Funny thing about this is that the arguments put forward by PBTories to try and defend Mr Johnson - that it was simply a beer drunk at an otherwise completely work meeting - work much better for Mr Starmer than Mr J.
Last year we had the fastest growing economy in the G7, this year we are expected to match the best. Unemployment is no more than frictional in most of the country, the government's deficit is coming in lower than expected (if still very high, reflecting high public spending), I must confess that I am at loss as to how so many think it would be better under Labour.
Of course, there is the cost of living crisis brought about by inflation like we haven't seen in 20 years, led by politically sensitive rises in fuel and gas with food in danger of falling on behind. What people think Labour can do about these things I am really not sure. Most come from international pressures, not least because of sanctions on Russia and the disruption of food harvests in Ukraine itself.
Labour's policies seem to me to be a windfall tax on north sea producers at a time that we want them to significantly increase investment and, ehm, I am not really sure. They seem to want to increase public spending in a variety of ways, notably health, further increasing demand in an economy running pretty near capacity giving an extra spin to inflation.
What I think we are actually seeing is that people are pretty unhappy. Wages are rising strongly but are being significantly outpaced by prices and most are seeing a difficult squeeze in their budgets. Those on fixed incomes or benefits are doing even worse. So they blame the government and hope something different would be better. When you add general dissatisfaction that the PM is a lying b****** it is hardly surprising that they do not give the government the benefit of the doubt. But Labour's cupboard looks pretty bare to me.
It isn't the national GDP figures that matter to people, it is the economic pressures on themselves and their communities that impacts on voting.
Putting up NI on workers to allow the elderly to keep more of their assets is an example of this.
Interest rates on Student Loans too. Very well targeted, like the NI, to make the happy recipients feel all loved and supported by their parentally minded government.
And fast growing economies in 2021 are hardly a reliable measure given the crash beforehand.
You know a government is struggling when their attack on the opposition is that they haven’t fleshed out their policies 2 1/12 years from an election.
Absolutely true. They are struggling, they have no clear and obvious policies to deal with issues that are out of their control and their attempt to do so in the Spring statement was a fiasco focusing on the wrong targets and depleting the limited amunition available to little or no benefit. But an alternative would be nice. Blair and Brown seemed to manage one.
Not this far out.
Why wouldn't Opposition parties want to keep their powder dry until closer to the election. Take Osborne's foolish (but popular with HYUFD and other million pound heirs to fortunes) inheritance tax proposals taken up in part by Brown/ Darling.
My optimistic prediction for today is that Le Pen will slightly underperform and it’ll be 57:43. I hope I’m right.
My fear is Melanchon's Corbynista morons will stay at home or vote Le Pen because they hate Centrists more than they do Fascists. Meanwhile talking of Corbynista morons.
There is something of a repellent double standard here, in that Rayner was pilloried for calling Conservatives "scum" (fair enough) yet it is acceptable for the Mail to allude to the misogynistic notion that she exposes her minge to Boris Johnson every Wednesday at noon.
Anyway working girl Angie is wasting her time. Johnson prefers posh *****... like Jacob Rees Mogg.
Just imagine Delboy with a lock up garage filled with dusty boxes of hundreds of Ukrainian flags he’s had since 1998, realising his lottery numbers came in.
Mickey Pearce has borrowed 200 sovs off Rodney to go and join the Azov Battalion.
Taking with him some broken lawn mower engines.
Only Fools and Horses is very popular in parts of Eastern Europe IIRC.
Yes, I followed the late John Challis on Twitter and he said how,popular he was in Serbia and even had a road named after him there.
Lovely bloke, interacted with fans on Twitter. Never unpleasant. RIP
My optimistic prediction for today is that Le Pen will slightly underperform and it’ll be 57:43. I hope I’m right.
My fear is Melanchon's Corbynista morons will stay at home or vote Le Pen because they hate Centrists more than they do Fascists. Meanwhile talking of Corbynista morons.
There is something of a repellent double standard here, in that Rayner was pilloried for calling Conservatives "scum" (fair enough) yet it is acceptable for the Mail to allude to the misogynistic notion that she exposes her minge to Boris Johnson every Wednesday at noon.
Anyway working girl Angie is wasting her time. Johnson prefers posh *****... like Jacob Rees Mogg.
Boris fancies JRM?? Surely not.
You clearly didn't get my "Wordle" right. And there were two (in)appropriate answers.
Last year we had the fastest growing economy in the G7, this year we are expected to match the best. Unemployment is no more than frictional in most of the country, the government's deficit is coming in lower than expected (if still very high, reflecting high public spending), I must confess that I am at loss as to how so many think it would be better under Labour.
Of course, there is the cost of living crisis brought about by inflation like we haven't seen in 20 years, led by politically sensitive rises in fuel and gas with food in danger of falling on behind. What people think Labour can do about these things I am really not sure. Most come from international pressures, not least because of sanctions on Russia and the disruption of food harvests in Ukraine itself.
Labour's policies seem to me to be a windfall tax on north sea producers at a time that we want them to significantly increase investment and, ehm, I am not really sure. They seem to want to increase public spending in a variety of ways, notably health, further increasing demand in an economy running pretty near capacity giving an extra spin to inflation.
What I think we are actually seeing is that people are pretty unhappy. Wages are rising strongly but are being significantly outpaced by prices and most are seeing a difficult squeeze in their budgets. Those on fixed incomes or benefits are doing even worse. So they blame the government and hope something different would be better. When you add general dissatisfaction that the PM is a lying b****** it is hardly surprising that they do not give the government the benefit of the doubt. But Labour's cupboard looks pretty bare to me.
Tulip Siddiq has just said on Sophie Ridge that the windfall tax would give everyone £600 off their energy bills
I have no idea how much the windfall tax is supposed to raise but I am sure someone on here can calculate the cost of giving everyone £600 off their energy bill and compare it to the windfall gain
I would just add this may well be an example of misleading the public when I understood it would provide £200 off energy bills with upto £600 for the poorest in the community
If as I suspect I am correct on this it just adds to the general opinion they are all the same when it comes to the truth
Last year we had the fastest growing economy in the G7, this year we are expected to match the best. Unemployment is no more than frictional in most of the country, the government's deficit is coming in lower than expected (if still very high, reflecting high public spending), I must confess that I am at loss as to how so many think it would be better under Labour.
Of course, there is the cost of living crisis brought about by inflation like we haven't seen in 20 years, led by politically sensitive rises in fuel and gas with food in danger of falling on behind. What people think Labour can do about these things I am really not sure. Most come from international pressures, not least because of sanctions on Russia and the disruption of food harvests in Ukraine itself.
Labour's policies seem to me to be a windfall tax on north sea producers at a time that we want them to significantly increase investment and, ehm, I am not really sure. They seem to want to increase public spending in a variety of ways, notably health, further increasing demand in an economy running pretty near capacity giving an extra spin to inflation.
What I think we are actually seeing is that people are pretty unhappy. Wages are rising strongly but are being significantly outpaced by prices and most are seeing a difficult squeeze in their budgets. Those on fixed incomes or benefits are doing even worse. So they blame the government and hope something different would be better. When you add general dissatisfaction that the PM is a lying b****** it is hardly surprising that they do not give the government the benefit of the doubt. But Labour's cupboard looks pretty bare to me.
It isn't the national GDP figures that matter to people, it is the economic pressures on themselves and their communities that impacts on voting.
Putting up NI on workers to allow the elderly to keep more of their assets is an example of this.
That was a serious mistake. Yet more taxes on earned income as opposed to unearned income. Not only stupid but also, frankly, immoral when those in work are feeling the squeeze more than anyone.
Agree, and I think Labour have the credibility on the NHS to get away with reversing the "Health Levy".
On a broader labour market level it's stupid too - as you note, unemployment is low but I think under-employment is quite high, part of the reason we have such problems with in-work poverty.
Funny thing about this is that the arguments put forward by PBTories to try and defend Mr Johnson - that it was simply a beer drunk at an otherwise completely work meeting - work much better for Mr Starmer than Mr J.
Oh sure. But it’s politics, and I expect the Tories will be doing everything they can to make Sir Keir (what’s this Mr Starmer stuff?!?) look like a hypocrite. If the Lab PCC was there and that might have had an influence on the police investigation of the incident, they’ll probably try to paint it as corruption too.
You know a government is struggling when their attack on the opposition is that they haven’t fleshed out their policies 2 1/12 years from an election.
Absolutely true. They are struggling, they have no clear and obvious policies to deal with issues that are out of their control and their attempt to do so in the Spring statement was a fiasco focusing on the wrong targets and depleting the limited amunition available to little or no benefit. But an alternative would be nice. Blair and Brown seemed to manage one.
Not this far out.
Why wouldn't Opposition parties want to keep their powder dry until closer to the election. Take Osborne's foolish (but popular with HYUFD and other million pound heirs to fortunes) inheritance tax proposals taken up in part by Brown/ Darling.
That was very successful, it scared Brown into not calling an election he might just have won, 1992 style. It also left no doubt about who owned the end of the end of boom and bust. Oppositions do have the ability to change the weather and succesful oppositions use that power effectively. I am not saying waiting for the government to self destruct won't work, it looks on target at the moment, but opportunities are being squandered to exaccerbate the Tories problems.
I hope this experience doesn’t put off a single person like me, with a background like mine from aspiring to participate in public life.
That would break my heart. 💔
We need more people in politics with backgrounds like mine - and fewer as a hobby to help their mates.
7/9
For once the Mail seems to have united the whole of politics and the country in contempt for them. I think there's even been a couple of Tory MPs calling them absolute arseholes.
I just voted Conservative in the Council elections. Its a marginal seat, the candidate is young and fresh, and the longstanding labour incumbent has nothing to say on his leaflets other than he is a socialist.
Even though Starmer is impressive and would be a far better PM than Johnson, the Corbyn legacy runs very deep in the labour party, and puts people off, and this may still be a factor in the next general election.
I think the tories will try and blame the cost of living crisis on Putin, and it may just work. The support for the war in Ukraine seems to be quite popular, I walked across a council estate on Friday, lots of Ukrainian flags everywhere.
Surely there must have been other candidates. It doesn't matter if he is "young and fresh" he stands for lies and criminality and impropriety. And you voted for those things. I know you don't support that so why do it?
Chill. Even voting for an MP isn't voting for a pm, never mind voting for a young fresh councillor who for all we know thinks Johnson is a POS.
Funny thing about this is that the arguments put forward by PBTories to try and defend Mr Johnson - that it was simply a beer drunk at an otherwise completely work meeting - work much better for Mr Starmer than Mr J.
Oh sure. But it’s politics, and I expect the Tories will be doing everything they can to make Sir Keir (what’s this Mr Starmer stuff?!?) look like a hypocrite. If the Lab PCC was there and that might have had an influence on the police investigation of the incident, they’ll probably try to paint it as corruption too.
A sensible story for sensible times. The MoS rightly calls out the scandal that Angela Rayner has a Vagina. You know, that unmentionable thing with all kinds of noxious oozings. Distracts the chaps, unseemly. Shouldn't be allowed in politics.
So a very serious story. There are too many women with vaginas distracting the chaps and they really should Know Their Limits and not be there at all. We could start by ignoring all these vagina fiends involved in politics especially Cressida Dick and Sue Grey. So, no FPNs and critical reports for the PM. Back to business, vote Conservative, huzzah.
Its the people who *buy* the Hate Mail we should be worried about.
I just voted Conservative in the Council elections. Its a marginal seat, the candidate is young and fresh, and the longstanding labour incumbent has nothing to say on his leaflets other than he is a socialist.
Even though Starmer is impressive and would be a far better PM than Johnson, the Corbyn legacy runs very deep in the labour party, and puts people off, and this may still be a factor in the next general election.
I think the tories will try and blame the cost of living crisis on Putin, and it may just work. The support for the war in Ukraine seems to be quite popular, I walked across a council estate on Friday, lots of Ukrainian flags everywhere.
Surely there must have been other candidates. It doesn't matter if he is "young and fresh" he stands for lies and criminality and impropriety. And you voted for those things. I know you don't support that so why do it?
Chill. Even voting for an MP isn't voting for a pm, never mind voting for a young fresh councillor who for all we know thinks Johnson is a POS.
Although... A really dire result for the Tories on 5th May is more likely to see Johnson ousted; every Tory vote helps keep the POS in No 10.
Last year we had the fastest growing economy in the G7, this year we are expected to match the best.
With apologies for the snip, but this simply isn't true. The IMF forecast the UK to have the *slowest* growing economy in the G7. Perhaps people think they are worse off and are getting even worse off because the IMF are right and the liars on the Treasury bench who keep being instructed by the ONS to stop lying about our "fastest-growing economy" are wrong.
You know a government is struggling when their attack on the opposition is that they haven’t fleshed out their policies 2 1/12 years from an election.
Absolutely true. They are struggling, they have no clear and obvious policies to deal with issues that are out of their control and their attempt to do so in the Spring statement was a fiasco focusing on the wrong targets and depleting the limited amunition available to little or no benefit. But an alternative would be nice. Blair and Brown seemed to manage one.
Not this far out.
Why wouldn't Opposition parties want to keep their powder dry until closer to the election. Take Osborne's foolish (but popular with HYUFD and other million pound heirs to fortunes) inheritance tax proposals taken up in part by Brown/ Darling.
It's a tricky one.
On one hand it makes sense that policies only really begin to crystallise (or be made clear) in the run-up to an election. On the other hand getting a general sense of a party's policies and aims well in advance seems to be important, and that requires something more than just a few years of them going "god, these guys in government are absolute spanners, aren't they?"
A sensible story for sensible times. The MoS rightly calls out the scandal that Angela Rayner has a Vagina. You know, that unmentionable thing with all kinds of noxious oozings. Distracts the chaps, unseemly. Shouldn't be allowed in politics.
So a very serious story. There are too many women with vaginas distracting the chaps and they really should Know Their Limits and not be there at all. We could start by ignoring all these vagina fiends involved in politics especially Cressida Dick and Sue Grey. So, no FPNs and critical reports for the PM. Back to business, vote Conservative, huzzah.
Its the people who *buy* the Hate Mail we should be worried about.
Isn't it a majority female readership?
It's such a bonkers thing to publish I wonder if it stems from the idea that women are more likely to comment on clothing etc
I just voted Conservative in the Council elections. Its a marginal seat, the candidate is young and fresh, and the longstanding labour incumbent has nothing to say on his leaflets other than he is a socialist.
Even though Starmer is impressive and would be a far better PM than Johnson, the Corbyn legacy runs very deep in the labour party, and puts people off, and this may still be a factor in the next general election.
I think the tories will try and blame the cost of living crisis on Putin, and it may just work. The support for the war in Ukraine seems to be quite popular, I walked across a council estate on Friday, lots of Ukrainian flags everywhere.
Surely there must have been other candidates. It doesn't matter if he is "young and fresh" he stands for lies and criminality and impropriety. And you voted for those things. I know you don't support that so why do it?
Chill. Even voting for an MP isn't voting for a pm, never mind voting for a young fresh councillor who for all we know thinks Johnson is a POS.
I am chilled! Why do people run under a party banner? Its because they identify with its values, its policies and its leadership. Which means he identifies with lies, criminality and impropriety.
Sorry but thats the harsh light of day that is spooking increasing numbers of Tory MPs. They can't work out how they are supposed to justify themselves in front of the electorate hence the rapid collapse of the entire "just bluster through" strategy on Thursday.
I hope this experience doesn’t put off a single person like me, with a background like mine from aspiring to participate in public life.
That would break my heart. 💔
We need more people in politics with backgrounds like mine - and fewer as a hobby to help their mates.
7/9
Well done Angela Rayner! Money couldn't buy you a page like that. It does just about everything. From being a not very impressive hang over from the Corbyn era this turns her into a real player. I noticed she's started working on her image a couple of weeks ago. Now when she has something to say people will listen. Whatever the Mail were trying to do I can't imagine. Maybe they're as pissed off with the Tories as the rest of us?
Last year we had the fastest growing economy in the G7, this year we are expected to match the best. Unemployment is no more than frictional in most of the country, the government's deficit is coming in lower than expected (if still very high, reflecting high public spending), I must confess that I am at loss as to how so many think it would be better under Labour.
Of course, there is the cost of living crisis brought about by inflation like we haven't seen in 20 years, led by politically sensitive rises in fuel and gas with food in danger of falling on behind. What people think Labour can do about these things I am really not sure. Most come from international pressures, not least because of sanctions on Russia and the disruption of food harvests in Ukraine itself.
Labour's policies seem to me to be a windfall tax on north sea producers at a time that we want them to significantly increase investment and, ehm, I am not really sure. They seem to want to increase public spending in a variety of ways, notably health, further increasing demand in an economy running pretty near capacity giving an extra spin to inflation.
What I think we are actually seeing is that people are pretty unhappy. Wages are rising strongly but are being significantly outpaced by prices and most are seeing a difficult squeeze in their budgets. Those on fixed incomes or benefits are doing even worse. So they blame the government and hope something different would be better. When you add general dissatisfaction that the PM is a lying b****** it is hardly surprising that they do not give the government the benefit of the doubt. But Labour's cupboard looks pretty bare to me.
It isn't the national GDP figures that matter to people, it is the economic pressures on themselves and their communities that impacts on voting.
Putting up NI on workers to allow the elderly to keep more of their assets is an example of this.
And a lot of the recent GDP growth was reflating the nation after Covid. Good it happened and all that, but it doesn't generate feel good.
The reality might be that there aren't new ideas to solve this problem. We've had the party, the hangover is coming whether we like it or not. All we can choose is who leads us through the wilderness with decency and a modicum of fairness.
Which ain't Boris, but it also isn't an easy sell on the doorstep.
Last year we had the fastest growing economy in the G7, this year we are expected to match the best. Unemployment is no more than frictional in most of the country, the government's deficit is coming in lower than expected (if still very high, reflecting high public spending), I must confess that I am at loss as to how so many think it would be better under Labour.
Of course, there is the cost of living crisis brought about by inflation like we haven't seen in 20 years, led by politically sensitive rises in fuel and gas with food in danger of falling on behind. What people think Labour can do about these things I am really not sure. Most come from international pressures, not least because of sanctions on Russia and the disruption of food harvests in Ukraine itself.
Labour's policies seem to me to be a windfall tax on north sea producers at a time that we want them to significantly increase investment and, ehm, I am not really sure. They seem to want to increase public spending in a variety of ways, notably health, further increasing demand in an economy running pretty near capacity giving an extra spin to inflation.
What I think we are actually seeing is that people are pretty unhappy. Wages are rising strongly but are being significantly outpaced by prices and most are seeing a difficult squeeze in their budgets. Those on fixed incomes or benefits are doing even worse. So they blame the government and hope something different would be better. When you add general dissatisfaction that the PM is a lying b****** it is hardly surprising that they do not give the government the benefit of the doubt. But Labour's cupboard looks pretty bare to me.
"Last year we had the most impressive dead cat bounce of all the economies in the G7, as we partially recovered from the biggest decline in GDP in 2020, in part reflecting how early vintages of GDP are measured from an output point of view in this country" would be a more accurate way of putting it. Looking at recent economic performance in the round we are clearly near the bottom of the pack, but doing better than tourist dependent economies like Spain for obvious reasons. As for Labour's cupboard being bare, we are only halfway through the parliament. Your point would have more relevance if it still holds after they publish their manifesto at the next general election, but right now it makes perfect sense to keep schtum. The Tories will nick anything that proves popular, for one thing. Plus, never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.
Last year we had the fastest growing economy in the G7, this year we are expected to match the best.
With apologies for the snip, but this simply isn't true. The IMF forecast the UK to have the *slowest* growing economy in the G7. Perhaps people think they are worse off and are getting even worse off because the IMF are right and the liars on the Treasury bench who keep being instructed by the ONS to stop lying about our "fastest-growing economy" are wrong.
No, the year when they are forecasting we will have the slowest economy is 2023. This year we are joint top. Of course IMF predictions are there to make Mystic Meg look reliable for both the good and the bad.
I hope this experience doesn’t put off a single person like me, with a background like mine from aspiring to participate in public life.
That would break my heart. 💔
We need more people in politics with backgrounds like mine - and fewer as a hobby to help their mates.
7/9
Well done Angela Rayner! Money couldn't buy you a page like that. It does just about everything. From being a not very impressive hang over from the Corbyn era this turns her into a real player. I noticed she's started working on her image a couple of weeks ago. Now when she has something to say people will listen. Whatever the Mail were trying to do I can't imagine. Maybe they're as pissed off with the Tories as the rest of us?
The "Tory scum" speech was the making of her. Its far too easy to speak to your core, especially when you were a Cobynista. She'd already dropped the Jeremy and become a far more serious player than Wrong-Daily, but still pandered to the "scum" thing.
Reaction was swift and harsh inside the party and out. She genuinely apologised and reformed. Note that Steve Baker says he is now VONC because of the clear insincerity of the PM apologising to the Commons on Tuesday afternoon then ranting away to the '22 on Tuesday evening.
Another reason why they have to take her out. Authentic, northern, fiesty, but clearly articulate and clever. And understands what humility is.
Last year we had the fastest growing economy in the G7, this year we are expected to match the best. Unemployment is no more than frictional in most of the country, the government's deficit is coming in lower than expected (if still very high, reflecting high public spending), I must confess that I am at loss as to how so many think it would be better under Labour.
Of course, there is the cost of living crisis brought about by inflation like we haven't seen in 20 years, led by politically sensitive rises in fuel and gas with food in danger of falling on behind. What people think Labour can do about these things I am really not sure. Most come from international pressures, not least because of sanctions on Russia and the disruption of food harvests in Ukraine itself.
Labour's policies seem to me to be a windfall tax on north sea producers at a time that we want them to significantly increase investment and, ehm, I am not really sure. They seem to want to increase public spending in a variety of ways, notably health, further increasing demand in an economy running pretty near capacity giving an extra spin to inflation.
What I think we are actually seeing is that people are pretty unhappy. Wages are rising strongly but are being significantly outpaced by prices and most are seeing a difficult squeeze in their budgets. Those on fixed incomes or benefits are doing even worse. So they blame the government and hope something different would be better. When you add general dissatisfaction that the PM is a lying b****** it is hardly surprising that they do not give the government the benefit of the doubt. But Labour's cupboard looks pretty bare to me.
"Last year we had the most impressive dead cat bounce of all the economies in the G7, as we partially recovered from the biggest decline in GDP in 2020, in part reflecting how early vintages of GDP are measured from an output point of view in this country" would be a more accurate way of putting it. Looking at recent economic performance in the round we are clearly near the bottom of the pack, but doing better than tourist dependent economies like Spain for obvious reasons. As for Labour's cupboard being bare, we are only halfway through the parliament. Your point would have more relevance if it still holds after they publish their manifesto at the next general election, but right now it makes perfect sense to keep schtum. The Tories will nick anything that proves popular, for one thing. Plus, never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.
Your last sentence suggests an almost permanent vow of silence!
Last year we had the fastest growing economy in the G7, this year we are expected to match the best. Unemployment is no more than frictional in most of the country, the government's deficit is coming in lower than expected (if still very high, reflecting high public spending), I must confess that I am at loss as to how so many think it would be better under Labour.
Of course, there is the cost of living crisis brought about by inflation like we haven't seen in 20 years, led by politically sensitive rises in fuel and gas with food in danger of falling on behind. What people think Labour can do about these things I am really not sure. Most come from international pressures, not least because of sanctions on Russia and the disruption of food harvests in Ukraine itself.
Labour's policies seem to me to be a windfall tax on north sea producers at a time that we want them to significantly increase investment and, ehm, I am not really sure. They seem to want to increase public spending in a variety of ways, notably health, further increasing demand in an economy running pretty near capacity giving an extra spin to inflation.
What I think we are actually seeing is that people are pretty unhappy. Wages are rising strongly but are being significantly outpaced by prices and most are seeing a difficult squeeze in their budgets. Those on fixed incomes or benefits are doing even worse. So they blame the government and hope something different would be better. When you add general dissatisfaction that the PM is a lying b****** it is hardly surprising that they do not give the government the benefit of the doubt. But Labour's cupboard looks pretty bare to me.
"Last year we had the most impressive dead cat bounce of all the economies in the G7, as we partially recovered from the biggest decline in GDP in 2020, in part reflecting how early vintages of GDP are measured from an output point of view in this country" would be a more accurate way of putting it. Looking at recent economic performance in the round we are clearly near the bottom of the pack, but doing better than tourist dependent economies like Spain for obvious reasons. As for Labour's cupboard being bare, we are only halfway through the parliament. Your point would have more relevance if it still holds after they publish their manifesto at the next general election, but right now it makes perfect sense to keep schtum. The Tories will nick anything that proves popular, for one thing. Plus, never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.
Your last sentence suggests an almost permanent vow of silence!
Last year we had the fastest growing economy in the G7, this year we are expected to match the best. Unemployment is no more than frictional in most of the country, the government's deficit is coming in lower than expected (if still very high, reflecting high public spending), I must confess that I am at loss as to how so many think it would be better under Labour.
Of course, there is the cost of living crisis brought about by inflation like we haven't seen in 20 years, led by politically sensitive rises in fuel and gas with food in danger of falling on behind. What people think Labour can do about these things I am really not sure. Most come from international pressures, not least because of sanctions on Russia and the disruption of food harvests in Ukraine itself.
Labour's policies seem to me to be a windfall tax on north sea producers at a time that we want them to significantly increase investment and, ehm, I am not really sure. They seem to want to increase public spending in a variety of ways, notably health, further increasing demand in an economy running pretty near capacity giving an extra spin to inflation.
What I think we are actually seeing is that people are pretty unhappy. Wages are rising strongly but are being significantly outpaced by prices and most are seeing a difficult squeeze in their budgets. Those on fixed incomes or benefits are doing even worse. So they blame the government and hope something different would be better. When you add general dissatisfaction that the PM is a lying b****** it is hardly surprising that they do not give the government the benefit of the doubt. But Labour's cupboard looks pretty bare to me.
Tulip Siddiq has just said on Sophie Ridge that the windfall tax would give everyone £600 off their energy bills
I have no idea how much the windfall tax is supposed to raise but I am sure someone on here can calculate the cost of giving everyone £600 off their energy bill and compare it to the windfall gain
I would just add this may well be an example of misleading the public when I understood it would provide £200 off energy bills with upto £600 for the poorest in the community
If as I suspect I am correct on this it just adds to the general opinion they are all the same when it comes to the truth
Roughly 20m households, so £18bn just for domestic users at £600 each.
Last year we had the fastest growing economy in the G7, this year we are expected to match the best.
With apologies for the snip, but this simply isn't true. The IMF forecast the UK to have the *slowest* growing economy in the G7. Perhaps people think they are worse off and are getting even worse off because the IMF are right and the liars on the Treasury bench who keep being instructed by the ONS to stop lying about our "fastest-growing economy" are wrong.
No, the year when they are forecasting we will have the slowest economy is 2023. This year we are joint top. Of course IMF predictions are there to make Mystic Meg look reliable for both the good and the bad.
Whilst I take your point about anyone's economic predictions, when the Treasury Bench keep lying on a scale that has the ONS writing to ask them to stop misleading people, we know that we can ignore what they are saying. And as others have responded a bigger bounce back from a bigger fall is hardly us outperforming the countries whose economic output is higher than our own.
People think the economy has made them poorer because it has and will keep making them poorer because all the markers are sliding into the red. Saying "you've never had it so good" doesn't work when people can see and feel how bad it is.
Last year we had the fastest growing economy in the G7, this year we are expected to match the best.
With apologies for the snip, but this simply isn't true. The IMF forecast the UK to have the *slowest* growing economy in the G7. Perhaps people think they are worse off and are getting even worse off because the IMF are right and the liars on the Treasury bench who keep being instructed by the ONS to stop lying about our "fastest-growing economy" are wrong.
No, the year when they are forecasting we will have the slowest economy is 2023. This year we are joint top. Of course IMF predictions are there to make Mystic Meg look reliable for both the good and the bad.
That's the government's problem. People's experience of the economy is set to get worse from here, and the government are going to have to work very hard to generate feel good by 2024.
It's why appeals to 2010-5, or 1983-7, aren't watertight. Previous winning PMs have aligned the economic and electoral cycles. BoJo has had the bad luck to have them horribly out of synch.
I hope this experience doesn’t put off a single person like me, with a background like mine from aspiring to participate in public life.
That would break my heart. 💔
We need more people in politics with backgrounds like mine - and fewer as a hobby to help their mates.
7/9
Well done Angela Rayner! Money couldn't buy you a page like that. It does just about everything. From being a not very impressive hang over from the Corbyn era this turns her into a real player. I noticed she's started working on her image a couple of weeks ago. Now when she has something to say people will listen. Whatever the Mail were trying to do I can't imagine. Maybe they're as pissed off with the Tories as the rest of us?
The "Tory scum" speech was the making of her. Its far too easy to speak to your core, especially when you were a Cobynista. She'd already dropped the Jeremy and become a far more serious player than Wrong-Daily, but still pandered to the "scum" thing.
Reaction was swift and harsh inside the party and out. She genuinely apologised and reformed. Note that Steve Baker says he is now VONC because of the clear insincerity of the PM apologising to the Commons on Tuesday afternoon then ranting away to the '22 on Tuesday evening.
Another reason why they have to take her out. Authentic, northern, fiesty, but clearly articulate and clever. And understands what humility is.
Powerful articulate and attractive is how they have painted her. I've just looked at her tweet underneath the photo of her and she clearly knows what she's doing .....10/10!
Last year we had the fastest growing economy in the G7, this year we are expected to match the best. Unemployment is no more than frictional in most of the country, the government's deficit is coming in lower than expected (if still very high, reflecting high public spending), I must confess that I am at loss as to how so many think it would be better under Labour.
Of course, there is the cost of living crisis brought about by inflation like we haven't seen in 20 years, led by politically sensitive rises in fuel and gas with food in danger of falling on behind. What people think Labour can do about these things I am really not sure. Most come from international pressures, not least because of sanctions on Russia and the disruption of food harvests in Ukraine itself.
Labour's policies seem to me to be a windfall tax on north sea producers at a time that we want them to significantly increase investment and, ehm, I am not really sure. They seem to want to increase public spending in a variety of ways, notably health, further increasing demand in an economy running pretty near capacity giving an extra spin to inflation.
What I think we are actually seeing is that people are pretty unhappy. Wages are rising strongly but are being significantly outpaced by prices and most are seeing a difficult squeeze in their budgets. Those on fixed incomes or benefits are doing even worse. So they blame the government and hope something different would be better. When you add general dissatisfaction that the PM is a lying b****** it is hardly surprising that they do not give the government the benefit of the doubt. But Labour's cupboard looks pretty bare to me.
Tulip Siddiq has just said on Sophie Ridge that the windfall tax would give everyone £600 off their energy bills
I have no idea how much the windfall tax is supposed to raise but I am sure someone on here can calculate the cost of giving everyone £600 off their energy bill and compare it to the windfall gain
I would just add this may well be an example of misleading the public when I understood it would provide £200 off energy bills with upto £600 for the poorest in the community
If as I suspect I am correct on this it just adds to the general opinion they are all the same when it comes to the truth
Roughly 20m households, so £18bn just for domestic users at £600 each.
Last year we had the fastest growing economy in the G7, this year we are expected to match the best. Unemployment is no more than frictional in most of the country, the government's deficit is coming in lower than expected (if still very high, reflecting high public spending), I must confess that I am at loss as to how so many think it would be better under Labour.
Of course, there is the cost of living crisis brought about by inflation like we haven't seen in 20 years, led by politically sensitive rises in fuel and gas with food in danger of falling on behind. What people think Labour can do about these things I am really not sure. Most come from international pressures, not least because of sanctions on Russia and the disruption of food harvests in Ukraine itself.
Labour's policies seem to me to be a windfall tax on north sea producers at a time that we want them to significantly increase investment and, ehm, I am not really sure. They seem to want to increase public spending in a variety of ways, notably health, further increasing demand in an economy running pretty near capacity giving an extra spin to inflation.
What I think we are actually seeing is that people are pretty unhappy. Wages are rising strongly but are being significantly outpaced by prices and most are seeing a difficult squeeze in their budgets. Those on fixed incomes or benefits are doing even worse. So they blame the government and hope something different would be better. When you add general dissatisfaction that the PM is a lying b****** it is hardly surprising that they do not give the government the benefit of the doubt. But Labour's cupboard looks pretty bare to me.
Tulip Siddiq has just said on Sophie Ridge that the windfall tax would give everyone £600 off their energy bills
I have no idea how much the windfall tax is supposed to raise but I am sure someone on here can calculate the cost of giving everyone £600 off their energy bill and compare it to the windfall gain
I would just add this may well be an example of misleading the public when I understood it would provide £200 off energy bills with upto £600 for the poorest in the community
If as I suspect I am correct on this it just adds to the general opinion they are all the same when it comes to the truth
Roughly 20m households, so £18bn just for domestic users at £600 each.
I hope this experience doesn’t put off a single person like me, with a background like mine from aspiring to participate in public life.
That would break my heart. 💔
We need more people in politics with backgrounds like mine - and fewer as a hobby to help their mates.
7/9
Well done Angela Rayner! Money couldn't buy you a page like that. It does just about everything. From being a not very impressive hang over from the Corbyn era this turns her into a real player. I noticed she's started working on her image a couple of weeks ago. Now when she has something to say people will listen. Whatever the Mail were trying to do I can't imagine. Maybe they're as pissed off with the Tories as the rest of us?
The "Tory scum" speech was the making of her. Its far too easy to speak to your core, especially when you were a Cobynista. She'd already dropped the Jeremy and become a far more serious player than Wrong-Daily, but still pandered to the "scum" thing.
Reaction was swift and harsh inside the party and out. She genuinely apologised and reformed. Note that Steve Baker says he is now VONC because of the clear insincerity of the PM apologising to the Commons on Tuesday afternoon then ranting away to the '22 on Tuesday evening.
Another reason why they have to take her out. Authentic, northern, fiesty, but clearly articulate and clever. And understands what humility is.
I still don't like her, but her personal back story is definitely one for desperate economic times. The single mums of Bolsover and Sedgefield might feel Rayner has more to tell them as they hunt around for fifty pence for the meter than Rishi Sunak.
Last year we had the fastest growing economy in the G7, this year we are expected to match the best.
With apologies for the snip, but this simply isn't true. The IMF forecast the UK to have the *slowest* growing economy in the G7. Perhaps people think they are worse off and are getting even worse off because the IMF are right and the liars on the Treasury bench who keep being instructed by the ONS to stop lying about our "fastest-growing economy" are wrong.
No, the year when they are forecasting we will have the slowest economy is 2023. This year we are joint top. Of course IMF predictions are there to make Mystic Meg look reliable for both the good and the bad.
That's the government's problem. People's experience of the economy is set to get worse from here, and the government are going to have to work very hard to generate feel good by 2024.
It's why appeals to 2010-5, or 1983-7, aren't watertight. Previous winning PMs have aligned the economic and electoral cycles. BoJo has had the bad luck to have them horribly out of synch.
Yes. I've remarked as have others what a lucky boy the PM is. Tactically, yes. Summat big always seems to come up to distract from a blunder. But strategically he has to be the unluckiest ever. Shame.
1. Saw The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent yesterday. Was excellent thoroughly recommend (no one else at all in the cinema at the 6pm viewing).
2. Whyte didn't turn up to the fight last night. Perhaps he really was overawed by the occasion/opponent I'm not sure he landed a single shot before getting sparked out. People expected a tear up and tear up came there none.
3. Spoke to someone v close to govt last week and they were super worried about govt finances. Forget about lower spending they were seeing a likelihood of cuts. The debt servicing bill is eye watering and unsustainable. That puts the Cons in a difficult place in the run up to any election.
A sensible story for sensible times. The MoS rightly calls out the scandal that Angela Rayner has a Vagina. You know, that unmentionable thing with all kinds of noxious oozings. Distracts the chaps, unseemly. Shouldn't be allowed in politics.
So a very serious story. There are too many women with vaginas distracting the chaps and they really should Know Their Limits and not be there at all. We could start by ignoring all these vagina fiends involved in politics especially Cressida Dick and Sue Grey. So, no FPNs and critical reports for the PM. Back to business, vote Conservative, huzzah.
Its the people who *buy* the Hate Mail we should be worried about.
Isn't it a majority female readership?
It's such a bonkers thing to publish I wonder if it stems from the idea that women are more likely to comment on clothing etc
Isn't the Mail's female readership 'of an age' and perhaps background, which tut about a 'hussy'?
I hope this experience doesn’t put off a single person like me, with a background like mine from aspiring to participate in public life.
That would break my heart. 💔
We need more people in politics with backgrounds like mine - and fewer as a hobby to help their mates.
7/9
Well done Angela Rayner! Money couldn't buy you a page like that. It does just about everything. From being a not very impressive hang over from the Corbyn era this turns her into a real player. I noticed she's started working on her image a couple of weeks ago. Now when she has something to say people will listen. Whatever the Mail were trying to do I can't imagine. Maybe they're as pissed off with the Tories as the rest of us?
The "Tory scum" speech was the making of her. Its far too easy to speak to your core, especially when you were a Cobynista. She'd already dropped the Jeremy and become a far more serious player than Wrong-Daily, but still pandered to the "scum" thing.
Reaction was swift and harsh inside the party and out. She genuinely apologised and reformed. Note that Steve Baker says he is now VONC because of the clear insincerity of the PM apologising to the Commons on Tuesday afternoon then ranting away to the '22 on Tuesday evening.
Another reason why they have to take her out. Authentic, northern, fiesty, but clearly articulate and clever. And understands what humility is.
"genuinely apologised."
She eventually apologised, after being forced. I don't see her apology as being particularly genuine.
Last year we had the fastest growing economy in the G7, this year we are expected to match the best.
With apologies for the snip, but this simply isn't true. The IMF forecast the UK to have the *slowest* growing economy in the G7. Perhaps people think they are worse off and are getting even worse off because the IMF are right and the liars on the Treasury bench who keep being instructed by the ONS to stop lying about our "fastest-growing economy" are wrong.
No, the year when they are forecasting we will have the slowest economy is 2023. This year we are joint top. Of course IMF predictions are there to make Mystic Meg look reliable for both the good and the bad.
That's the government's problem. People's experience of the economy is set to get worse from here, and the government are going to have to work very hard to generate feel good by 2024.
It's why appeals to 2010-5, or 1983-7, aren't watertight. Previous winning PMs have aligned the economic and electoral cycles. BoJo has had the bad luck to have them horribly out of synch.
Yes. I've remarked as have others what a lucky boy the PM is. Tactically, yes. Summat big always seems to come up to distract from a blunder. But strategically he has to be the unluckiest ever. Shame.
OT, but I see the MP for Wakefield hasn't yet applied for the Chiltern Hundreds, despite his Party wanting to get it over with. It simply drags the issue out locally.
Last year we had the fastest growing economy in the G7, this year we are expected to match the best. Unemployment is no more than frictional in most of the country, the government's deficit is coming in lower than expected (if still very high, reflecting high public spending), I must confess that I am at loss as to how so many think it would be better under Labour.
Of course, there is the cost of living crisis brought about by inflation like we haven't seen in 20 years, led by politically sensitive rises in fuel and gas with food in danger of falling on behind. What people think Labour can do about these things I am really not sure. Most come from international pressures, not least because of sanctions on Russia and the disruption of food harvests in Ukraine itself.
Labour's policies seem to me to be a windfall tax on north sea producers at a time that we want them to significantly increase investment and, ehm, I am not really sure. They seem to want to increase public spending in a variety of ways, notably health, further increasing demand in an economy running pretty near capacity giving an extra spin to inflation.
What I think we are actually seeing is that people are pretty unhappy. Wages are rising strongly but are being significantly outpaced by prices and most are seeing a difficult squeeze in their budgets. Those on fixed incomes or benefits are doing even worse. So they blame the government and hope something different would be better. When you add general dissatisfaction that the PM is a lying b****** it is hardly surprising that they do not give the government the benefit of the doubt. But Labour's cupboard looks pretty bare to me.
Tulip Siddiq has just said on Sophie Ridge that the windfall tax would give everyone £600 off their energy bills
I have no idea how much the windfall tax is supposed to raise but I am sure someone on here can calculate the cost of giving everyone £600 off their energy bill and compare it to the windfall gain
I would just add this may well be an example of misleading the public when I understood it would provide £200 off energy bills with upto £600 for the poorest in the community
If as I suspect I am correct on this it just adds to the general opinion they are all the same when it comes to the truth
Roughly 20m households, so £18bn just for domestic users at £600 each.
Seems Tullip was misleading everyone listening
Of course, 20m x 600 is £12bn, not £18bn…
There’s dodgy Labour maths…. and then there’s dodgy Tory maths.
Last year we had the fastest growing economy in the G7, this year we are expected to match the best.
With apologies for the snip, but this simply isn't true. The IMF forecast the UK to have the *slowest* growing economy in the G7. Perhaps people think they are worse off and are getting even worse off because the IMF are right and the liars on the Treasury bench who keep being instructed by the ONS to stop lying about our "fastest-growing economy" are wrong.
No, the year when they are forecasting we will have the slowest economy is 2023. This year we are joint top. Of course IMF predictions are there to make Mystic Meg look reliable for both the good and the bad.
Whilst I take your point about anyone's economic predictions, when the Treasury Bench keep lying on a scale that has the ONS writing to ask them to stop misleading people, we know that we can ignore what they are saying. And as others have responded a bigger bounce back from a bigger fall is hardly us outperforming the countries whose economic output is higher than our own.
People think the economy has made them poorer because it has and will keep making them poorer because all the markers are sliding into the red. Saying "you've never had it so good" doesn't work when people can see and feel how bad it is.
So what are we measuring here? Pessimism or current performace? If the government are lucky peoples' expectations are so low that it might be possible to exceed them. If they are not and this is the assessment of current performance things are going to get a whole lot worse!
And another prick in the balloon of Boris' bluster over Ukraine
"Ukraine spent seven years begging three PMs for weapons — and no one listened Cameron, May and Johnson all thought they could contain Putin. How wrong they were"
1. Saw The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent yesterday. Was excellent thoroughly recommend (no one else at all in the cinema at the 6pm viewing).
2. Whyte didn't turn up to the fight last night. Perhaps he really was overawed by the occasion/opponent I'm not sure he landed a single shot before getting sparked out. People expected a tear up and tear up came there none.
3. Spoke to someone v close to govt last week and they were super worried about govt finances. Forget about lower spending they were seeing a likelihood of cuts. The debt servicing bill is eye watering and unsustainable. That puts the Cons in a difficult place in the run up to any election.
Interest rates and gilt rates are on the up, no question. But a fair bit of the interest bill at the moment is a paper transfer with the BoE and doesn't cost the government anything. Of course, this is one of the reasons that inflation is out of control... There is no such thing as a free lunch.
Last year we had the fastest growing economy in the G7, this year we are expected to match the best. Unemployment is no more than frictional in most of the country, the government's deficit is coming in lower than expected (if still very high, reflecting high public spending), I must confess that I am at loss as to how so many think it would be better under Labour.
Of course, there is the cost of living crisis brought about by inflation like we haven't seen in 20 years, led by politically sensitive rises in fuel and gas with food in danger of falling on behind. What people think Labour can do about these things I am really not sure. Most come from international pressures, not least because of sanctions on Russia and the disruption of food harvests in Ukraine itself.
Labour's policies seem to me to be a windfall tax on north sea producers at a time that we want them to significantly increase investment and, ehm, I am not really sure. They seem to want to increase public spending in a variety of ways, notably health, further increasing demand in an economy running pretty near capacity giving an extra spin to inflation.
What I think we are actually seeing is that people are pretty unhappy. Wages are rising strongly but are being significantly outpaced by prices and most are seeing a difficult squeeze in their budgets. Those on fixed incomes or benefits are doing even worse. So they blame the government and hope something different would be better. When you add general dissatisfaction that the PM is a lying b****** it is hardly surprising that they do not give the government the benefit of the doubt. But Labour's cupboard looks pretty bare to me.
Tulip Siddiq has just said on Sophie Ridge that the windfall tax would give everyone £600 off their energy bills
I have no idea how much the windfall tax is supposed to raise but I am sure someone on here can calculate the cost of giving everyone £600 off their energy bill and compare it to the windfall gain
I would just add this may well be an example of misleading the public when I understood it would provide £200 off energy bills with upto £600 for the poorest in the community
If as I suspect I am correct on this it just adds to the general opinion they are all the same when it comes to the truth
Roughly 20m households, so £18bn just for domestic users at £600 each.
Seems Tullip was misleading everyone listening
Of course, 20m x 600 is £12bn, not £18bn…
There’s dodgy Labour maths…. and then there’s dodgy Tory maths.
Nothing will ever beat Diane Abbott, and the £300,000 for 10,000 new police officers.
Last year we had the fastest growing economy in the G7, this year we are expected to match the best. Unemployment is no more than frictional in most of the country, the government's deficit is coming in lower than expected (if still very high, reflecting high public spending), I must confess that I am at loss as to how so many think it would be better under Labour.
Of course, there is the cost of living crisis brought about by inflation like we haven't seen in 20 years, led by politically sensitive rises in fuel and gas with food in danger of falling on behind. What people think Labour can do about these things I am really not sure. Most come from international pressures, not least because of sanctions on Russia and the disruption of food harvests in Ukraine itself.
Labour's policies seem to me to be a windfall tax on north sea producers at a time that we want them to significantly increase investment and, ehm, I am not really sure. They seem to want to increase public spending in a variety of ways, notably health, further increasing demand in an economy running pretty near capacity giving an extra spin to inflation.
What I think we are actually seeing is that people are pretty unhappy. Wages are rising strongly but are being significantly outpaced by prices and most are seeing a difficult squeeze in their budgets. Those on fixed incomes or benefits are doing even worse. So they blame the government and hope something different would be better. When you add general dissatisfaction that the PM is a lying b****** it is hardly surprising that they do not give the government the benefit of the doubt. But Labour's cupboard looks pretty bare to me.
Tulip Siddiq has just said on Sophie Ridge that the windfall tax would give everyone £600 off their energy bills
I have no idea how much the windfall tax is supposed to raise but I am sure someone on here can calculate the cost of giving everyone £600 off their energy bill and compare it to the windfall gain
I would just add this may well be an example of misleading the public when I understood it would provide £200 off energy bills with upto £600 for the poorest in the community
If as I suspect I am correct on this it just adds to the general opinion they are all the same when it comes to the truth
Roughly 20m households, so £18bn just for domestic users at £600 each.
Seems Tullip was misleading everyone listening
Of course, 20m x 600 is £12bn, not £18bn…
There’s dodgy Labour maths…. and then there’s dodgy Tory maths.
Nothing will ever beat Diane Abbott, and the £300,000 for 10,000 new police officers.
And another prick in the balloon of Boris' bluster over Ukraine
"Ukraine spent seven years begging three PMs for weapons — and no one listened Cameron, May and Johnson all thought they could contain Putin. How wrong they were"
Yes they were wrong. They were probably listening to people like you who were so cocksure that Russia would not invade the rest of Ukraine.
Not everybody was. Czechia, Turkey, Poland, and France all exported >10 TIVs of arms to Ukraine between 2014 and 2021. All of the French exports came under Macron, interestingly.
And another prick in the balloon of Boris' bluster over Ukraine
"Ukraine spent seven years begging three PMs for weapons — and no one listened Cameron, May and Johnson all thought they could contain Putin. How wrong they were"
Yes they were wrong. They were probably listening to people like you who were so cocksure that Russia would not invade the rest of Ukraine.
British troops have been in Ukraine training and supplying them with equipment since 2015. We can claim considerable vicarious credit for how much better their armed forces have performed than they did in 2014 and the Ukrainians have acknowledged this repeatedly.
We could, of course, have done even more but would Russia then have invaded even earlier?
OT, but I see the MP for Wakefield hasn't yet applied for the Chiltern Hundreds, despite his Party wanting to get it over with. It simply drags the issue out locally.
And another prick in the balloon of Boris' bluster over Ukraine
"Ukraine spent seven years begging three PMs for weapons — and no one listened Cameron, May and Johnson all thought they could contain Putin. How wrong they were"
Yes they were wrong. They were probably listening to people like you who were so cocksure that Russia would not invade the rest of Ukraine.
British troops have been in Ukraine training and supplying them with equipment since 2015. We can claim considerable vicarious credit for how much better their armed forces have performed than they did in 2014 and the Ukrainians have acknowledged this repeatedly.
We could, of course, have done even more but would Russia then have invaded even earlier?
Who knows? But it's a good rule of thumb to ignore anyone who says "Putin wouldn't".
3. Spoke to someone v close to govt last week and they were super worried about govt finances. Forget about lower spending they were seeing a likelihood of cuts. The debt servicing bill is eye watering and unsustainable. That puts the Cons in a difficult place in the run up to any election.
Anyone who believes a short period of high inflation is bad for the exchequer has drunk the cool aid, or not read the OBR or ONS.
The government's debt stock retreats at a much quicker level than debt interest goes up, Since the nominal level of debt (£2,326.8 billion) is deflated by nominal GDP. If inflation is 8%, the debt pile reduced, in real terms, by £186bn, compared to £100bn in debt interest (at Feb 2022 levels).
In addition to the BoE effect, that's because of the £2,032.9 billion gilts in circulation at the end of February 2022:
£1,530.8 billion are conventional gilts that pay a fixed interest rate (i.e. about 75%)
£502.1 billion are index-linked gilts that pay an interest rate pegged to the Retail Prices Index (RPI) (25%)
Last year we had the fastest growing economy in the G7, this year we are expected to match the best. Unemployment is no more than frictional in most of the country, the government's deficit is coming in lower than expected (if still very high, reflecting high public spending), I must confess that I am at loss as to how so many think it would be better under Labour.
Of course, there is the cost of living crisis brought about by inflation like we haven't seen in 20 years, led by politically sensitive rises in fuel and gas with food in danger of falling on behind. What people think Labour can do about these things I am really not sure. Most come from international pressures, not least because of sanctions on Russia and the disruption of food harvests in Ukraine itself.
Labour's policies seem to me to be a windfall tax on north sea producers at a time that we want them to significantly increase investment and, ehm, I am not really sure. They seem to want to increase public spending in a variety of ways, notably health, further increasing demand in an economy running pretty near capacity giving an extra spin to inflation.
What I think we are actually seeing is that people are pretty unhappy. Wages are rising strongly but are being significantly outpaced by prices and most are seeing a difficult squeeze in their budgets. Those on fixed incomes or benefits are doing even worse. So they blame the government and hope something different would be better. When you add general dissatisfaction that the PM is a lying b****** it is hardly surprising that they do not give the government the benefit of the doubt. But Labour's cupboard looks pretty bare to me.
Tulip Siddiq has just said on Sophie Ridge that the windfall tax would give everyone £600 off their energy bills
I have no idea how much the windfall tax is supposed to raise but I am sure someone on here can calculate the cost of giving everyone £600 off their energy bill and compare it to the windfall gain
I would just add this may well be an example of misleading the public when I understood it would provide £200 off energy bills with upto £600 for the poorest in the community
If as I suspect I am correct on this it just adds to the general opinion they are all the same when it comes to the truth
Roughly 20m households, so £18bn just for domestic users at £600 each.
Seems Tullip was misleading everyone listening
Of course, 20m x 600 is £12bn, not £18bn…
There’s dodgy Labour maths…. and then there’s dodgy Tory maths.
Nothing will ever beat Diane Abbott, and the £300,000 for 10,000 new police officers.
Priti Patel came pretty close at a Covid press conference when she proclaimed that there had been "three hundred thousand, and thirty four, nine hundred and seventy four thousand" Covid tests carried out.
I see she no longer identifies as ginger. I'd be surprised but not shocked if the Labour party would have her as has been fash-curious in the past.
I watched three hours of live HoC on Tuesday and Dehenna Davison was the only one to impress me with how clearly and strongly she spoke. She is an excellent politician with big future. Labour will struggle to wrestle the constituency from her is my betting tip.
And another prick in the balloon of Boris' bluster over Ukraine
"Ukraine spent seven years begging three PMs for weapons — and no one listened Cameron, May and Johnson all thought they could contain Putin. How wrong they were"
Yes they were wrong. They were probably listening to people like you who were so cocksure that Russia would not invade the rest of Ukraine.
British troops have been in Ukraine training and supplying them with equipment since 2015. We can claim considerable vicarious credit for how much better their armed forces have performed than they did in 2014 and the Ukrainians have acknowledged this repeatedly.
We could, of course, have done even more but would Russia then have invaded even earlier?
To be fair, the whole Russia/Belarus/Ukraine......and indeed Chechnya & Caucasus 'thing' has been going on since the Soviet Union collapsed twenty-five or so years ago. It's got worse as Putin has consolidated his hold on power, of course. And one cannot say that all the Ukrainian leaders, either before or since independence, have been uncanonised as yet saints!
This shouldn't be read as any sort of justification for Russia's current policy, of course. Just suggesting that Western leaders could be forgiven for being unsure as to who were the good guys.
And another prick in the balloon of Boris' bluster over Ukraine
"Ukraine spent seven years begging three PMs for weapons — and no one listened Cameron, May and Johnson all thought they could contain Putin. How wrong they were"
Yes they were wrong. They were probably listening to people like you who were so cocksure that Russia would not invade the rest of Ukraine.
British troops have been in Ukraine training and supplying them with equipment since 2015. We can claim considerable vicarious credit for how much better their armed forces have performed than they did in 2014 and the Ukrainians have acknowledged this repeatedly.
We could, of course, have done even more but would Russia then have invaded even earlier?
Do you have any detail about the "equipment" supplied since 2015 and prior to the most recent escalation? As far as I can tell, Operation Orbital was a training programme covering: • Additional medical, infantry and survival skills training • Countering improvised explosive devices • Training for defensive operations in an urban environment • Operational planning • Engineering • Countering attacks from snipers, armoured vehicles and mortars.
But my search for equipment supplied in the same time period is coming up blank.
1. Saw The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent yesterday. Was excellent thoroughly recommend (no one else at all in the cinema at the 6pm viewing).
2. Whyte didn't turn up to the fight last night. Perhaps he really was overawed by the occasion/opponent I'm not sure he landed a single shot before getting sparked out. People expected a tear up and tear up came there none.
3. Spoke to someone v close to govt last week and they were super worried about govt finances. Forget about lower spending they were seeing a likelihood of cuts. The debt servicing bill is eye watering and unsustainable. That puts the Cons in a difficult place in the run up to any election.
Interest rates and gilt rates are on the up, no question. But a fair bit of the interest bill at the moment is a paper transfer with the BoE and doesn't cost the government anything. Of course, this is one of the reasons that inflation is out of control... There is no such thing as a free lunch.
In normal times, un-printing a lot of money might help to get inflation back under control. The problem here though, is that the inflation is global and driven by war and pandemic. There’s very little domestically that can be done about it in the short term.
Ironically, this might actually work out positively for the government, with the inflation receding before the election as fuel prices fall and supply chains sort themselves out, the massive debt pile deflated by 15% or so, and a fair bit of fiscal drag helping government revenues.
I hope this experience doesn’t put off a single person like me, with a background like mine from aspiring to participate in public life.
That would break my heart. 💔
We need more people in politics with backgrounds like mine - and fewer as a hobby to help their mates.
7/9
Well done Angela Rayner! Money couldn't buy you a page like that. It does just about everything. From being a not very impressive hang over from the Corbyn era this turns her into a real player. I noticed she's started working on her image a couple of weeks ago. Now when she has something to say people will listen. Whatever the Mail were trying to do I can't imagine. Maybe they're as pissed off with the Tories as the rest of us?
The "Tory scum" speech was the making of her. Its far too easy to speak to your core, especially when you were a Cobynista. She'd already dropped the Jeremy and become a far more serious player than Wrong-Daily, but still pandered to the "scum" thing.
Reaction was swift and harsh inside the party and out. She genuinely apologised and reformed. Note that Steve Baker says he is now VONC because of the clear insincerity of the PM apologising to the Commons on Tuesday afternoon then ranting away to the '22 on Tuesday evening.
Another reason why they have to take her out. Authentic, northern, fiesty, but clearly articulate and clever. And understands what humility is.
I still don't like her, but her personal back story is definitely one for desperate economic times. The single mums of Bolsover and Sedgefield might feel Rayner has more to tell them as they hunt around for fifty pence for the meter than Rishi Sunak.
Labour seem to lack definition at the moment. Blair and Brown were perfect in that despite their different backgrounds they were reasonably classless. The image of the Tories are now a party of Colonel Blimps and under Corbyn Labour were a party of Len McCluskies.
Starmer hasn't got the 'everyman' quality of Brown and Blair but with a revamped Rayner she and Starmer could be onto something.
I see she no longer identifies as ginger. I'd be surprised but not shocked if the Labour party would have her as has been fash-curious in the past.
I watched three hours of live HoC on Tuesday and Dehenna Davison was the only one to impress me with how clearly and strongly she spoke. She is an excellent politician with big future. Labour will struggle to wrestle the constituency from her is my betting tip.
Same here. Especially looking at the demographic changes going on and the house building going on as well. These owner occupiers will not be natural labour voters. The seat has drifted away from labour for many years. Rightly so. Durham labour took the whole area for granted.
Day trip to The Big Smoke - West End absolutely rammed - easily back to pre-pandemic levels. Enjoyed “Diary of a Somebody” about the Orton Halliwell relationship - great leads and a superb supporting cast in multiple roles. In its final week.
A sensible story for sensible times. The MoS rightly calls out the scandal that Angela Rayner has a Vagina. You know, that unmentionable thing with all kinds of noxious oozings. Distracts the chaps, unseemly. Shouldn't be allowed in politics.
So a very serious story. There are too many women with vaginas distracting the chaps and they really should Know Their Limits and not be there at all. We could start by ignoring all these vagina fiends involved in politics especially Cressida Dick and Sue Grey. So, no FPNs and critical reports for the PM. Back to business, vote Conservative, huzzah.
Its the people who *buy* the Hate Mail we should be worried about.
Isn't it a majority female readership?
It's such a bonkers thing to publish I wonder if it stems from the idea that women are more likely to comment on clothing etc
Isn't the Mail's female readership 'of an age' and perhaps background, which tut about a 'hussy'?
I know this sounds bad, and believe me I really aren’t a sexist pig, but I do wonder if the menopause can sometimes do something to women’s attitudes and views that make them more reactionary and prone to that kind of tutting, suspicion of the modern world, everything was better in my day approach that the Mail mines so successfully.
Seen it in my mum, and other women of that age. It might be just an aging thing generally cos of course there is that tendency to drift rightward as you age regardless of gender, but I sometimes ponder if the menopause, the hormonal changes, exacerbate the effect, particularly if the woman is finding it difficult to live with her symptoms. God knows I don’t envy women for having to go through it.
I was discussing it with a very old friend of mine the other day, who recently started HRT, and she said her mum had definitely shifted rightwards, strikingly so, since the menopause.
Notable that @Keir_Starmer stressing to @sophieraworth his 'priority' is 'cracking down on those criminal gangs' who put people in cross Channel small boats.
Pressed on 'safe routes' processing centres: "The best place would be country nearest where they are fleeing from"
Which, yes, sounds very much like the Govt's position.
1. Saw The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent yesterday. Was excellent thoroughly recommend (no one else at all in the cinema at the 6pm viewing).
2. Whyte didn't turn up to the fight last night. Perhaps he really was overawed by the occasion/opponent I'm not sure he landed a single shot before getting sparked out. People expected a tear up and tear up came there none.
3. Spoke to someone v close to govt last week and they were super worried about govt finances. Forget about lower spending they were seeing a likelihood of cuts. The debt servicing bill is eye watering and unsustainable. That puts the Cons in a difficult place in the run up to any election.
Interest rates and gilt rates are on the up, no question. But a fair bit of the interest bill at the moment is a paper transfer with the BoE and doesn't cost the government anything. Of course, this is one of the reasons that inflation is out of control... There is no such thing as a free lunch.
Performance. Our record economic growth sees the economy smaller than it was before, and that's clearly the top of a roll-back slope with inflation and fuel and crap pay rises all smashing the momentum into reverse.
You earn £lotsandlots. I earn less but still £lots. There are so many poor sods out there who work far harder jobs than we do for £less and they are directly feeling it even if you are not.
My optimistic prediction for today is that Le Pen will slightly underperform and it’ll be 57:43. I hope I’m right.
My fear is Melanchon's Corbynista morons will stay at home or vote Le Pen because they hate Centrists more than they do Fascists.
I could see a lot of people hoping that Macron wins, but only narrowly, and that other people will do the dirty work of voting for him so that they don't have to sully their hands.
Hopefully I'm wrong and French voters will find it easy to vote against Le Pen in huge numbers.
Notable that @Keir_Starmer stressing to @sophieraworth his 'priority' is 'cracking down on those criminal gangs' who put people in cross Channel small boats.
Pressed on 'safe routes' processing centres: "The best place would be country nearest where they are fleeing from"
Which, yes, sounds very much like the Govt's position.
I’ve seen some gaslighting in my time, but the new book from transgender professor Grace Lavery takes the biscuit. It is almost entirely about Lavery’s penis – as confirmed by its title, Please Miss: A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Penis – and yet if any of you dare to refer to Lavery as a man you will be branded a bigot. It has page after depressing page about Mr Lavery’s cock – how shrivelled it has become since he started popping female hormone pills, how it ‘does very little but flop around’, how it occasionally ‘takes a stab at stiffening’ – and yet anyone who says ‘He must be a bloke, then’ will be denounced as a foul transphobe deserving of cancellation. It goes on and on about boners and ballsacks and the ‘Lacanian phallus’ – imagine Jay from The Inbetweeners getting a PhD in Queer Studies – and yet woe betide those who refuse to bow down to the idea that this dick obsessed with his dick is in fact a woman. Literally, legally, actually a woman.
Notable that @Keir_Starmer stressing to @sophieraworth his 'priority' is 'cracking down on those criminal gangs' who put people in cross Channel small boats.
Pressed on 'safe routes' processing centres: "The best place would be country nearest where they are fleeing from"
Which, yes, sounds very much like the Govt's position.
Processing applications for UK asylum in say Turkey is very much like deporting people from UK to Rwanda? I can literally not see one single point of resemblance.
I’ve seen some gaslighting in my time, but the new book from transgender professor Grace Lavery takes the biscuit. It is almost entirely about Lavery’s penis – as confirmed by its title, Please Miss: A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Penis – and yet if any of you dare to refer to Lavery as a man you will be branded a bigot. It has page after depressing page about Mr Lavery’s cock – how shrivelled it has become since he started popping female hormone pills, how it ‘does very little but flop around’, how it occasionally ‘takes a stab at stiffening’ – and yet anyone who says ‘He must be a bloke, then’ will be denounced as a foul transphobe deserving of cancellation. It goes on and on about boners and ballsacks and the ‘Lacanian phallus’ – imagine Jay from The Inbetweeners getting a PhD in Queer Studies – and yet woe betide those who refuse to bow down to the idea that this dick obsessed with his dick is in fact a woman. Literally, legally, actually a woman.
A sensible story for sensible times. The MoS rightly calls out the scandal that Angela Rayner has a Vagina. You know, that unmentionable thing with all kinds of noxious oozings. Distracts the chaps, unseemly. Shouldn't be allowed in politics.
So a very serious story. There are too many women with vaginas distracting the chaps and they really should Know Their Limits and not be there at all. We could start by ignoring all these vagina fiends involved in politics especially Cressida Dick and Sue Grey. So, no FPNs and critical reports for the PM. Back to business, vote Conservative, huzzah.
Its the people who *buy* the Hate Mail we should be worried about.
Isn't it a majority female readership?
It's such a bonkers thing to publish I wonder if it stems from the idea that women are more likely to comment on clothing etc
Isn't the Mail's female readership 'of an age' and perhaps background, which tut about a 'hussy'?
I know this sounds bad, and believe me I really aren’t a sexist pig, but I do wonder if the menopause can sometimes do something to women’s attitudes and views that make them more reactionary and prone to that kind of tutting, suspicion of the modern world, everything was better in my day approach that the Mail mines so successfully.
Seen it in my mum, and other women of that age. It might be just an aging thing generally cos of course there is that tendency to drift rightward as you age regardless of gender, but I sometimes ponder if the menopause, the hormonal changes, exacerbate the effect, particularly if the woman is finding it difficult to live with her symptoms. God knows I don’t envy women for having to go through it.
I was discussing it with a very old friend of mine the other day, who recently started HRT, and she said her mum had definitely shifted rightwards, strikingly so, since the menopause.
Or maybe I’m talking bollocks.
I don't think my mother shifted rightwards in her 50's. She could be quite right-wing before, but, as someone who carved out a career for herself in the late 1920's/early 30's she had quite a few feminist attitudes! And my wife has shifted leftwards over the course of our 60 years together, although she blames me!
I hope this experience doesn’t put off a single person like me, with a background like mine from aspiring to participate in public life.
That would break my heart. 💔
We need more people in politics with backgrounds like mine - and fewer as a hobby to help their mates.
7/9
Well done Angela Rayner! Money couldn't buy you a page like that. It does just about everything. From being a not very impressive hang over from the Corbyn era this turns her into a real player. I noticed she's started working on her image a couple of weeks ago. Now when she has something to say people will listen. Whatever the Mail were trying to do I can't imagine. Maybe they're as pissed off with the Tories as the rest of us?
The "Tory scum" speech was the making of her. Its far too easy to speak to your core, especially when you were a Cobynista. She'd already dropped the Jeremy and become a far more serious player than Wrong-Daily, but still pandered to the "scum" thing.
Reaction was swift and harsh inside the party and out. She genuinely apologised and reformed. Note that Steve Baker says he is now VONC because of the clear insincerity of the PM apologising to the Commons on Tuesday afternoon then ranting away to the '22 on Tuesday evening.
Another reason why they have to take her out. Authentic, northern, fiesty, but clearly articulate and clever. And understands what humility is.
"genuinely apologised."
She eventually apologised, after being forced. I don't see her apology as being particularly genuine.
Her first attempts were to excuse her comments as they were down to her 'northern roots; it it was only after a month that she 'apologised'.
'Scum' is a horrible word. Not because of any hidden meaning but because the sound is particularly ugly. It used to be a PB favourite. I would be surprised if you haven't used it?
But if you aren't worried about the aesthetics just the meaning then you could say she was ahead of the game. The word is defined as 'A contemptible person'. At the time she said it that was a minority view. Now we know what we know there are few who would describe him as anything else
One of the most depressingly tedious arguments in recent years has been the Diane Abbott / Priti Patel maths thing
It reflects the larger reality that an awful lot of folk are not very numerate. PB is of course a shining exception…
I regard myself as reasonably numerate, but my worst mathematical mistake involved an answer that was 68 orders of magnitude out.
One of the effects of medicine switching from the apothecaries system of weights and measures to the metric was that errors started to be of at least 10 orders of magnitude!
Edit; think I've got that wrong. I meant doses (etc) were 10x (at least) what ought to have been intended.
My optimistic prediction for today is that Le Pen will slightly underperform and it’ll be 57:43. I hope I’m right.
My fear is Melanchon's Corbynista morons will stay at home or vote Le Pen because they hate Centrists more than they do Fascists.
I could see a lot of people hoping that Macron wins, but only narrowly, and that other people will do the dirty work of voting for him so that they don't have to sully their hands.
Hopefully I'm wrong and French voters will find it easy to vote against Le Pen in huge numbers.
Not for the first time in recent years, one wishes there was a “None of the Above” or “Re-Open Nominations” option in a national election.
OT, but I see the MP for Wakefield hasn't yet applied for the Chiltern Hundreds, despite his Party wanting to get it over with. It simply drags the issue out locally.
OT, but I see the MP for Wakefield hasn't yet applied for the Chiltern Hundreds, despite his Party wanting to get it over with. It simply drags the issue out locally.
One of the most depressingly tedious arguments in recent years has been the Diane Abbott / Priti Patel maths thing
It reflects the larger reality that an awful lot of folk are not very numerate. PB is of course a shining exception…
I regard myself as reasonably numerate, but my worst mathematical mistake involved an answer that was 68 orders of magnitude out.
One of the effects of medicine switching from the apothecaries system of weights and measures to the metric was that errors started to be of at least 10 orders of magnitude!
Edit; think I've got that wrong. I meant doses (etc) were 10x (at least) what ought to have been intended.
One hopes so. Oddly the only active drug I can think of where a 10 oom od might be survivable is lsd
One of the most depressingly tedious arguments in recent years has been the Diane Abbott / Priti Patel maths thing
It reflects the larger reality that an awful lot of folk are not very numerate. PB is of course a shining exception…
I regard myself as reasonably numerate, but my worst mathematical mistake involved an answer that was 68 orders of magnitude out.
One of the effects of medicine switching from the apothecaries system of weights and measures to the metric was that errors started to be of at least 10 orders of magnitude!
Edit; think I've got that wrong. I meant doses (etc) were 10x (at least) what ought to have been intended.
10x = one order of magnitude. Wasn’t there a study that suggested that dosage errors were much more common under the metric system, so the authorities had to devise new processes to catch the errors before the drug got to the patient?
One of the most depressingly tedious arguments in recent years has been the Diane Abbott / Priti Patel maths thing
It reflects the larger reality that an awful lot of folk are not very numerate. PB is of course a shining exception…
I regard myself as reasonably numerate, but my worst mathematical mistake involved an answer that was 68 orders of magnitude out.
One of the effects of medicine switching from the apothecaries system of weights and measures to the metric was that errors started to be of at least 10 orders of magnitude!
Edit; think I've got that wrong. I meant doses (etc) were 10x (at least) what ought to have been intended.
Out by a factor of ten is one order of magnitude, 100 is two and so on; the easy way to think of it is how many places out is the decimal point.
My optimistic prediction for today is that Le Pen will slightly underperform and it’ll be 57:43. I hope I’m right.
My fear is Melanchon's Corbynista morons will stay at home or vote Le Pen because they hate Centrists more than they do Fascists.
I could see a lot of people hoping that Macron wins, but only narrowly, and that other people will do the dirty work of voting for him so that they don't have to sully their hands.
Hopefully I'm wrong and French voters will find it easy to vote against Le Pen in huge numbers.
Not for the first time in recent years, one wishes there was a “None of the Above” or “Re-Open Nominations” option in a national election.
Re-open nominations so some other 0.5% no-hopers can enter the race? What good does that do?
One of the most depressingly tedious arguments in recent years has been the Diane Abbott / Priti Patel maths thing
It reflects the larger reality that an awful lot of folk are not very numerate. PB is of course a shining exception…
I regard myself as reasonably numerate, but my worst mathematical mistake involved an answer that was 68 orders of magnitude out.
One of the effects of medicine switching from the apothecaries system of weights and measures to the metric was that errors started to be of at least 10 orders of magnitude!
Edit; think I've got that wrong. I meant doses (etc) were 10x (at least) what ought to have been intended.
One hopes so. Oddly the only active drug I can think of where a 10 oom od might be survivable is lsd
Think you're right. I've had several 'discussions' with prescribers over does where a factor of 10 has been involved. When I were a lad, back in the 50's and studying pharmacy, we had to learn all the doses of commonly prescribed drugs and were examined on our memory of them.
One of the most depressingly tedious arguments in recent years has been the Diane Abbott / Priti Patel maths thing
It reflects the larger reality that an awful lot of folk are not very numerate. PB is of course a shining exception…
I regard myself as reasonably numerate, but my worst mathematical mistake involved an answer that was 68 orders of magnitude out.
One of the effects of medicine switching from the apothecaries system of weights and measures to the metric was that errors started to be of at least 10 orders of magnitude!
Edit; think I've got that wrong. I meant doses (etc) were 10x (at least) what ought to have been intended.
10x = one order of magnitude. Wasn’t there a study that suggested that dosage errors were much more common under the metric system, so the authorities had to devise new processes to catch the errors before the drug got to the patient?
Confusion between mg and micro grams would worry me.
Trying to teach people to spot and avoid powers of ten errors takes up a noticeable portion of my working life.
One of the most depressingly tedious arguments in recent years has been the Diane Abbott / Priti Patel maths thing
It reflects the larger reality that an awful lot of folk are not very numerate. PB is of course a shining exception…
I regard myself as reasonably numerate, but my worst mathematical mistake involved an answer that was 68 orders of magnitude out.
One of the effects of medicine switching from the apothecaries system of weights and measures to the metric was that errors started to be of at least 10 orders of magnitude!
Edit; think I've got that wrong. I meant doses (etc) were 10x (at least) what ought to have been intended.
One hopes so. Oddly the only active drug I can think of where a 10 oom od might be survivable is lsd
In many cases the pill would weigh more than the patient: 10 micrograms would become 100 kg.
One of the most depressingly tedious arguments in recent years has been the Diane Abbott / Priti Patel maths thing
It reflects the larger reality that an awful lot of folk are not very numerate. PB is of course a shining exception…
I regard myself as reasonably numerate, but my worst mathematical mistake involved an answer that was 68 orders of magnitude out.
One of the effects of medicine switching from the apothecaries system of weights and measures to the metric was that errors started to be of at least 10 orders of magnitude!
Edit; think I've got that wrong. I meant doses (etc) were 10x (at least) what ought to have been intended.
10x = one order of magnitude. Wasn’t there a study that suggested that dosage errors were much more common under the metric system, so the authorities had to devise new processes to catch the errors before the drug got to the patient?
Confusion between mg and micro grams would worry me.
Trying to teach people to spot and avoid powers of ten errors takes up a noticeable portion of my working life.
Young pharmacists spend a considerable amount of time on calculations and dose review. Trouble is, of course, most of the time prescribers get it right, so it's easy to just run down a list and sign it off. One has to be aware of the possibility of error all the time.
One of the most depressingly tedious arguments in recent years has been the Diane Abbott / Priti Patel maths thing
It reflects the larger reality that an awful lot of folk are not very numerate. PB is of course a shining exception…
I regard myself as reasonably numerate, but my worst mathematical mistake involved an answer that was 68 orders of magnitude out.
One of the effects of medicine switching from the apothecaries system of weights and measures to the metric was that errors started to be of at least 10 orders of magnitude!
Edit; think I've got that wrong. I meant doses (etc) were 10x (at least) what ought to have been intended.
10x = one order of magnitude. Wasn’t there a study that suggested that dosage errors were much more common under the metric system, so the authorities had to devise new processes to catch the errors before the drug got to the patient?
Confusion between mg and micro grams would worry me.
Trying to teach people to spot and avoid powers of ten errors takes up a noticeable portion of my working life.
Young pharmacists spend a considerable amount of time on calculations and dose review. Trouble is, of course, most of the time prescribers get it right, so it's easy to just run down a list and sign it off. One has to be aware of the possibility of error all the time.
Shame you changed the typo: “the possibility of terror” has a good ring to it.
One of the most depressingly tedious arguments in recent years has been the Diane Abbott / Priti Patel maths thing
It reflects the larger reality that an awful lot of folk are not very numerate. PB is of course a shining exception…
I regard myself as reasonably numerate, but my worst mathematical mistake involved an answer that was 68 orders of magnitude out.
One of the effects of medicine switching from the apothecaries system of weights and measures to the metric was that errors started to be of at least 10 orders of magnitude!
Edit; think I've got that wrong. I meant doses (etc) were 10x (at least) what ought to have been intended.
One hopes so. Oddly the only active drug I can think of where a 10 oom od might be survivable is lsd
In many cases the pill would weigh more than the patient: 10 micrograms would become 100 kg.
I'm proud/ashamed to say I checked your calculation.
I hope this experience doesn’t put off a single person like me, with a background like mine from aspiring to participate in public life.
That would break my heart. 💔
We need more people in politics with backgrounds like mine - and fewer as a hobby to help their mates.
7/9
Well done Angela Rayner! Money couldn't buy you a page like that. It does just about everything. From being a not very impressive hang over from the Corbyn era this turns her into a real player. I noticed she's started working on her image a couple of weeks ago. Now when she has something to say people will listen. Whatever the Mail were trying to do I can't imagine. Maybe they're as pissed off with the Tories as the rest of us?
The "Tory scum" speech was the making of her. Its far too easy to speak to your core, especially when you were a Cobynista. She'd already dropped the Jeremy and become a far more serious player than Wrong-Daily, but still pandered to the "scum" thing.
Reaction was swift and harsh inside the party and out. She genuinely apologised and reformed. Note that Steve Baker says he is now VONC because of the clear insincerity of the PM apologising to the Commons on Tuesday afternoon then ranting away to the '22 on Tuesday evening.
Another reason why they have to take her out. Authentic, northern, fiesty, but clearly articulate and clever. And understands what humility is.
"genuinely apologised."
She eventually apologised, after being forced. I don't see her apology as being particularly genuine.
Her first attempts were to excuse her comments as they were down to her 'northern roots; it it was only after a month that she 'apologised'.
'Scum' is a horrible word. Not because of any hidden meaning but because the sound is particularly ugly. It used to be a PB favourite. I would be surprised if you haven't used it?
But if you aren't worried about the aesthetics just the meaning then you could say she was ahead of the game. The word is defined as 'A contemptible person'. At the time she said it that was a minority view. Now we know what we know there are few who would describe him as anything else
I have almost certainly used the word in the past. I shouldn't, and it's something I try not to use any more. But I am not a politician.
But when it comes to 'a contemptible person', I'd include people who say the 'talent' should be able to abuse women. Can you think of a PB regular who said such a thing, before 'Me Too' made the problem in his industry even more obvious?
One of the most depressingly tedious arguments in recent years has been the Diane Abbott / Priti Patel maths thing
It reflects the larger reality that an awful lot of folk are not very numerate. PB is of course a shining exception…
I regard myself as reasonably numerate, but my worst mathematical mistake involved an answer that was 68 orders of magnitude out.
One of the effects of medicine switching from the apothecaries system of weights and measures to the metric was that errors started to be of at least 10 orders of magnitude!
Edit; think I've got that wrong. I meant doses (etc) were 10x (at least) what ought to have been intended.
10x = one order of magnitude. Wasn’t there a study that suggested that dosage errors were much more common under the metric system, so the authorities had to devise new processes to catch the errors before the drug got to the patient?
Confusion between mg and micro grams would worry me.
Trying to teach people to spot and avoid powers of ten errors takes up a noticeable portion of my working life.
Young pharmacists spend a considerable amount of time on calculations and dose review. Trouble is, of course, most of the time prescribers get it right, so it's easy to just run down a list and sign it off. One has to be aware of the possibility of error all the time.
Shame you changed the typo: “the possibility of terror” has a good ring to it.
The 'discussion' I had with an anesthetist when by him wakened at 2am one morning about the strength of the pre-prepared syringes in the theatre certainly awakened 'terror' in me!
I’ve seen some gaslighting in my time, but the new book from transgender professor Grace Lavery takes the biscuit. It is almost entirely about Lavery’s penis – as confirmed by its title, Please Miss: A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Penis – and yet if any of you dare to refer to Lavery as a man you will be branded a bigot. It has page after depressing page about Mr Lavery’s cock – how shrivelled it has become since he started popping female hormone pills, how it ‘does very little but flop around’, how it occasionally ‘takes a stab at stiffening’ – and yet anyone who says ‘He must be a bloke, then’ will be denounced as a foul transphobe deserving of cancellation. It goes on and on about boners and ballsacks and the ‘Lacanian phallus’ – imagine Jay from The Inbetweeners getting a PhD in Queer Studies – and yet woe betide those who refuse to bow down to the idea that this dick obsessed with his dick is in fact a woman. Literally, legally, actually a woman.
I'll be honest, it still sounds a better read than Spiked
I always think when you've decided to go with the genocide deniers as your source of book reviews you might want to take a wee moment of self reflection.
One of the most depressingly tedious arguments in recent years has been the Diane Abbott / Priti Patel maths thing
It reflects the larger reality that an awful lot of folk are not very numerate. PB is of course a shining exception…
I regard myself as reasonably numerate, but my worst mathematical mistake involved an answer that was 68 orders of magnitude out.
One of the effects of medicine switching from the apothecaries system of weights and measures to the metric was that errors started to be of at least 10 orders of magnitude!
Edit; think I've got that wrong. I meant doses (etc) were 10x (at least) what ought to have been intended.
One hopes so. Oddly the only active drug I can think of where a 10 oom od might be survivable is lsd
In many cases the pill would weigh more than the patient: 10 micrograms would become 100 kg.
I'm proud/ashamed to say I checked your calculation.
Given the size of the error I previously admitted to, that was wise.
I see she no longer identifies as ginger. I'd be surprised but not shocked if the Labour party would have her as has been fash-curious in the past.
I watched three hours of live HoC on Tuesday and Dehenna Davison was the only one to impress me with how clearly and strongly she spoke. She is an excellent politician with big future. Labour will struggle to wrestle the constituency from her is my betting tip.
Although boundary changes tip it slightly back towards Labour. But it has been swinging Tory at every election this Century.
One of the most depressingly tedious arguments in recent years has been the Diane Abbott / Priti Patel maths thing
It reflects the larger reality that an awful lot of folk are not very numerate. PB is of course a shining exception…
I regard myself as reasonably numerate, but my worst mathematical mistake involved an answer that was 68 orders of magnitude out.
One of the effects of medicine switching from the apothecaries system of weights and measures to the metric was that errors started to be of at least 10 orders of magnitude!
Edit; think I've got that wrong. I meant doses (etc) were 10x (at least) what ought to have been intended.
10x = one order of magnitude. Wasn’t there a study that suggested that dosage errors were much more common under the metric system, so the authorities had to devise new processes to catch the errors before the drug got to the patient?
Confusion between mg and micro grams would worry me.
Trying to teach people to spot and avoid powers of ten errors takes up a noticeable portion of my working life.
Young pharmacists spend a considerable amount of time on calculations and dose review. Trouble is, of course, most of the time prescribers get it right, so it's easy to just run down a list and sign it off. One has to be aware of the possibility of error all the time.
Shame you changed the typo: “the possibility of terror” has a good ring to it.
The 'discussion' I had with an anesthetist when by him wakened at 2am one morning about the strength of the pre-prepared syringes in the theatre certainly awakened 'terror' in me!
Having had more than a few GAs I’m glad someone is checking…
Comments
And fast growing economies in 2021 are hardly a reliable measure given the crash beforehand.
Why wouldn't Opposition parties want to keep their powder dry until closer to the election. Take Osborne's foolish (but popular with HYUFD and other million pound heirs to fortunes) inheritance tax proposals taken up in part by Brown/ Darling.
Lovely bloke, interacted with fans on Twitter. Never unpleasant. RIP
You rang my Lord is very popular in Hungary.
I have no idea how much the windfall tax is supposed to raise but I am sure someone on here can calculate the cost of giving everyone £600 off their energy bill and compare it to the windfall gain
I would just add this may well be an example of misleading the public when I understood it would provide £200 off energy bills with upto £600 for the poorest in the community
If as I suspect I am correct on this it just adds to the general opinion they are all the same when it comes to the truth
On a broader labour market level it's stupid too - as you note, unemployment is low but I think under-employment is quite high, part of the reason we have such problems with in-work poverty.
Need to sort incentives out.
So a very serious story. There are too many women with vaginas distracting the chaps and they really should Know Their Limits and not be there at all. We could start by ignoring all these vagina fiends involved in politics especially Cressida Dick and Sue Grey. So, no FPNs and critical reports for the PM. Back to business, vote Conservative, huzzah.
Its the people who *buy* the Hate Mail we should be worried about.
Fingers crossed for Macron 60%-65% as on at 16.
On one hand it makes sense that policies only really begin to crystallise (or be made clear) in the run-up to an election. On the other hand getting a general sense of a party's policies and aims well in advance seems to be important, and that requires something more than just a few years of them going "god, these guys in government are absolute spanners, aren't they?"
It's such a bonkers thing to publish I wonder if it stems from the idea that women are more likely to comment on clothing etc
Sorry but thats the harsh light of day that is spooking increasing numbers of Tory MPs. They can't work out how they are supposed to justify themselves in front of the electorate hence the rapid collapse of the entire "just bluster through" strategy on Thursday.
If you stand for the Tories, you stand for lies.
The reality might be that there aren't new ideas to solve this problem. We've had the party, the hangover is coming whether we like it or not. All we can choose is who leads us through the wilderness with decency and a modicum of fairness.
Which ain't Boris, but it also isn't an easy sell on the doorstep.
As for Labour's cupboard being bare, we are only halfway through the parliament. Your point would have more relevance if it still holds after they publish their manifesto at the next general election, but right now it makes perfect sense to keep schtum. The Tories will nick anything that proves popular, for one thing. Plus, never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.
Reaction was swift and harsh inside the party and out. She genuinely apologised and reformed. Note that Steve Baker says he is now VONC because of the clear insincerity of the PM apologising to the Commons on Tuesday afternoon then ranting away to the '22 on Tuesday evening.
Another reason why they have to take her out. Authentic, northern, fiesty, but clearly articulate and clever. And understands what humility is.
People think the economy has made them poorer because it has and will keep making them poorer because all the markers are sliding into the red. Saying "you've never had it so good" doesn't work when people can see and feel how bad it is.
It's why appeals to 2010-5, or 1983-7, aren't watertight. Previous winning PMs have aligned the economic and electoral cycles. BoJo has had the bad luck to have them horribly out of synch.
https://twitter.com/ThatTimWalker/status/1517890615438192641/photo/1
Tactically, yes. Summat big always seems to come up to distract from a blunder.
But strategically he has to be the unluckiest ever.
Shame.
2. Whyte didn't turn up to the fight last night. Perhaps he really was overawed by the occasion/opponent I'm not sure he landed a single shot before getting sparked out. People expected a tear up and tear up came there none.
3. Spoke to someone v close to govt last week and they were super worried about govt finances. Forget about lower spending they were seeing a likelihood of cuts. The debt servicing bill is eye watering and unsustainable. That puts the Cons in a difficult place in the run up to any election.
She eventually apologised, after being forced. I don't see her apology as being particularly genuine.
26th September: "Labour conference: Angela Rayner stands by calling Boris Johnson 'scum'"
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/sep/26/angela-rayner-stands-by-remarks-calling-tories-scum
29th October: "Angela Rayner 'unreservedly' apologises for Conservative 'scum' comments"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-59081482
Her first attempts were to excuse her comments as they were down to her 'northern roots; it it was only after a month that she 'apologised'.
Except it's happening to the country I live in.
It simply drags the issue out locally.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/apr/24/mp-convicted-of-sexually-molesting-boy-15-fails-to-keep-his-promise-to-resign
Czechia, Turkey, Poland, and France all exported >10 TIVs of arms to Ukraine between 2014 and 2021. All of the French exports came under Macron, interestingly.
We could, of course, have done even more but would Russia then have invaded even earlier?
The government's debt stock retreats at a much quicker level than debt interest goes up, Since the nominal level of debt (£2,326.8 billion) is deflated by nominal GDP. If inflation is 8%, the debt pile reduced, in real terms, by £186bn, compared to £100bn in debt interest (at Feb 2022 levels).
In addition to the BoE effect, that's because of the £2,032.9 billion gilts in circulation at the end of February 2022:
£1,530.8 billion are conventional gilts that pay a fixed interest rate (i.e. about 75%)
£502.1 billion are index-linked gilts that pay an interest rate pegged to the Retail Prices Index (RPI) (25%)
It's got worse as Putin has consolidated his hold on power, of course.
And one cannot say that all the Ukrainian leaders, either before or since independence, have been uncanonised as yet saints!
This shouldn't be read as any sort of justification for Russia's current policy, of course. Just suggesting that Western leaders could be forgiven for being unsure as to who were the good guys.
• Additional medical, infantry and survival skills training
• Countering improvised explosive devices
• Training for defensive operations in an urban environment
• Operational planning
• Engineering
• Countering attacks from snipers, armoured vehicles and mortars.
But my search for equipment supplied in the same time period is coming up blank.
Ironically, this might actually work out positively for the government, with the inflation receding before the election as fuel prices fall and supply chains sort themselves out, the massive debt pile deflated by 15% or so, and a fair bit of fiscal drag helping government revenues.
Starmer hasn't got the 'everyman' quality of Brown and Blair but with a revamped Rayner she and Starmer could be onto something.
Seen it in my mum, and other women of that age. It might be just an aging thing generally cos of course there is that tendency to drift rightward as you age regardless of gender, but I sometimes ponder if the menopause, the hormonal changes, exacerbate the effect, particularly if the woman is finding it difficult to live with her symptoms. God knows I don’t envy women for having to go through it.
I was discussing it with a very old friend of mine the other day, who recently started HRT, and she said her mum had definitely shifted rightwards, strikingly so, since the menopause.
Or maybe I’m talking bollocks.
Pressed on 'safe routes' processing centres: "The best place would be country nearest where they are fleeing from"
Which, yes, sounds very much like the Govt's position.
https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1518155830251638784?s=20&t=Q5XQ-mfiQf2x0v0ctnvXUw
You earn £lotsandlots. I earn less but still £lots. There are so many poor sods out there who work far harder jobs than we do for £less and they are directly feeling it even if you are not.
People can't feed their kids with rhetoric.
Hopefully I'm wrong and French voters will find it easy to vote against Le Pen in huge numbers.
https://www.spiked-online.com/2022/04/23/how-the-trans-ideology-dehumanises-women/#.YmSnyIOGefA.twitter
PB is of course a shining exception…
And my wife has shifted leftwards over the course of our 60 years together, although she blames me!
But if you aren't worried about the aesthetics just the meaning then you could say she was ahead of the game. The word is defined as 'A contemptible person'. At the time she said it that was a minority view. Now we know what we know there are few who would describe him as anything else
Edit; think I've got that wrong. I meant doses (etc) were 10x (at least) what ought to have been intended.
I’d like to know who gets results where it’s more than two (apart from calculations of vacuum energy density, obviously).
When I were a lad, back in the 50's and studying pharmacy, we had to learn all the doses of commonly prescribed drugs and were examined on our memory of them.
Trying to teach people to spot and avoid powers of ten errors takes up a noticeable portion of my working life.
26.41%
This is a a bit higher than the first round but down 2 points on the 2017 second round .
But when it comes to 'a contemptible person', I'd include people who say the 'talent' should be able to abuse women. Can you think of a PB regular who said such a thing, before 'Me Too' made the problem in his industry even more obvious?
Contemptible indeed.
But it has been swinging Tory at every election this Century.