching it again didn't he make points about aircon usage and travel by cars.

    A more UK or US equivalent could also mention the amount of air travel the modern lifestyle includes.
    If he feels so strongly about a consumerist lifestyle then surely he ought to be agreeing with their sentiments while fulminating about their behaviour ?
    No, it's just ignorant dyspepsia.
    Oh I'm sure he lives it up and that his own upbringing wasn't something out of an Australian Hovis advert.

    But so what - few of us fully match our deeds to our thoughts - and the fundamental point remains that the modern middle class teenager has a pampered, privileged lifestyle, A lifestyle, at least in the UK, they will struggle to maintain when they have to fund it themselves.
    A lifestyle they will struggle to maintain after their rentier parents and grandparents have extorted sufficient rents and taxes from them.
    Indeed.

    Their parents and grandparents generations are indulging them at the wrong time and will exploit them at the wrong time.

    The younger generation are having their current expectations raised and their future means reduced.
    The younger generation will inherit more than any generation before them thanks to the assets and savings their parents and grandparents have built up
    The expected age for someone born in the 1980s to lose their last parent is 64. Only in Tory HQ would that be considered young.
    Don't forget they will also likely inherit something from their grandparents too in their teens, twenties or thirties
    I don't know what world you live in HYUFD but my inheritance from my grandparents was: Nil, Nil, £500, £500.

    For my children it is/will be Nil, Nil, £1000 and sometime in the future possibly £5000.
    You are well over 60 and in your youth most grandparents rented they did not own, now the vast majority of grandparents own properties and have savings some of which will go to their children. That inheritance will then filter down to their grandchildren too when their children die in turn
    @HYUFD 's Tory party flagship policy: Don't have grandparents with assets? Fuck you, here's some tax rises.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 10,468
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Watching this makes me feel pity for Greta. Who could let this happen to a little girl?

    Must say, I do quite like the Australian style points based response to the "selfish, badly educated, virtue signalling little turds"

    Patrick Moore
    @EcoSenseNow
    Watch as Sky News Australia rips a new one for Greta. This would never happen in Canada, USA, or Europe. Three Cheers!

    Haven't followed the link as I'm immune to Blimpish clickbait. But it's interesting what hostility Greta arouses. Nearly everyone agrees she's got a point, though we can debate how far we need to go to turn the ship round before it hits the rocks. Instead of discussing that, let's have a go at a teenager...
    But he wasn't having a go at a teenager, Greta.

    He was having a go at teenagers, Australian teenagers.
    Nick’s comment still applies.
    It doesn't.

    Modern western middle class teenagers have a very indulged and pampered lifestyle and most will struggle to maintain that when they have to fund it themselves.

    Its not really their fault but rather that of their parents, who would be better advised saving money for their kids rather than spending so much on them.
    It does - and your response is any event directed at their parents.

    As far as Australia’s CO2 output is concerned, this has little or nothing to do with teenagers and their mobile phone usage - indeed there is already one state (Tasmania) with 100% renewable electricity.
    Being one of the world’s largest coal producers is rather more germane.

    It is blimpish clickbait par excellence, and frankly embarrassing to watch.
    Embarrassing because he points out some inconvenient truths ?

    Without watching it again didn't he make points about aircon usage and travel by cars.

    A more UK or US equivalent could also mention the amount of air travel the modern lifestyle includes.
    If he feels so strongly about a consumerist lifestyle then surely he ought to be agreeing with their sentiments while fulminating about their behaviour ?
    No, it's just ignorant dyspepsia.
    Oh I'm sure he lives it up and that his own upbringing wasn't something out of an Australian Hovis advert.

    But so what - few of us fully match our deeds to our thoughts - and the fundamental point remains that the modern middle class teenager has a pampered, privileged lifestyle, A lifestyle, at least in the UK, they will struggle to maintain when they have to fund it themselves.
    A lifestyle they will struggle to maintain after their rentier parents and grandparents have extorted sufficient rents and taxes from them.
    Indeed.

    Their parents and grandparents generations are indulging them at the wrong time and will exploit them at the wrong time.

    The younger generation are having their current expectations raised and their future means reduced.
    The younger generation will inherit more than any generation before them thanks to the assets and savings their parents and grandparents have built up
    The expected age for someone born in the 1980s to lose their last parent is 64. Only in Tory HQ would that be considered young.
    Don't forget they will also likely inherit something from their grandparents too in their teens, twenties or thirties
    Not if their grandparents spaff it all on strippers and blow, oh and cruises
    @HYUFD is single minded in protecting his inheritance but in our case we spent a lot of money on cruises and 7 round the world trips over the last 15 years with no thought to our family's hope of inheritance

    Furthermore demanding one million inheritance tax free so you can buy a house in the south us the ultimate in selfish self interest
    I am a conservative not a liberal and not a socialist and family is important to me. If you wish to spend all your children and grandchildrens' inheritance away that is your affair, however you live in North Wales where most young people on average incomes can afford to buy a house without assistance. That is not the case for those on average incomes in London and most of the South East and Home Counties so parents tend to be more prudent there in protecting the family savings and assets
    I'm just wondering where you expect my dad to live to be able to give me my inheritance?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,590
    Dura_Ace said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    And I understand are so heavy you can't jack them up to change a wheel.

    Of course you can. BEVs aren't double the weight of an ICE car. A Taycan is more or less the same weight as a Panamera.
    And likely to get lighter quite soon as battery energy density improves.

    On another note, the switch from two stroke to electric scooters in Asia will make a massive difference to regional air quality over the next few years.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,165
    Farooq said:

    tlg86 said:

    Nigelb said:

    I am still angry about these rumours re. the Government messing with the student loan repayment thresholds to pay for protecting the wealthy, property owning older generation.

    The deal was we paid X% over Y for 30 years. That was bad enough, never mind extending the term by a third and reducing Y when it suits.

    Tax the f*cking wealth ffs, not 20 something people getting by on circa 25-30k a year.

    Would the retrospective nature of such a thing even be legal ?
    (Of course Parliament can legislate to make it so, but it would be astonishingly bad policy.)
    I’d argue a wealth tax is a retrospective tax.
    If you tax people on the wealth they had in previous years, yes.
    If it's based on current wealth, obviously not.
    If the government helps itself to people’s savings, then that’s a tax on past income.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,776
    Farooq said:

    Foxy said:

    Wow. Only just caught up with the musings of this lady:

    https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/tv/conservative-host-candace-owens-calls-for-us-to-invade-australia-to-free-people-from-tyranny/news-story/9a487acac0dbafefaa0945d2aa7284cc

    Surely this suggests that AUUUKUS is finished should Trump - or indeed any GOP candidate - prevail in 2024.

    AUKUS has really upset you hasn't it
    I'm just peering deep into the GOP soul. It's clear that they now see Australia as a libtard, Bidenite tyranny. AUUKUS will be seen as a sinister Democrat ruse to facilitate that. I can therefore imagine Trump rescinding AUUUKUS purely to spite Biden and energize the base.
    Does AUUKUS consist of more that the Aussies exploring the possibility of a nuclear submarine deal? I haven't heard of anything else.

    I wouldn't think Australia a great base to invade China from. They are 4,600 miles apart, a thousand miles further than UK to Afghanistan.
    Yes, it was essentially an arms agreement, but plenty see it as kind of proto-NATO and a means of asserting an anglophone New World Order in the Far East. Trump's spin writes itself: it's a sinister, Democrat plot to get American servicemen to risks their lives for foreigners and divert billions in US taxes to fund their militaries. Moreover, Trump will see Scott Morrison, previously regarded as a Trumpite ally, as a traitor for sucking up to Biden and will want vengeance. AUUKUS may be short lived.
    Trump is not going to be president again.
    He does not deserve to be President again. But, it's entirely possible that he will be.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,719
    edited October 2021

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Watching this makes me feel pity for Greta. Who could let this happen to a little girl?

    Must say, I do quite like the Australian style points based response to the "selfish, badly educated, virtue signalling little turds"

    Patrick Moore
    @EcoSenseNow
    Watch as Sky News Australia rips a new one for Greta. This would never happen in Canada, USA, or Europe. Three Cheers!

    Haven't followed the link as I'm immune to Blimpish clickbait. But it's interesting what hostility Greta arouses. Nearly everyone agrees she's got a point, though we can debate how far we need to go to turn the ship round before it hits the rocks. Instead of discussing that, let's have a go at a teenager...
    But he wasn't having a go at a teenager, Greta.

    He was having a go at teenagers, Australian teenagers.
    Nick’s comment still applies.
    It doesn't.

    Modern western middle class teenagers have a very indulged and pampered lifestyle and most will struggle to maintain that when they have to fund it themselves.

    Its not really their fault but rather that of their parents, who would be better advised saving money for their kids rather than spending so much on them.
    It does - and your response is any event directed at their parents.

    As far as Australia’s CO2 output is concerned, this has little or nothing to do with teenagers and their mobile phone usage - indeed there is already one state (Tasmania) with 100% renewable electricity.
    Being one of the world’s largest coal producers is rather more germane.

    It is blimpish clickbait par excellence, and frankly embarrassing to watch.
    Embarrassing because he points out some inconvenient truths ?

    Without watching it again didn't he make points about aircon usage and travel by cars.

    A more UK or US equivalent could also mention the amount of air travel the modern lifestyle includes.
    If he feels so strongly about a consumerist lifestyle then surely he ought to be agreeing with their sentiments while fulminating about their behaviour ?
    No, it's just ignorant dyspepsia.
    Oh I'm sure he lives it up and that his own upbringing wasn't something out of an Australian Hovis advert.

    But so what - few of us fully match our deeds to our thoughts - and the fundamental point remains that the modern middle class teenager has a pampered, privileged lifestyle, A lifestyle, at least in the UK, they will struggle to maintain when they have to fund it themselves.
    A lifestyle they will struggle to maintain after their rentier parents and grandparents have extorted sufficient rents and taxes from them.
    Indeed.

    Their parents and grandparents generations are indulging them at the wrong time and will exploit them at the wrong time.

    The younger generation are having their current expectations raised and their future means reduced.
    The younger generation will inherit more than any generation before them thanks to the assets and savings their parents and grandparents have built up
    The expected age for someone born in the 1980s to lose their last parent is 64. Only in Tory HQ would that be considered young.
    Don't forget they will also likely inherit something from their grandparents too in their teens, twenties or thirties
    Not if their grandparents spaff it all on strippers and blow, oh and cruises
    @HYUFD is single minded in protecting his inheritance but in our case we spent a lot of money on cruises and 7 round the world trips over the last 15 years with no thought to our family's hope of inheritance

    Furthermore demanding one million inheritance tax free so you can buy a house in the south us the ultimate in selfish self interest
    am a Tory and family is important to me. If you wish to spend all your children and grandchildrens' inheritance away that is your affair, however you live in North Wales when most young people on average incomes can afford to buy a house without assistance. That is not the case for those on average incomes in London and the South East so parents tend to be more prudent there in protecting the family savings and assets
    And yet a graduate on 25k is taxed the same in North Wales as they are in London
    So no difference then. The cost of living will be far lower in North Wales and even if earnings are a bit higher in London all but the highest earners would have more disposable income in North Wales than in London with lower commute costs, lower costs on food and drink and going out, lower rents and lower mortgages.

    Plenty of higher earning apprentices too who never went to university and have no student loans to repay
This discussion has been closed.