Howdy, Stranger!

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

Just 19% think the Chancellor’s changes will make them better off – politicalbetting.com

1457910

Comments

  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 16,605
    I’ve sat with the “fiscal event” for a while.

    It’s still totally crackers, in fact it feels even more crackers than it did this morning.

    Remember; this was supposed to be Truss’s big launch - delayed by royal mortality - the moment the country is introduced to her.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 27,612
    edited September 23
    kle4 said:

    On the subject of literary estates, even without seeing the show I can declare people moaning about the portrayal of Galadriel in the Rings of Power are barking up the wrong tree. Been reading 'Unfinished Tales' today, and it is pretty explicit that the entire backstory and character of Galadriel is inconsistent and in parts contradictory. The show might match none of it yet even if it did it would still contradict in parts.

    Galadriel is portrayed by Tolkien in his earlier writings as one of the leaders of the Noldor elven rebellion and as desiring a realm in Middle Earth she could rule for herself uncontested. The portrayal in Rings of Power of her as a warrior matches this very well. It was only in Tolkien's final letters prior to his death that he changed the nature of Galadriel to some extent.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 28,024

    I’ve sat with the “fiscal event” for a while.

    It’s still totally crackers, in fact it feels even more crackers than it did this morning.

    Remember; this was supposed to be Truss’s big launch - delayed by royal mortality - the moment the country is introduced to her.

    More crackers than a lorry-load of Bath Olivers.
  • Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Phil said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    FPT
    Question and I am genuinely happy to hear an answer from left or right as it puzzles me.

    Many of our public services whether national or local throughout the years have been giving funding increases above inflation and then announced they have to cut services. Either the inflation figure is a fiction or the money is somehow being siphoned off. The nhs is a good example of this...plenty of years of above inflation increases in budget while service is cut.

    Medical inflation is higher than CPI. Not just because of costly new treatments, but also the obvious one of an ageing boomer population, so more demand.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/05/health/05iht-obese.1.9748884.html

    Needed to fit a source in somewhere for what I had been saying so not specifically aimed at you
    “The study, paid for by the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports, did not take into account other potential costs of obesity and smoking, such as lost economic productivity or social costs.”

    Yeah. What do you think happens to all those uncontrolled diabetes patients who end up losing a limb?
    Losing a limb through diabetes isnt common as most get caught before that point, certainly not to the point of distorting the figures.
    Diabetes foot disease is the cause of more diabetic inpatient days than anything else.
    Didn't claim it wasnt what I disputed is that a lot of diabetics ended up losing a limb.

    If 50% of diabetics lose a limb thats a big deal....if its 0.05% then hardly disrupting the figures.

    You are a doctor...what percentage of diabetics lose a limb?
    You started off by asking why the NHS is cutting services whilst the budget is increasing.

    You got the correct answer in the first response. People are living longer with more things wrong with them. So demand is up and the budget isn't increasing fast enough to match that increase.

    We also have a raft of new expensive technologies and people expect more nowadays.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 5,419

    kle4 said:

    On the subject of literary estates, even without seeing the show I can declare people moaning about the portrayal of Galadriel in the Rings of Power are barking up the wrong tree. Been reading 'Unfinished Tales' today, and it is pretty explicit that the entire backstory and character of Galadriel is inconsistent and in parts contradictory. The show might match none of it yet even if it did it would still contradict in parts.

    Galadriel is portrayed by Tolkien in his earlier writings as one of the leaders of the Noldor elven rebellion and as desiring a realm in Middle Earth she could rule for herself uncontested. The portrayal in Rings of Power of her as a warrior matches this very well. It was only in Tolkien's final letters prior to his death that he changed the nature of Galadriel to some extent.
    The noldor were the middle class elves, the middle classes being the source of most rebellions
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 5,419

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Phil said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    FPT
    Question and I am genuinely happy to hear an answer from left or right as it puzzles me.

    Many of our public services whether national or local throughout the years have been giving funding increases above inflation and then announced they have to cut services. Either the inflation figure is a fiction or the money is somehow being siphoned off. The nhs is a good example of this...plenty of years of above inflation increases in budget while service is cut.

    Medical inflation is higher than CPI. Not just because of costly new treatments, but also the obvious one of an ageing boomer population, so more demand.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/05/health/05iht-obese.1.9748884.html

    Needed to fit a source in somewhere for what I had been saying so not specifically aimed at you
    “The study, paid for by the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports, did not take into account other potential costs of obesity and smoking, such as lost economic productivity or social costs.”

    Yeah. What do you think happens to all those uncontrolled diabetes patients who end up losing a limb?
    Losing a limb through diabetes isnt common as most get caught before that point, certainly not to the point of distorting the figures.
    Diabetes foot disease is the cause of more diabetic inpatient days than anything else.
    Didn't claim it wasnt what I disputed is that a lot of diabetics ended up losing a limb.

    If 50% of diabetics lose a limb thats a big deal....if its 0.05% then hardly disrupting the figures.

    You are a doctor...what percentage of diabetics lose a limb?
    You started off by asking why the NHS is cutting services whilst the budget is increasing.

    You got the correct answer in the first response. People are living longer with more things wrong with them. So demand is up and the budget isn't increasing fast enough to match that increase.

    We also have a raft of new expensive technologies and people expect more nowadays.
    Which is why we need life time budgets and you can insure against exceeding it
  • Scott_xP said:

    👀 NEW Conservative peer Gavin Barwell tonight on @LBC to @AndrewMarr9: “I think the UK needs a centre right party, and… we face the same dilemma maybe that moderates in the Labour Party faced during Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership.”
    #MiniBudget @GavinBarwell

    Unfortunately so.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 10,463
    Scott_xP said:
    Richard Splett. "Well, I'm not sure but positivity is the first step."
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 81,420
    edited September 23

    kle4 said:

    On the subject of literary estates, even without seeing the show I can declare people moaning about the portrayal of Galadriel in the Rings of Power are barking up the wrong tree. Been reading 'Unfinished Tales' today, and it is pretty explicit that the entire backstory and character of Galadriel is inconsistent and in parts contradictory. The show might match none of it yet even if it did it would still contradict in parts.

    Galadriel is portrayed by Tolkien in his earlier writings as one of the leaders of the Noldor elven rebellion and as desiring a realm in Middle Earth she could rule for herself uncontested. The portrayal in Rings of Power of her as a warrior matches this very well. It was only in Tolkien's final letters prior to his death that he changed the nature of Galadriel to some extent.
    Yes, I found it interesting to see that element, and how her line in LOTR about how she could rule as a dark queen, and rejected taking on the ring, was about her growth away from that desire and showed her improved wisdom and redemption, such that she could return home. Honestly, it seems to come out of nowhere without that, it fills in some gaps.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 5,419
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    On the subject of literary estates, even without seeing the show I can declare people moaning about the portrayal of Galadriel in the Rings of Power are barking up the wrong tree. Been reading 'Unfinished Tales' today, and it is pretty explicit that the entire backstory and character of Galadriel is inconsistent and in parts contradictory. The show might match none of it yet even if it did it would still contradict in parts.

    Galadriel is portrayed by Tolkien in his earlier writings as one of the leaders of the Noldor elven rebellion and as desiring a realm in Middle Earth she could rule for herself uncontested. The portrayal in Rings of Power of her as a warrior matches this very well. It was only in Tolkien's final letters prior to his death that he changed the nature of Galadriel to some extent.
    Yes, I found it interesting to see that element, and how her line in LOTR about how she could rule as a dark queen, and rejected taking on the ring, was about her growth away from that desire and showed her improved wisdom and redemption, such that she could return home.
    You are saying her choice was be priti patel or rachel reeves?
  • PhilPhil Posts: 1,132

    Leon said:

    Ok, a mild distraction from woes various, what's the copyright situation with using pieces from literature in a commercial setting? I'd like to use Vimes' Boot Theory in something I'm involved in. Nothing as crude as Pratchett endorses X but more an appreciation of that simple piece of economic clarity. I believe @SouthamObserver has copyright as his business?

    "Fair usage"or "fair dealing" is the rule

    https://www.bl.uk/business-and-ip-centre/articles/fair-dealing-copyright-explained

    It really depends on your purposes. If you are out to make money you are allowed a few lines, is all

    Thanks. Would the full passage qualify as a few lines?

    'The reason that the rich were so rich, Vimes reasoned, was because they managed to spend less money. Take boots, for example. He earned thirty-eight dollars a month plus allowances. A really good pair of leather boots cost fifty dollars. But an affordable pair of boots, which were sort of OK for a season or two and then leaked like hell when the cardboard gave out, cost about ten dollars. Those were the kind of boots Vimes always bought, and wore until the soles were so thin that he could tell where he was in Ankh-Morpork on a foggy night by the feel of the cobbles. But the thing was that good boots lasted for years and years. A man who could afford fifty dollars had a pair of boots that'd still be keeping his feet dry in ten years' time, while a poor man who could only afford cheap boots would have spent a hundred dollars on boots in the same time and would still have wet feet. This was the Captain Samuel Vimes "Boots" theory of socioeconomic unfairness.'
    I need to start reading Pratchett. Had a brief dalliance a long time ago. Need to sort my shit out.
    Don’t start at the beginning, Pratchett improved considerably with experience. Pick the start of one of the major character / story arcs: “Guards Guards” or “Wyrd Sisters” are good choices. Alternatively maybe a standalone like “Small Gods”.
  • Leon said:

    Ok, a mild distraction from woes various, what's the copyright situation with using pieces from literature in a commercial setting? I'd like to use Vimes' Boot Theory in something I'm involved in. Nothing as crude as Pratchett endorses X but more an appreciation of that simple piece of economic clarity. I believe @SouthamObserver has copyright as his business?

    "Fair usage"or "fair dealing" is the rule

    https://www.bl.uk/business-and-ip-centre/articles/fair-dealing-copyright-explained

    It really depends on your purposes. If you are out to make money you are allowed a few lines, is all

    Thanks. Would the full passage qualify as a few lines?

    'The reason that the rich were so rich, Vimes reasoned, was because they managed to spend less money. Take boots, for example. He earned thirty-eight dollars a month plus allowances. A really good pair of leather boots cost fifty dollars. But an affordable pair of boots, which were sort of OK for a season or two and then leaked like hell when the cardboard gave out, cost about ten dollars. Those were the kind of boots Vimes always bought, and wore until the soles were so thin that he could tell where he was in Ankh-Morpork on a foggy night by the feel of the cobbles. But the thing was that good boots lasted for years and years. A man who could afford fifty dollars had a pair of boots that'd still be keeping his feet dry in ten years' time, while a poor man who could only afford cheap boots would have spent a hundred dollars on boots in the same time and would still have wet feet. This was the Captain Samuel Vimes "Boots" theory of socioeconomic unfairness.'
    Its very clever but a medieval fantasy world doesn't really apply to modern Britain.

    A really good pair of leather boots does not cost over £2k nor a cheap one about £400.

    So to apply it to our present situation what would be the equivalents ?

    Something about heating costs in old terraced housing compared with modern detached houses ?

    Or how food is cheaper at supermarkets compared to corner shops in deprived areas ?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 28,024
    edited September 23

    Carnyx said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Ok, a mild distraction from woes various, what's the copyright situation with using pieces from literature in a commercial setting? I'd like to use Vimes' Boot Theory in something I'm involved in. Nothing as crude as Pratchett endorses X but more an appreciation of that simple piece of economic clarity. I believe @SouthamObserver has copyright as his business?

    "Fair usage"or "fair dealing" is the rule

    https://www.bl.uk/business-and-ip-centre/articles/fair-dealing-copyright-explained

    It really depends on your purposes. If you are out to make money you are allowed a few lines, is all

    Thanks. Would the full passage qualify as a few lines?

    'The reason that the rich were so rich, Vimes reasoned, was because they managed to spend less money. Take boots, for example. He earned thirty-eight dollars a month plus allowances. A really good pair of leather boots cost fifty dollars. But an affordable pair of boots, which were sort of OK for a season or two and then leaked like hell when the cardboard gave out, cost about ten dollars. Those were the kind of boots Vimes always bought, and wore until the soles were so thin that he could tell where he was in Ankh-Morpork on a foggy night by the feel of the cobbles. But the thing was that good boots lasted for years and years. A man who could afford fifty dollars had a pair of boots that'd still be keeping his feet dry in ten years' time, while a poor man who could only afford cheap boots would have spent a hundred dollars on boots in the same time and would still have wet feet. This was the Captain Samuel Vimes "Boots" theory of socioeconomic unfairness.'
    Right on the edge I would say!

    Seek pro advice perhaps. Getting this wrong can be quite expensive

    Some authors/publishers are extremely litigious. Others don’t give a toss. And you never know which is which

    Don’t ever get on the wrong side of the guy that wrote the lyrics to “postman pat”. (And his black and white cat). I’m serious
    I'd agree. Strip it down - and for that matter paraphrase some or all of it, . So you can have

    'A man who could afford fifty dollars had a pair of boots that'd still be keeping his feet dry in ten years' time, while a poor man who could only afford cheap boots would have spent a hundred dollars on boots in the same time and would still have wet feet. This was the Captain Samuel Vimes "Boots" theory of socioeconomic unfairness.'

    or (partly paraphrasing)

    "'A man who could afford fifty dollars had a pair of boots that'd still be keeping his feet dry in ten years' time, while a poor man who could only afford cheap boots would have spent a hundred dollars on boots in the same time and would still have wet feet.' So ran Captain Vimes' theory of socioeconomic unfairness, as imagined by TP in Whatever Book It Was."

    Or simply paraphrase the whole, so nobody can get you for (c), while mentioning the source, so nobody can get you for plagiarism.

    The other point is that in copyright stuff, 'commercial' doesn't mean what you might think it does any more (but this is mainly an issue for stuff like academic/scholarly journals produced by learned societies and local history or natural history societies, not so much here).
    Thanks, who needs pros when you have PB!

    My even shorter paraphrase would be:

    Buy goood stuff if you can afford it, it's cheaper in the long run.
    By all means speir nicely at the Estate re a moderate quote. But be prepared to paraphrase.

    I've been able to reproduce an entire poem (normally strictly un-kosher) at the cost of a free copy of the book to the author (edit: not TP).
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 5,419
    edited September 23
    Phil said:

    Leon said:

    Ok, a mild distraction from woes various, what's the copyright situation with using pieces from literature in a commercial setting? I'd like to use Vimes' Boot Theory in something I'm involved in. Nothing as crude as Pratchett endorses X but more an appreciation of that simple piece of economic clarity. I believe @SouthamObserver has copyright as his business?

    "Fair usage"or "fair dealing" is the rule

    https://www.bl.uk/business-and-ip-centre/articles/fair-dealing-copyright-explained

    It really depends on your purposes. If you are out to make money you are allowed a few lines, is all

    Thanks. Would the full passage qualify as a few lines?

    'The reason that the rich were so rich, Vimes reasoned, was because they managed to spend less money. Take boots, for example. He earned thirty-eight dollars a month plus allowances. A really good pair of leather boots cost fifty dollars. But an affordable pair of boots, which were sort of OK for a season or two and then leaked like hell when the cardboard gave out, cost about ten dollars. Those were the kind of boots Vimes always bought, and wore until the soles were so thin that he could tell where he was in Ankh-Morpork on a foggy night by the feel of the cobbles. But the thing was that good boots lasted for years and years. A man who could afford fifty dollars had a pair of boots that'd still be keeping his feet dry in ten years' time, while a poor man who could only afford cheap boots would have spent a hundred dollars on boots in the same time and would still have wet feet. This was the Captain Samuel Vimes "Boots" theory of socioeconomic unfairness.'
    I need to start reading Pratchett. Had a brief dalliance a long time ago. Need to sort my shit out.
    Don’t start at the beginning, Pratchett improved considerably with experience. Pick the start of one of the major character / story arcs: “Guards Guards” or “Wyrd Sisters” are good choices. Alternatively maybe a standalone like “Small Gods”.
    Mort was good dont miss that one but skip sourcery
  • Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Phil said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    FPT
    Question and I am genuinely happy to hear an answer from left or right as it puzzles me.

    Many of our public services whether national or local throughout the years have been giving funding increases above inflation and then announced they have to cut services. Either the inflation figure is a fiction or the money is somehow being siphoned off. The nhs is a good example of this...plenty of years of above inflation increases in budget while service is cut.

    Medical inflation is higher than CPI. Not just because of costly new treatments, but also the obvious one of an ageing boomer population, so more demand.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/05/health/05iht-obese.1.9748884.html

    Needed to fit a source in somewhere for what I had been saying so not specifically aimed at you
    “The study, paid for by the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports, did not take into account other potential costs of obesity and smoking, such as lost economic productivity or social costs.”

    Yeah. What do you think happens to all those uncontrolled diabetes patients who end up losing a limb?
    Losing a limb through diabetes isnt common as most get caught before that point, certainly not to the point of distorting the figures.
    Diabetes foot disease is the cause of more diabetic inpatient days than anything else.
    Didn't claim it wasnt what I disputed is that a lot of diabetics ended up losing a limb.

    If 50% of diabetics lose a limb thats a big deal....if its 0.05% then hardly disrupting the figures.

    You are a doctor...what percentage of diabetics lose a limb?
    You started off by asking why the NHS is cutting services whilst the budget is increasing.

    You got the correct answer in the first response. People are living longer with more things wrong with them. So demand is up and the budget isn't increasing fast enough to match that increase.

    We also have a raft of new expensive technologies and people expect more nowadays.
    Which is why we need life time budgets and you can insure against exceeding it
    Sorry I don't really know what that means in practice.
  • Scott_xP said:

    👀 NEW Conservative peer Gavin Barwell tonight on @LBC to @AndrewMarr9: “I think the UK needs a centre right party, and… we face the same dilemma maybe that moderates in the Labour Party faced during Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership.”
    #MiniBudget @GavinBarwell

    Unfortunately so.
    I believe Change UK is available...
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 28,192
    Bank of England urged to call emergency rates meeting next week to rescue pound

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2022/09/23/mini-budget-stamp-duty-tax-cuts-ni-truss-kwarteng-ftse-100/
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 45,183
    Scott_xP said:

    👀 NEW Conservative peer Gavin Barwell tonight on @LBC to @AndrewMarr9: “I think the UK needs a centre right party, and… we face the same dilemma maybe that moderates in the Labour Party faced during Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership.”
    #MiniBudget @GavinBarwell

    Rather a lot of fire directed at the messenger in the comments.

    Whatever you think of Barwell (not much) it appears that quite a large slice of a governing party which commands well under 40% in the polls thinks their leadership is nuts.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 28,192
    NEW

    Liz Truss’s mini-Budget has done little to unite the Tories https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/09/23/liz-trusss-budget-has-done-little-unite-tory-party/
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 28,024

    Scott_xP said:

    👀 NEW Conservative peer Gavin Barwell tonight on @LBC to @AndrewMarr9: “I think the UK needs a centre right party, and… we face the same dilemma maybe that moderates in the Labour Party faced during Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership.”
    #MiniBudget @GavinBarwell

    Unfortunately so.
    I believe Change UK is available...
    Or Alba, it must be said.
  • Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Phil said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    FPT
    Question and I am genuinely happy to hear an answer from left or right as it puzzles me.

    Many of our public services whether national or local throughout the years have been giving funding increases above inflation and then announced they have to cut services. Either the inflation figure is a fiction or the money is somehow being siphoned off. The nhs is a good example of this...plenty of years of above inflation increases in budget while service is cut.

    Medical inflation is higher than CPI. Not just because of costly new treatments, but also the obvious one of an ageing boomer population, so more demand.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/05/health/05iht-obese.1.9748884.html

    Needed to fit a source in somewhere for what I had been saying so not specifically aimed at you
    “The study, paid for by the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports, did not take into account other potential costs of obesity and smoking, such as lost economic productivity or social costs.”

    Yeah. What do you think happens to all those uncontrolled diabetes patients who end up losing a limb?
    Losing a limb through diabetes isnt common as most get caught before that point, certainly not to the point of distorting the figures.
    Diabetes foot disease is the cause of more diabetic inpatient days than anything else.
    Didn't claim it wasnt what I disputed is that a lot of diabetics ended up losing a limb.

    If 50% of diabetics lose a limb thats a big deal....if its 0.05% then hardly disrupting the figures.

    You are a doctor...what percentage of diabetics lose a limb?
    You started off by asking why the NHS is cutting services whilst the budget is increasing.

    You got the correct answer in the first response. People are living longer with more things wrong with them. So demand is up and the budget isn't increasing fast enough to match that increase.

    We also have a raft of new expensive technologies and people expect more nowadays.
    Which is why we need life time budgets and you can insure against exceeding it
    And the children born with disabilities? At what age should they insure?
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 5,419

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Phil said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    FPT
    Question and I am genuinely happy to hear an answer from left or right as it puzzles me.

    Many of our public services whether national or local throughout the years have been giving funding increases above inflation and then announced they have to cut services. Either the inflation figure is a fiction or the money is somehow being siphoned off. The nhs is a good example of this...plenty of years of above inflation increases in budget while service is cut.

    Medical inflation is higher than CPI. Not just because of costly new treatments, but also the obvious one of an ageing boomer population, so more demand.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/05/health/05iht-obese.1.9748884.html

    Needed to fit a source in somewhere for what I had been saying so not specifically aimed at you
    “The study, paid for by the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports, did not take into account other potential costs of obesity and smoking, such as lost economic productivity or social costs.”

    Yeah. What do you think happens to all those uncontrolled diabetes patients who end up losing a limb?
    Losing a limb through diabetes isnt common as most get caught before that point, certainly not to the point of distorting the figures.
    Diabetes foot disease is the cause of more diabetic inpatient days than anything else.
    Didn't claim it wasnt what I disputed is that a lot of diabetics ended up losing a limb.

    If 50% of diabetics lose a limb thats a big deal....if its 0.05% then hardly disrupting the figures.

    You are a doctor...what percentage of diabetics lose a limb?
    You started off by asking why the NHS is cutting services whilst the budget is increasing.

    You got the correct answer in the first response. People are living longer with more things wrong with them. So demand is up and the budget isn't increasing fast enough to match that increase.

    We also have a raft of new expensive technologies and people expect more nowadays.
    Which is why we need life time budgets and you can insure against exceeding it
    Sorry I don't really know what that means in practice.
    Simple you get treatment upto a lifetime budget of say 150k anything over that you pay or your insurance has to pay
  • Our analysts have written their analysis on the special fiscal operation, their précis.

    Great for anybody earning above £150k and terrible for the country.

    We're likely to have something to rival Black Wednesday soon.

    Next Wednesday? The pound sinks rapidly towards parity through into early next week. Chancellor Richard Splett says something arrogant and stupid. Then the collapse *really* starts...
  • Scott_xP said:

    Bank of England urged to call emergency rates meeting next week to rescue pound

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2022/09/23/mini-budget-stamp-duty-tax-cuts-ni-truss-kwarteng-ftse-100/

    Great - so we whack up interest rates to protect the pound, hurtling more misery on the middle and low incomers.

    I don't think the budget could have been *better* designed to screw up the country.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 5,419

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Phil said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    FPT
    Question and I am genuinely happy to hear an answer from left or right as it puzzles me.

    Many of our public services whether national or local throughout the years have been giving funding increases above inflation and then announced they have to cut services. Either the inflation figure is a fiction or the money is somehow being siphoned off. The nhs is a good example of this...plenty of years of above inflation increases in budget while service is cut.

    Medical inflation is higher than CPI. Not just because of costly new treatments, but also the obvious one of an ageing boomer population, so more demand.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/05/health/05iht-obese.1.9748884.html

    Needed to fit a source in somewhere for what I had been saying so not specifically aimed at you
    “The study, paid for by the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports, did not take into account other potential costs of obesity and smoking, such as lost economic productivity or social costs.”

    Yeah. What do you think happens to all those uncontrolled diabetes patients who end up losing a limb?
    Losing a limb through diabetes isnt common as most get caught before that point, certainly not to the point of distorting the figures.
    Diabetes foot disease is the cause of more diabetic inpatient days than anything else.
    Didn't claim it wasnt what I disputed is that a lot of diabetics ended up losing a limb.

    If 50% of diabetics lose a limb thats a big deal....if its 0.05% then hardly disrupting the figures.

    You are a doctor...what percentage of diabetics lose a limb?
    You started off by asking why the NHS is cutting services whilst the budget is increasing.

    You got the correct answer in the first response. People are living longer with more things wrong with them. So demand is up and the budget isn't increasing fast enough to match that increase.

    We also have a raft of new expensive technologies and people expect more nowadays.
    Which is why we need life time budgets and you can insure against exceeding it
    And the children born with disabilities? At what age should they insure?
    There are allowed to be exemptions you know
  • Our analysts have written their analysis on the special fiscal operation, their précis.

    Great for anybody earning above £150k and terrible for the country.

    We're likely to have something to rival Black Wednesday soon.

    So lower interest rates and a stronger economy ...

    ... and a collapse in Conservative poll ratings ?
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 28,192
    Phil said:

    Don’t start at the beginning, Pratchett improved considerably with experience. Pick the start of one of the major character / story arcs: “Guards Guards” or “Wyrd Sisters” are good choices. Alternatively maybe a standalone like “Small Gods”.

    I started with Guards, Guards. (gifted by a friend)

    But surely Wyrd Sisters comes after Equal Rites?
  • Our analysts have written their analysis on the special fiscal operation, their précis.

    Great for anybody earning above £150k and terrible for the country.

    We're likely to have something to rival Black Wednesday soon.

    So lower interest rates and a stronger economy ...

    ... and a collapse in Conservative poll ratings ?
    Nope to the first government, the government's ability to borrow is the key issue.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 28,192
    Analysis: Britain's new vision leaves onlookers with nightmares http://reut.rs/3UszRKC https://twitter.com/Reuters/status/1573411974574137344/photo/1
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 81,420
    Pagan2 said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    On the subject of literary estates, even without seeing the show I can declare people moaning about the portrayal of Galadriel in the Rings of Power are barking up the wrong tree. Been reading 'Unfinished Tales' today, and it is pretty explicit that the entire backstory and character of Galadriel is inconsistent and in parts contradictory. The show might match none of it yet even if it did it would still contradict in parts.

    Galadriel is portrayed by Tolkien in his earlier writings as one of the leaders of the Noldor elven rebellion and as desiring a realm in Middle Earth she could rule for herself uncontested. The portrayal in Rings of Power of her as a warrior matches this very well. It was only in Tolkien's final letters prior to his death that he changed the nature of Galadriel to some extent.
    Yes, I found it interesting to see that element, and how her line in LOTR about how she could rule as a dark queen, and rejected taking on the ring, was about her growth away from that desire and showed her improved wisdom and redemption, such that she could return home.
    You are saying her choice was be priti patel or rachel reeves?
    Well, it also says she was 6ft 4, so definitely not Priti.
  • Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Phil said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    FPT
    Question and I am genuinely happy to hear an answer from left or right as it puzzles me.

    Many of our public services whether national or local throughout the years have been giving funding increases above inflation and then announced they have to cut services. Either the inflation figure is a fiction or the money is somehow being siphoned off. The nhs is a good example of this...plenty of years of above inflation increases in budget while service is cut.

    Medical inflation is higher than CPI. Not just because of costly new treatments, but also the obvious one of an ageing boomer population, so more demand.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/05/health/05iht-obese.1.9748884.html

    Needed to fit a source in somewhere for what I had been saying so not specifically aimed at you
    “The study, paid for by the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports, did not take into account other potential costs of obesity and smoking, such as lost economic productivity or social costs.”

    Yeah. What do you think happens to all those uncontrolled diabetes patients who end up losing a limb?
    Losing a limb through diabetes isnt common as most get caught before that point, certainly not to the point of distorting the figures.
    Diabetes foot disease is the cause of more diabetic inpatient days than anything else.
    Didn't claim it wasnt what I disputed is that a lot of diabetics ended up losing a limb.

    If 50% of diabetics lose a limb thats a big deal....if its 0.05% then hardly disrupting the figures.

    You are a doctor...what percentage of diabetics lose a limb?
    You started off by asking why the NHS is cutting services whilst the budget is increasing.

    You got the correct answer in the first response. People are living longer with more things wrong with them. So demand is up and the budget isn't increasing fast enough to match that increase.

    We also have a raft of new expensive technologies and people expect more nowadays.
    Which is why we need life time budgets and you can insure against exceeding it
    Sorry I don't really know what that means in practice.
    Simple you get treatment upto a lifetime budget of say 150k anything over that you pay or your insurance has to pay
    That's a stupidly mental idea, sorry.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 28,192
    EXCL: Veteran Tory Charles Walker set to be handed spot on committee investigating Boris Johnson over claims he misled MPs over Partygate - story by ⁦@breeallegretti⁩ https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/sep/23/tory-mp-charles-walker-expected-to-join-parliament-privileges-committee?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 28,024

    Leon said:

    Ok, a mild distraction from woes various, what's the copyright situation with using pieces from literature in a commercial setting? I'd like to use Vimes' Boot Theory in something I'm involved in. Nothing as crude as Pratchett endorses X but more an appreciation of that simple piece of economic clarity. I believe @SouthamObserver has copyright as his business?

    "Fair usage"or "fair dealing" is the rule

    https://www.bl.uk/business-and-ip-centre/articles/fair-dealing-copyright-explained

    It really depends on your purposes. If you are out to make money you are allowed a few lines, is all

    Thanks. Would the full passage qualify as a few lines?

    'The reason that the rich were so rich, Vimes reasoned, was because they managed to spend less money. Take boots, for example. He earned thirty-eight dollars a month plus allowances. A really good pair of leather boots cost fifty dollars. But an affordable pair of boots, which were sort of OK for a season or two and then leaked like hell when the cardboard gave out, cost about ten dollars. Those were the kind of boots Vimes always bought, and wore until the soles were so thin that he could tell where he was in Ankh-Morpork on a foggy night by the feel of the cobbles. But the thing was that good boots lasted for years and years. A man who could afford fifty dollars had a pair of boots that'd still be keeping his feet dry in ten years' time, while a poor man who could only afford cheap boots would have spent a hundred dollars on boots in the same time and would still have wet feet. This was the Captain Samuel Vimes "Boots" theory of socioeconomic unfairness.'
    Its very clever but a medieval fantasy world doesn't really apply to modern Britain.

    A really good pair of leather boots does not cost over £2k nor a cheap one about £400.

    So to apply it to our present situation what would be the equivalents ?

    Something about heating costs in old terraced housing compared with modern detached houses ?

    Or how food is cheaper at supermarkets compared to corner shops in deprived areas ?
    Alreadt done, as RT reminds us just now: the Vimes Index.

    https://www.theguardian.com/books/2022/jan/26/terry-pratchett-jack-monroe-vimes-boots-poverty-index
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 35,597
    IanB2 said:

    $1.08 and a bit. Oh dear. Lowest £ for decades - at least 30 years, maybe more?

    At what point do the BOE convene an emergency meeting to raise interest rates?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 81,420

    Leon said:

    Ok, a mild distraction from woes various, what's the copyright situation with using pieces from literature in a commercial setting? I'd like to use Vimes' Boot Theory in something I'm involved in. Nothing as crude as Pratchett endorses X but more an appreciation of that simple piece of economic clarity. I believe @SouthamObserver has copyright as his business?

    "Fair usage"or "fair dealing" is the rule

    https://www.bl.uk/business-and-ip-centre/articles/fair-dealing-copyright-explained

    It really depends on your purposes. If you are out to make money you are allowed a few lines, is all

    Thanks. Would the full passage qualify as a few lines?

    'The reason that the rich were so rich, Vimes reasoned, was because they managed to spend less money. Take boots, for example. He earned thirty-eight dollars a month plus allowances. A really good pair of leather boots cost fifty dollars. But an affordable pair of boots, which were sort of OK for a season or two and then leaked like hell when the cardboard gave out, cost about ten dollars. Those were the kind of boots Vimes always bought, and wore until the soles were so thin that he could tell where he was in Ankh-Morpork on a foggy night by the feel of the cobbles. But the thing was that good boots lasted for years and years. A man who could afford fifty dollars had a pair of boots that'd still be keeping his feet dry in ten years' time, while a poor man who could only afford cheap boots would have spent a hundred dollars on boots in the same time and would still have wet feet. This was the Captain Samuel Vimes "Boots" theory of socioeconomic unfairness.'
    Its very clever but a medieval fantasy world doesn't really apply to modern Britain.

    A really good pair of leather boots does not cost over £2k nor a cheap one about £400.

    So to apply it to our present situation what would be the equivalents ?

    Something about heating costs in old terraced housing compared with modern detached houses ?

    Or how food is cheaper at supermarkets compared to corner shops in deprived areas ?
    It was more of an early modern/pre -industrial fantasy world at the end.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 5,419
    kle4 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    On the subject of literary estates, even without seeing the show I can declare people moaning about the portrayal of Galadriel in the Rings of Power are barking up the wrong tree. Been reading 'Unfinished Tales' today, and it is pretty explicit that the entire backstory and character of Galadriel is inconsistent and in parts contradictory. The show might match none of it yet even if it did it would still contradict in parts.

    Galadriel is portrayed by Tolkien in his earlier writings as one of the leaders of the Noldor elven rebellion and as desiring a realm in Middle Earth she could rule for herself uncontested. The portrayal in Rings of Power of her as a warrior matches this very well. It was only in Tolkien's final letters prior to his death that he changed the nature of Galadriel to some extent.
    Yes, I found it interesting to see that element, and how her line in LOTR about how she could rule as a dark queen, and rejected taking on the ring, was about her growth away from that desire and showed her improved wisdom and redemption, such that she could return home.
    You are saying her choice was be priti patel or rachel reeves?
    Well, it also says she was 6ft 4, so definitely not Priti.
    depends on the size of the heels
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 45,183

    Our analysts have written their analysis on the special fiscal operation, their précis.

    Great for anybody earning above £150k and terrible for the country.

    We're likely to have something to rival Black Wednesday soon.

    So lower interest rates and a stronger economy ...

    ... and a collapse in Conservative poll ratings ?
    …the government's ability to borrow is the key issue.
    Soon to be followed by the government’s ability to pay the interest on the debt.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 81,420
    My first Pratchett was Feet of Clay, so even mid sequence can be fine of course. The Truth and Going Postal are both good jumping off points I feel.
  • Nigelb said:

    Our analysts have written their analysis on the special fiscal operation, their précis.

    Great for anybody earning above £150k and terrible for the country.

    We're likely to have something to rival Black Wednesday soon.

    So lower interest rates and a stronger economy ...

    ... and a collapse in Conservative poll ratings ?
    …the government's ability to borrow is the key issue.
    Soon to be followed by the government’s ability to pay the interest on the debt.
    Indeed, we're likely to have at least one event that keeps parties out of government for decades.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 45,183
    Pagan2 said:

    kle4 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    On the subject of literary estates, even without seeing the show I can declare people moaning about the portrayal of Galadriel in the Rings of Power are barking up the wrong tree. Been reading 'Unfinished Tales' today, and it is pretty explicit that the entire backstory and character of Galadriel is inconsistent and in parts contradictory. The show might match none of it yet even if it did it would still contradict in parts.

    Galadriel is portrayed by Tolkien in his earlier writings as one of the leaders of the Noldor elven rebellion and as desiring a realm in Middle Earth she could rule for herself uncontested. The portrayal in Rings of Power of her as a warrior matches this very well. It was only in Tolkien's final letters prior to his death that he changed the nature of Galadriel to some extent.
    Yes, I found it interesting to see that element, and how her line in LOTR about how she could rule as a dark queen, and rejected taking on the ring, was about her growth away from that desire and showed her improved wisdom and redemption, such that she could return home.
    You are saying her choice was be priti patel or rachel reeves?
    Well, it also says she was 6ft 4, so definitely not Priti.
    depends on the size of the heels
    Elf on stilts ?
  • Our analysts have written their analysis on the special fiscal operation, their précis.

    Great for anybody earning above £150k and terrible for the country.

    We're likely to have something to rival Black Wednesday soon.

    Yes but we are still all eagerly awaiting Barty's analysis.
  • I fear that KK is going to appear a bit 'Nigerian Prince' in his financial imagery.

    Rishi by contrast had the 'clever Indian chap' look.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 28,192
    England's Nations League campaign so far:

    ▪️ Zero wins in five matches
    ▪️ One goal in five matches
    ▪️ Relegation confirmed

    Worrying signs from Gareth Southgate's Three Lions.

    😬 https://twitter.com/WilliamHill/status/1573412228002463751/photo/1
  • PhilPhil Posts: 1,132
    Scott_xP said:

    Phil said:

    Don’t start at the beginning, Pratchett improved considerably with experience. Pick the start of one of the major character / story arcs: “Guards Guards” or “Wyrd Sisters” are good choices. Alternatively maybe a standalone like “Small Gods”.

    I started with Guards, Guards. (gifted by a friend)

    But surely Wyrd Sisters comes after Equal Rites?
    It does, but Equal Rites is too early. He doesn’t really hit his stride until Wyrd Sisters in my opinion & there’s nothing in the former that you need to read in order to understand the character relationships in the latter.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 5,419

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Phil said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    FPT
    Question and I am genuinely happy to hear an answer from left or right as it puzzles me.

    Many of our public services whether national or local throughout the years have been giving funding increases above inflation and then announced they have to cut services. Either the inflation figure is a fiction or the money is somehow being siphoned off. The nhs is a good example of this...plenty of years of above inflation increases in budget while service is cut.

    Medical inflation is higher than CPI. Not just because of costly new treatments, but also the obvious one of an ageing boomer population, so more demand.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/05/health/05iht-obese.1.9748884.html

    Needed to fit a source in somewhere for what I had been saying so not specifically aimed at you
    “The study, paid for by the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports, did not take into account other potential costs of obesity and smoking, such as lost economic productivity or social costs.”

    Yeah. What do you think happens to all those uncontrolled diabetes patients who end up losing a limb?
    Losing a limb through diabetes isnt common as most get caught before that point, certainly not to the point of distorting the figures.
    Diabetes foot disease is the cause of more diabetic inpatient days than anything else.
    Didn't claim it wasnt what I disputed is that a lot of diabetics ended up losing a limb.

    If 50% of diabetics lose a limb thats a big deal....if its 0.05% then hardly disrupting the figures.

    You are a doctor...what percentage of diabetics lose a limb?
    You started off by asking why the NHS is cutting services whilst the budget is increasing.

    You got the correct answer in the first response. People are living longer with more things wrong with them. So demand is up and the budget isn't increasing fast enough to match that increase.

    We also have a raft of new expensive technologies and people expect more nowadays.
    Which is why we need life time budgets and you can insure against exceeding it
    Sorry I don't really know what that means in practice.
    Simple you get treatment upto a lifetime budget of say 150k anything over that you pay or your insurance has to pay
    That's a stupidly mental idea, sorry.
    perhaps you would care to state why? The elderly are inflating the nhs budget by living too long. Why should they not pay for it? Is that not the common left wing complaint that the elderly are robbing the young and yet you suggest a sensible compromise and its all "oh but not that"
  • Scott_xP said:

    EXCL: Veteran Tory Charles Walker set to be handed spot on committee investigating Boris Johnson over claims he misled MPs over Partygate - story by ⁦@breeallegretti⁩ https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/sep/23/tory-mp-charles-walker-expected-to-join-parliament-privileges-committee?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

    What is Walker's history on Johnson? Is he being added to undermine the investigation or to bolster it?
  • stodgestodge Posts: 10,992
    Just left with a final thought - as it was a fiscal statement rather than a Budget, the response came from the Shadow Chancellor rather than the Leader of the Opposition.

    Responding to the Budget is one of the toughest jobs for any Opposition leader.

    It's hard to think how anything Kwarteng says in November will match today's "excitement" so Starmer may have an easier time with the response as the Government has already made its intentions and directions clear.
  • Scott_xP said:

    England's Nations League campaign so far:

    ▪️ Zero wins in five matches
    ▪️ One goal in five matches
    ▪️ Relegation confirmed

    Worrying signs from Gareth Southgate's Three Lions.

    😬 https://twitter.com/WilliamHill/status/1573412228002463751/photo/1

    I'm resigned to England losing to the Welsh in the world cup.

    Lay England for the coupe du monde.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 35,597

    Italy 1 England 0

    England's answer - bring on Shaw

    He is playing that disgusting pus-filled buboe Harry Maguire. Defeat is nailed on. And he's brought on Luke Shaw. SHAW? Fuxsake why?

    And thats me as a United fan...
    Maguire was good at Leicester, and his first year at United. He has been coached into incompetence.

    Mind you, Rodgers has managed to do the same to an entire back 4 and to Wilf Ndidi, who used to be amongst the best DM in the division.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,800

    Scott_xP said:

    England's Nations League campaign so far:

    ▪️ Zero wins in five matches
    ▪️ One goal in five matches
    ▪️ Relegation confirmed

    Worrying signs from Gareth Southgate's Three Lions.

    😬 https://twitter.com/WilliamHill/status/1573412228002463751/photo/1

    I'm resigned to England losing to the Welsh in the world cup.

    Lay England for the coupe du monde.
    Southgate is wasting the best England team in decades

    He is a massively over-promoted moron
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 28,192
    England haven’t scored in open play or won a game since Channel 4 started televising the games… #curse
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 36,203

    Our analysts have written their analysis on the special fiscal operation, their précis.

    Great for anybody earning above £150k and terrible for the country.

    We're likely to have something to rival Black Wednesday soon.

    Yes, that about sums up ours too. A tiny proportion of the nation will benefit, everyone else will face higher inflation due to sterling tanking and higher real interest rates because the benchmark rates (5y and 10y gilts) have gone up significantly.

    The BoE will need a 100 point raise in rates in the coming week just to support sterling and stave off short term import inflation.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,800
    Scott_xP said:

    England haven’t scored in open play or won a game since Channel 4 started televising the games… #curse

    BUT THEY TAKE THE KNEE
  • Leon said:

    Scott_xP said:

    England's Nations League campaign so far:

    ▪️ Zero wins in five matches
    ▪️ One goal in five matches
    ▪️ Relegation confirmed

    Worrying signs from Gareth Southgate's Three Lions.

    😬 https://twitter.com/WilliamHill/status/1573412228002463751/photo/1

    I'm resigned to England losing to the Welsh in the world cup.

    Lay England for the coupe du monde.
    Southgate is wasting the best England team in decades

    He is a massively over-promoted moron
    I've been saying for years that Southgate was overrated, so much defensive football.

    I know we're spoiled by the sexy football of Klopp and Guardiola but Southgate's England is like watching paint dry.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 28,192
    Leon said:

    Scott_xP said:

    England haven’t scored in open play or won a game since Channel 4 started televising the games… #curse

    BUT THEY TAKE THE KNEE
    So do the women, who are unbeatable
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 32,156
    edited September 23

    I’ve sat with the “fiscal event” for a while.

    It’s still totally crackers, in fact it feels even more crackers than it did this morning.

    Remember; this was supposed to be Truss’s big launch - delayed by royal mortality - the moment the country is introduced to her.

    And the GE they won on this platform must have been a real borefest because I can't recall any of it.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 105,062
    Scott_xP said:

    England's Nations League campaign so far:

    ▪️ Zero wins in five matches
    ▪️ One goal in five matches
    ▪️ Relegation confirmed

    Worrying signs from Gareth Southgate's Three Lions.

    😬 https://twitter.com/WilliamHill/status/1573412228002463751/photo/1

    Tonight's result penance from above for football fans in England not showing enough respect and mourning after the recent passing of Her Majesty.

    Rangers fans put them to shame!

  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 35,597

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Phil said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    FPT
    Question and I am genuinely happy to hear an answer from left or right as it puzzles me.

    Many of our public services whether national or local throughout the years have been giving funding increases above inflation and then announced they have to cut services. Either the inflation figure is a fiction or the money is somehow being siphoned off. The nhs is a good example of this...plenty of years of above inflation increases in budget while service is cut.

    Medical inflation is higher than CPI. Not just because of costly new treatments, but also the obvious one of an ageing boomer population, so more demand.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/05/health/05iht-obese.1.9748884.html

    Needed to fit a source in somewhere for what I had been saying so not specifically aimed at you
    “The study, paid for by the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports, did not take into account other potential costs of obesity and smoking, such as lost economic productivity or social costs.”

    Yeah. What do you think happens to all those uncontrolled diabetes patients who end up losing a limb?
    Losing a limb through diabetes isnt common as most get caught before that point, certainly not to the point of distorting the figures.
    Diabetes foot disease is the cause of more diabetic inpatient days than anything else.
    Didn't claim it wasnt what I disputed is that a lot of diabetics ended up losing a limb.

    If 50% of diabetics lose a limb thats a big deal....if its 0.05% then hardly disrupting the figures.

    You are a doctor...what percentage of diabetics lose a limb?
    You started off by asking why the NHS is cutting services whilst the budget is increasing.

    You got the correct answer in the first response. People are living longer with more things wrong with them. So demand is up and the budget isn't increasing fast enough to match that increase.

    We also have a raft of new expensive technologies and people expect more nowadays.
    Which is why we need life time budgets and you can insure against exceeding it
    Sorry I don't really know what that means in practice.
    It means the people most likely to need insurance cannot afford it, so we are supposed to let them die on the hospital doorstep.

    Welcome to the world of libertarianism.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,800
    edited September 23

    Leon said:

    Scott_xP said:

    England's Nations League campaign so far:

    ▪️ Zero wins in five matches
    ▪️ One goal in five matches
    ▪️ Relegation confirmed

    Worrying signs from Gareth Southgate's Three Lions.

    😬 https://twitter.com/WilliamHill/status/1573412228002463751/photo/1

    I'm resigned to England losing to the Welsh in the world cup.

    Lay England for the coupe du monde.
    Southgate is wasting the best England team in decades

    He is a massively over-promoted moron
    I've been saying for years that Southgate was overrated, so much defensive football.

    I know we're spoiled by the sexy football of Klopp and Guardiola but Southgate's England is like watching paint dry.
    He should have won the euros with all that talent, he somehow lost to a deeply average Italian side, at home

    He's a mediocre defensive loser who lucked out with a ton of good players. He missed his own fucking penalty. Get rid
  • MaxPB said:

    Our analysts have written their analysis on the special fiscal operation, their précis.

    Great for anybody earning above £150k and terrible for the country.

    We're likely to have something to rival Black Wednesday soon.

    Yes, that about sums up ours too. A tiny proportion of the nation will benefit, everyone else will face higher inflation due to sterling tanking and higher real interest rates because the benchmark rates (5y and 10y gilts) have gone up significantly.

    The BoE will need a 100 point raise in rates in the coming week just to support sterling and stave off short term import inflation.
    It's tragic, you and I are both going to benefit from today's changes, and what are we likely to do with it?

    Invest it, save it for our kids and our retirement which isn't going to boost the economy.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 16,605
    There must be a decent chance of a crash in the housing market.

    Plenty of folk on here have actually called for that; but in real life they tend to be sub-optimal for the real economy and indeed for whoever is unfortunate enough to be in power.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 28,192
    Maybe Gareth and Kwasi should do a job swap...
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 42,970

    MaxPB said:

    Our analysts have written their analysis on the special fiscal operation, their précis.

    Great for anybody earning above £150k and terrible for the country.

    We're likely to have something to rival Black Wednesday soon.

    Yes, that about sums up ours too. A tiny proportion of the nation will benefit, everyone else will face higher inflation due to sterling tanking and higher real interest rates because the benchmark rates (5y and 10y gilts) have gone up significantly.

    The BoE will need a 100 point raise in rates in the coming week just to support sterling and stave off short term import inflation.
    It's tragic, you and I are both going to benefit from today's changes, and what are we likely to do with it?

    Invest it, save it for our kids and our retirement which isn't going to boost the economy.
    Do you think income tax was too low under Blair?
  • Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Phil said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    FPT
    Question and I am genuinely happy to hear an answer from left or right as it puzzles me.

    Many of our public services whether national or local throughout the years have been giving funding increases above inflation and then announced they have to cut services. Either the inflation figure is a fiction or the money is somehow being siphoned off. The nhs is a good example of this...plenty of years of above inflation increases in budget while service is cut.

    Medical inflation is higher than CPI. Not just because of costly new treatments, but also the obvious one of an ageing boomer population, so more demand.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/05/health/05iht-obese.1.9748884.html

    Needed to fit a source in somewhere for what I had been saying so not specifically aimed at you
    “The study, paid for by the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports, did not take into account other potential costs of obesity and smoking, such as lost economic productivity or social costs.”

    Yeah. What do you think happens to all those uncontrolled diabetes patients who end up losing a limb?
    Losing a limb through diabetes isnt common as most get caught before that point, certainly not to the point of distorting the figures.
    Diabetes foot disease is the cause of more diabetic inpatient days than anything else.
    Didn't claim it wasnt what I disputed is that a lot of diabetics ended up losing a limb.

    If 50% of diabetics lose a limb thats a big deal....if its 0.05% then hardly disrupting the figures.

    You are a doctor...what percentage of diabetics lose a limb?
    You started off by asking why the NHS is cutting services whilst the budget is increasing.

    You got the correct answer in the first response. People are living longer with more things wrong with them. So demand is up and the budget isn't increasing fast enough to match that increase.

    We also have a raft of new expensive technologies and people expect more nowadays.
    Which is why we need life time budgets and you can insure against exceeding it
    Sorry I don't really know what that means in practice.
    Simple you get treatment upto a lifetime budget of say 150k anything over that you pay or your insurance has to pay
    That's a stupidly mental idea, sorry.
    perhaps you would care to state why? The elderly are inflating the nhs budget by living too long. Why should they not pay for it? Is that not the common left wing complaint that the elderly are robbing the young and yet you suggest a sensible compromise and its all "oh but not that"
    Ok. Well for a starters.. how would you start your policy? Who would start paying for the 'insurance' - 50 year olds, 60 year olds, 70 year olds, 80 year olds etc.? Does someone go back in time and tot up all they have used so far? What happens if they can't afford the insurance?

  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 5,419
    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Phil said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    FPT
    Question and I am genuinely happy to hear an answer from left or right as it puzzles me.

    Many of our public services whether national or local throughout the years have been giving funding increases above inflation and then announced they have to cut services. Either the inflation figure is a fiction or the money is somehow being siphoned off. The nhs is a good example of this...plenty of years of above inflation increases in budget while service is cut.

    Medical inflation is higher than CPI. Not just because of costly new treatments, but also the obvious one of an ageing boomer population, so more demand.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/05/health/05iht-obese.1.9748884.html

    Needed to fit a source in somewhere for what I had been saying so not specifically aimed at you
    “The study, paid for by the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports, did not take into account other potential costs of obesity and smoking, such as lost economic productivity or social costs.”

    Yeah. What do you think happens to all those uncontrolled diabetes patients who end up losing a limb?
    Losing a limb through diabetes isnt common as most get caught before that point, certainly not to the point of distorting the figures.
    Diabetes foot disease is the cause of more diabetic inpatient days than anything else.
    Didn't claim it wasnt what I disputed is that a lot of diabetics ended up losing a limb.

    If 50% of diabetics lose a limb thats a big deal....if its 0.05% then hardly disrupting the figures.

    You are a doctor...what percentage of diabetics lose a limb?
    You started off by asking why the NHS is cutting services whilst the budget is increasing.

    You got the correct answer in the first response. People are living longer with more things wrong with them. So demand is up and the budget isn't increasing fast enough to match that increase.

    We also have a raft of new expensive technologies and people expect more nowadays.
    Which is why we need life time budgets and you can insure against exceeding it
    Sorry I don't really know what that means in practice.
    It means the people most likely to need insurance cannot afford it, so we are supposed to let them die on the hospital doorstep.

    Welcome to the world of libertarianism.
    It encourages them to live a healthy life for as long as possible so by the time they are old they havent used up too much of their cap. Besides nothing to say we cant legislate to say they can take out the insurance any age up to 30 and then the premiums are fixed except for a cpi indexed amount. By 30 insurance companies would have a good enough fix on their lifestyle to fit a premium
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 16,605

    MaxPB said:

    Our analysts have written their analysis on the special fiscal operation, their précis.

    Great for anybody earning above £150k and terrible for the country.

    We're likely to have something to rival Black Wednesday soon.

    Yes, that about sums up ours too. A tiny proportion of the nation will benefit, everyone else will face higher inflation due to sterling tanking and higher real interest rates because the benchmark rates (5y and 10y gilts) have gone up significantly.

    The BoE will need a 100 point raise in rates in the coming week just to support sterling and stave off short term import inflation.
    It's tragic, you and I are both going to benefit from today's changes, and what are we likely to do with it?

    Invest it, save it for our kids and our retirement which isn't going to boost the economy.
    Do you think income tax was too low under Blair?
    Britain wasn’t relying on the kindness of strangers back then.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,800

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Phil said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    FPT
    Question and I am genuinely happy to hear an answer from left or right as it puzzles me.

    Many of our public services whether national or local throughout the years have been giving funding increases above inflation and then announced they have to cut services. Either the inflation figure is a fiction or the money is somehow being siphoned off. The nhs is a good example of this...plenty of years of above inflation increases in budget while service is cut.

    Medical inflation is higher than CPI. Not just because of costly new treatments, but also the obvious one of an ageing boomer population, so more demand.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/05/health/05iht-obese.1.9748884.html

    Needed to fit a source in somewhere for what I had been saying so not specifically aimed at you
    “The study, paid for by the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports, did not take into account other potential costs of obesity and smoking, such as lost economic productivity or social costs.”

    Yeah. What do you think happens to all those uncontrolled diabetes patients who end up losing a limb?
    Losing a limb through diabetes isnt common as most get caught before that point, certainly not to the point of distorting the figures.
    Diabetes foot disease is the cause of more diabetic inpatient days than anything else.
    Didn't claim it wasnt what I disputed is that a lot of diabetics ended up losing a limb.

    If 50% of diabetics lose a limb thats a big deal....if its 0.05% then hardly disrupting the figures.

    You are a doctor...what percentage of diabetics lose a limb?
    You started off by asking why the NHS is cutting services whilst the budget is increasing.

    You got the correct answer in the first response. People are living longer with more things wrong with them. So demand is up and the budget isn't increasing fast enough to match that increase.

    We also have a raft of new expensive technologies and people expect more nowadays.
    Which is why we need life time budgets and you can insure against exceeding it
    Sorry I don't really know what that means in practice.
    Simple you get treatment upto a lifetime budget of say 150k anything over that you pay or your insurance has to pay
    That's a stupidly mental idea, sorry.
    perhaps you would care to state why? The elderly are inflating the nhs budget by living too long. Why should they not pay for it? Is that not the common left wing complaint that the elderly are robbing the young and yet you suggest a sensible compromise and its all "oh but not that"
    Ok. Well for a starters.. how would you start your policy? Who would start paying for the 'insurance' - 50 year olds, 60 year olds, 70 year olds, 80 year olds etc.? Does someone go back in time and tot up all they have used so far? What happens if they can't afford the insurance?

    How about: No health care for the over 80s?

    You've had your life, you've had your chances, here's a ton of excellent opiates, bye

    I'm quite serious. That would be my health policy

    I'd start it at 60 if you are clinically obese. Time to wise up, you fat slobs
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 2,958
    Is there any genuinely good news out there? Everything seems grim as right now.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 5,419

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Phil said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    FPT
    Question and I am genuinely happy to hear an answer from left or right as it puzzles me.

    Many of our public services whether national or local throughout the years have been giving funding increases above inflation and then announced they have to cut services. Either the inflation figure is a fiction or the money is somehow being siphoned off. The nhs is a good example of this...plenty of years of above inflation increases in budget while service is cut.

    Medical inflation is higher than CPI. Not just because of costly new treatments, but also the obvious one of an ageing boomer population, so more demand.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/05/health/05iht-obese.1.9748884.html

    Needed to fit a source in somewhere for what I had been saying so not specifically aimed at you
    “The study, paid for by the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports, did not take into account other potential costs of obesity and smoking, such as lost economic productivity or social costs.”

    Yeah. What do you think happens to all those uncontrolled diabetes patients who end up losing a limb?
    Losing a limb through diabetes isnt common as most get caught before that point, certainly not to the point of distorting the figures.
    Diabetes foot disease is the cause of more diabetic inpatient days than anything else.
    Didn't claim it wasnt what I disputed is that a lot of diabetics ended up losing a limb.

    If 50% of diabetics lose a limb thats a big deal....if its 0.05% then hardly disrupting the figures.

    You are a doctor...what percentage of diabetics lose a limb?
    You started off by asking why the NHS is cutting services whilst the budget is increasing.

    You got the correct answer in the first response. People are living longer with more things wrong with them. So demand is up and the budget isn't increasing fast enough to match that increase.

    We also have a raft of new expensive technologies and people expect more nowadays.
    Which is why we need life time budgets and you can insure against exceeding it
    Sorry I don't really know what that means in practice.
    Simple you get treatment upto a lifetime budget of say 150k anything over that you pay or your insurance has to pay
    That's a stupidly mental idea, sorry.
    perhaps you would care to state why? The elderly are inflating the nhs budget by living too long. Why should they not pay for it? Is that not the common left wing complaint that the elderly are robbing the young and yet you suggest a sensible compromise and its all "oh but not that"
    Ok. Well for a starters.. how would you start your policy? Who would start paying for the 'insurance' - 50 year olds, 60 year olds, 70 year olds, 80 year olds etc.? Does someone go back in time and tot up all they have used so far? What happens if they can't afford the insurance?

    see my response to foxy
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 35,597
    Scott_xP said:

    Maybe Gareth and Kwasi should do a job swap...

    Kwasi would field 11 strikers and no goalie.

    It might be entertaining in a car crash sort of way. As long as you are not in the car...oh dear!
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 16,605

    MaxPB said:

    Our analysts have written their analysis on the special fiscal operation, their précis.

    Great for anybody earning above £150k and terrible for the country.

    We're likely to have something to rival Black Wednesday soon.

    Yes, that about sums up ours too. A tiny proportion of the nation will benefit, everyone else will face higher inflation due to sterling tanking and higher real interest rates because the benchmark rates (5y and 10y gilts) have gone up significantly.

    The BoE will need a 100 point raise in rates in the coming week just to support sterling and stave off short term import inflation.
    It's tragic, you and I are both going to benefit from today's changes, and what are we likely to do with it?

    Invest it, save it for our kids and our retirement which isn't going to boost the economy.
    Investing it does help the economy.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 3,750
    IanB2 said:

    $1.08 and a bit. Oh dear. Lowest £ for decades - at least 30 years, maybe more?

    Foreign exchange markets are the classic case for overshooting and subsequent correction - see Dornbusch's 1976 Nobel Prize winning paper:

    http://www.mit.edu/~14.54/handouts/dornbusch76.pdf

    (warning - it's pretty technical).
  • MaxPB said:

    Our analysts have written their analysis on the special fiscal operation, their précis.

    Great for anybody earning above £150k and terrible for the country.

    We're likely to have something to rival Black Wednesday soon.

    Yes, that about sums up ours too. A tiny proportion of the nation will benefit, everyone else will face higher inflation due to sterling tanking and higher real interest rates because the benchmark rates (5y and 10y gilts) have gone up significantly.

    The BoE will need a 100 point raise in rates in the coming week just to support sterling and stave off short term import inflation.
    It's tragic, you and I are both going to benefit from today's changes, and what are we likely to do with it?

    Invest it, save it for our kids and our retirement which isn't going to boost the economy.
    Do you think income tax was too low under Blair?
    Taxes are like my girlfriend's fiancée's knickers, I always want to see them lower.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,800

    Is there any genuinely good news out there? Everything seems grim as right now.

    I've just got a really excellent offer from the Turkish sex toy industry, which could - if all went peachy peachy - net me high six figures?

    It probably won't, but the worst outcome is a couple of years faffing about in deeply interesting bits of Turkey, for free

    So there's that. Does it help?
  • boulayboulay Posts: 1,819
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Scott_xP said:

    England's Nations League campaign so far:

    ▪️ Zero wins in five matches
    ▪️ One goal in five matches
    ▪️ Relegation confirmed

    Worrying signs from Gareth Southgate's Three Lions.

    😬 https://twitter.com/WilliamHill/status/1573412228002463751/photo/1

    I'm resigned to England losing to the Welsh in the world cup.

    Lay England for the coupe du monde.
    Southgate is wasting the best England team in decades

    He is a massively over-promoted moron
    I've been saying for years that Southgate was overrated, so much defensive football.

    I know we're spoiled by the sexy football of Klopp and Guardiola but Southgate's England is like watching paint dry.
    He should have won the euros with all that talent, he somehow lost to a deeply average Italian side, at home

    He's a mediocre defensive loser who lucked out with a ton of good players. He missed his own fucking penalty. Get
    rid
    Like the Chancellor, he’s Kwazi ineffective.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 105,062
    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Phil said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    FPT
    Question and I am genuinely happy to hear an answer from left or right as it puzzles me.

    Many of our public services whether national or local throughout the years have been giving funding increases above inflation and then announced they have to cut services. Either the inflation figure is a fiction or the money is somehow being siphoned off. The nhs is a good example of this...plenty of years of above inflation increases in budget while service is cut.

    Medical inflation is higher than CPI. Not just because of costly new treatments, but also the obvious one of an ageing boomer population, so more demand.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/05/health/05iht-obese.1.9748884.html

    Needed to fit a source in somewhere for what I had been saying so not specifically aimed at you
    “The study, paid for by the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports, did not take into account other potential costs of obesity and smoking, such as lost economic productivity or social costs.”

    Yeah. What do you think happens to all those uncontrolled diabetes patients who end up losing a limb?
    Losing a limb through diabetes isnt common as most get caught before that point, certainly not to the point of distorting the figures.
    Diabetes foot disease is the cause of more diabetic inpatient days than anything else.
    Didn't claim it wasnt what I disputed is that a lot of diabetics ended up losing a limb.

    If 50% of diabetics lose a limb thats a big deal....if its 0.05% then hardly disrupting the figures.

    You are a doctor...what percentage of diabetics lose a limb?
    You started off by asking why the NHS is cutting services whilst the budget is increasing.

    You got the correct answer in the first response. People are living longer with more things wrong with them. So demand is up and the budget isn't increasing fast enough to match that increase.

    We also have a raft of new expensive technologies and people expect more nowadays.
    Which is why we need life time budgets and you can insure against exceeding it
    Sorry I don't really know what that means in practice.
    It means the people most likely to need insurance cannot afford it, so we are supposed to let them die on the hospital doorstep.

    Welcome to the world of libertarianism.
    Far better to encourage the rich to take out private insurance so the NHS focuses on those who need it most
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 20,026
    Does anyone know what the voting hours will be in Italy?
  • kjhkjh Posts: 7,908
    Leon said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Phil said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    FPT
    Question and I am genuinely happy to hear an answer from left or right as it puzzles me.

    Many of our public services whether national or local throughout the years have been giving funding increases above inflation and then announced they have to cut services. Either the inflation figure is a fiction or the money is somehow being siphoned off. The nhs is a good example of this...plenty of years of above inflation increases in budget while service is cut.

    Medical inflation is higher than CPI. Not just because of costly new treatments, but also the obvious one of an ageing boomer population, so more demand.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/05/health/05iht-obese.1.9748884.html

    Needed to fit a source in somewhere for what I had been saying so not specifically aimed at you
    “The study, paid for by the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports, did not take into account other potential costs of obesity and smoking, such as lost economic productivity or social costs.”

    Yeah. What do you think happens to all those uncontrolled diabetes patients who end up losing a limb?
    Losing a limb through diabetes isnt common as most get caught before that point, certainly not to the point of distorting the figures.
    Diabetes foot disease is the cause of more diabetic inpatient days than anything else.
    Didn't claim it wasnt what I disputed is that a lot of diabetics ended up losing a limb.

    If 50% of diabetics lose a limb thats a big deal....if its 0.05% then hardly disrupting the figures.

    You are a doctor...what percentage of diabetics lose a limb?
    You started off by asking why the NHS is cutting services whilst the budget is increasing.

    You got the correct answer in the first response. People are living longer with more things wrong with them. So demand is up and the budget isn't increasing fast enough to match that increase.

    We also have a raft of new expensive technologies and people expect more nowadays.
    Which is why we need life time budgets and you can insure against exceeding it
    Sorry I don't really know what that means in practice.
    Simple you get treatment upto a lifetime budget of say 150k anything over that you pay or your insurance has to pay
    That's a stupidly mental idea, sorry.
    perhaps you would care to state why? The elderly are inflating the nhs budget by living too long. Why should they not pay for it? Is that not the common left wing complaint that the elderly are robbing the young and yet you suggest a sensible compromise and its all "oh but not that"
    Ok. Well for a starters.. how would you start your policy? Who would start paying for the 'insurance' - 50 year olds, 60 year olds, 70 year olds, 80 year olds etc.? Does someone go back in time and tot up all they have used so far? What happens if they can't afford the insurance?

    How about: No health care for the over 80s?

    You've had your life, you've had your chances, here's a ton of excellent opiates, bye

    I'm quite serious. That would be my health policy

    I'd start it at 60 if you are clinically obese. Time to wise up, you fat slobs
    Going for the OAP vote?
  • TinkyWinkyTinkyWinky Posts: 125
    edited September 23
    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Phil said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    FPT
    Question and I am genuinely happy to hear an answer from left or right as it puzzles me.

    Many of our public services whether national or local throughout the years have been giving funding increases above inflation and then announced they have to cut services. Either the inflation figure is a fiction or the money is somehow being siphoned off. The nhs is a good example of this...plenty of years of above inflation increases in budget while service is cut.

    Medical inflation is higher than CPI. Not just because of costly new treatments, but also the obvious one of an ageing boomer population, so more demand.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/05/health/05iht-obese.1.9748884.html

    Needed to fit a source in somewhere for what I had been saying so not specifically aimed at you
    “The study, paid for by the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports, did not take into account other potential costs of obesity and smoking, such as lost economic productivity or social costs.”

    Yeah. What do you think happens to all those uncontrolled diabetes patients who end up losing a limb?
    Losing a limb through diabetes isnt common as most get caught before that point, certainly not to the point of distorting the figures.
    Diabetes foot disease is the cause of more diabetic inpatient days than anything else.
    Didn't claim it wasnt what I disputed is that a lot of diabetics ended up losing a limb.

    If 50% of diabetics lose a limb thats a big deal....if its 0.05% then hardly disrupting the figures.

    You are a doctor...what percentage of diabetics lose a limb?
    You started off by asking why the NHS is cutting services whilst the budget is increasing.

    You got the correct answer in the first response. People are living longer with more things wrong with them. So demand is up and the budget isn't increasing fast enough to match that increase.

    We also have a raft of new expensive technologies and people expect more nowadays.
    Which is why we need life time budgets and you can insure against exceeding it
    Sorry I don't really know what that means in practice.
    It means the people most likely to need insurance cannot afford it, so we are supposed to let them die on the hospital doorstep.

    Welcome to the world of libertarianism.
    It encourages them to live a healthy life for as long as possible so by the time they are old they havent used up too much of their cap. Besides nothing to say we cant legislate to say they can take out the insurance any age up to 30 and then the premiums are fixed except for a cpi indexed amount. By 30 insurance companies would have a good enough fix on their lifestyle to fit a premium
    So not only do the young now need to pay for the pensions of the old (and their own) they also need to pay for the healthcare of the old but also fund their own. Seems a bit unfair don't it?

    Is it a step-change then, 30-years old then you have to do it but if you were lucky enough to be 31, you're safe?
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 2,174
    HYUFD said:

    Scott_xP said:

    England's Nations League campaign so far:

    ▪️ Zero wins in five matches
    ▪️ One goal in five matches
    ▪️ Relegation confirmed

    Worrying signs from Gareth Southgate's Three Lions.

    😬 https://twitter.com/WilliamHill/status/1573412228002463751/photo/1

    Tonight's result penance from above for football fans in England not showing enough respect and mourning after the recent passing of Her Majesty.

    Rangers fans put them to shame!

    Rangers fans support England as well!
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,800
    Foxy said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Maybe Gareth and Kwasi should do a job swap...

    Kwasi would field 11 strikers and no goalie.

    It might be entertaining in a car crash sort of way. As long as you are not in the car...oh dear!
    Ben Stokes and Bazball show that this works
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 36,203

    MaxPB said:

    Our analysts have written their analysis on the special fiscal operation, their précis.

    Great for anybody earning above £150k and terrible for the country.

    We're likely to have something to rival Black Wednesday soon.

    Yes, that about sums up ours too. A tiny proportion of the nation will benefit, everyone else will face higher inflation due to sterling tanking and higher real interest rates because the benchmark rates (5y and 10y gilts) have gone up significantly.

    The BoE will need a 100 point raise in rates in the coming week just to support sterling and stave off short term import inflation.
    It's tragic, you and I are both going to benefit from today's changes, and what are we likely to do with it?

    Invest it, save it for our kids and our retirement which isn't going to boost the economy.
    A good compromise would have been getting rid of cliff edges at £100k and the 45p rate at £150k and replacing both with a 43p rate at £100k. Removes the idiotic disincentives to earn more than £99k for a pretty large number of people and drags another fairly big group up from 40p to 43p but with the added benefit of not having allowance withdrawal. I think that would be revenue neutral too. The current cut is just ridiculous, I'll save well over £15k in tax over the next year, there's no way that I'll spend that much extra money in the UK. I think the Italian economy may benefit a bit.
  • Carnyx said:

    Leon said:

    Ok, a mild distraction from woes various, what's the copyright situation with using pieces from literature in a commercial setting? I'd like to use Vimes' Boot Theory in something I'm involved in. Nothing as crude as Pratchett endorses X but more an appreciation of that simple piece of economic clarity. I believe @SouthamObserver has copyright as his business?

    "Fair usage"or "fair dealing" is the rule

    https://www.bl.uk/business-and-ip-centre/articles/fair-dealing-copyright-explained

    It really depends on your purposes. If you are out to make money you are allowed a few lines, is all

    Thanks. Would the full passage qualify as a few lines?

    'The reason that the rich were so rich, Vimes reasoned, was because they managed to spend less money. Take boots, for example. He earned thirty-eight dollars a month plus allowances. A really good pair of leather boots cost fifty dollars. But an affordable pair of boots, which were sort of OK for a season or two and then leaked like hell when the cardboard gave out, cost about ten dollars. Those were the kind of boots Vimes always bought, and wore until the soles were so thin that he could tell where he was in Ankh-Morpork on a foggy night by the feel of the cobbles. But the thing was that good boots lasted for years and years. A man who could afford fifty dollars had a pair of boots that'd still be keeping his feet dry in ten years' time, while a poor man who could only afford cheap boots would have spent a hundred dollars on boots in the same time and would still have wet feet. This was the Captain Samuel Vimes "Boots" theory of socioeconomic unfairness.'
    Its very clever but a medieval fantasy world doesn't really apply to modern Britain.

    A really good pair of leather boots does not cost over £2k nor a cheap one about £400.

    So to apply it to our present situation what would be the equivalents ?

    Something about heating costs in old terraced housing compared with modern detached houses ?

    Or how food is cheaper at supermarkets compared to corner shops in deprived areas ?
    Alreadt done, as RT reminds us just now: the Vimes Index.

    https://www.theguardian.com/books/2022/jan/26/terry-pratchett-jack-monroe-vimes-boots-poverty-index
    She seems to have used a rather bollox example:

    She laid out how the prices of “value” product ranges in supermarkets had soared over the last decade – rice in her local supermarket had increased in price from 45p for a kilogram bag last year, to £1 for 500g, a 344% increase – and how the number of value products has shrunk.

    Cheapest rice at Asda is 48p for a kg.

    https://groceries.asda.com/search/rice

    The prices of many foods have varied considerably up and down because of the covid disruption to supply chains.

    The pasta shortage of spring 2020 was followed by a pasta glut at the end of the year with fancy brands being sold at 20p a pack.

    Which was great for those of us with no money problems and so can afford to stock up for the long term when prices are low.

    The shopping inflexibility which money shortages cause the deprived is more real world than the price/quality ratio of fantasy boots.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 17,682
    stodge said:

    Just left with a final thought - as it was a fiscal statement rather than a Budget, the response came from the Shadow Chancellor rather than the Leader of the Opposition.

    Responding to the Budget is one of the toughest jobs for any Opposition leader.

    It's hard to think how anything Kwarteng says in November will match today's "excitement" so Starmer may have an easier time with the response as the Government has already made its intentions and directions clear.

    I'm assuming that he is waiting for the real budget to announce the 20% cut in spending across all government departments. Except the Treasury.
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 2,958
    Leon said:

    Is there any genuinely good news out there? Everything seems grim as right now.

    I've just got a really excellent offer from the Turkish sex toy industry, which could - if all went peachy peachy - net me high six figures?

    It probably won't, but the worst outcome is a couple of years faffing about in deeply interesting bits of Turkey, for free

    So there's that. Does it help?
    It's not entirely what I had in mind, but what the hey, I'll take it. Good for you. Interesting bits of Turkey sounds good!
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 5,419
    Ok laying myself on the line here because people probably think I am callous.

    My father is 82. He is in reasonable physical health. However his mind is almost gone. Doctors insist on treating him everytime he gets ill but he has no real life anymore. He doesnt know he is, who we are, what day of the week it is. Why are we spending money keeping him going he is a walking zombie to be frank. I love my dad to bits but thats just a physical shell the person has long since departed. The only reason he isn't in a home is because the people round him spend time trying to keep him safe and out of one. Do I want him gone...hell no but I find less and less reasons to go out of the way to keep him from passing
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 105,062

    HYUFD said:

    Scott_xP said:

    England's Nations League campaign so far:

    ▪️ Zero wins in five matches
    ▪️ One goal in five matches
    ▪️ Relegation confirmed

    Worrying signs from Gareth Southgate's Three Lions.

    😬 https://twitter.com/WilliamHill/status/1573412228002463751/photo/1

    Tonight's result penance from above for football fans in England not showing enough respect and mourning after the recent passing of Her Majesty.

    Rangers fans put them to shame!

    Rangers fans support England as well!
    No, they support Scotland, just are loyal to our monarch and the UK too
  • Leon said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Phil said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    FPT
    Question and I am genuinely happy to hear an answer from left or right as it puzzles me.

    Many of our public services whether national or local throughout the years have been giving funding increases above inflation and then announced they have to cut services. Either the inflation figure is a fiction or the money is somehow being siphoned off. The nhs is a good example of this...plenty of years of above inflation increases in budget while service is cut.

    Medical inflation is higher than CPI. Not just because of costly new treatments, but also the obvious one of an ageing boomer population, so more demand.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/05/health/05iht-obese.1.9748884.html

    Needed to fit a source in somewhere for what I had been saying so not specifically aimed at you
    “The study, paid for by the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports, did not take into account other potential costs of obesity and smoking, such as lost economic productivity or social costs.”

    Yeah. What do you think happens to all those uncontrolled diabetes patients who end up losing a limb?
    Losing a limb through diabetes isnt common as most get caught before that point, certainly not to the point of distorting the figures.
    Diabetes foot disease is the cause of more diabetic inpatient days than anything else.
    Didn't claim it wasnt what I disputed is that a lot of diabetics ended up losing a limb.

    If 50% of diabetics lose a limb thats a big deal....if its 0.05% then hardly disrupting the figures.

    You are a doctor...what percentage of diabetics lose a limb?
    You started off by asking why the NHS is cutting services whilst the budget is increasing.

    You got the correct answer in the first response. People are living longer with more things wrong with them. So demand is up and the budget isn't increasing fast enough to match that increase.

    We also have a raft of new expensive technologies and people expect more nowadays.
    Which is why we need life time budgets and you can insure against exceeding it
    Sorry I don't really know what that means in practice.
    Simple you get treatment upto a lifetime budget of say 150k anything over that you pay or your insurance has to pay
    That's a stupidly mental idea, sorry.
    perhaps you would care to state why? The elderly are inflating the nhs budget by living too long. Why should they not pay for it? Is that not the common left wing complaint that the elderly are robbing the young and yet you suggest a sensible compromise and its all "oh but not that"
    Ok. Well for a starters.. how would you start your policy? Who would start paying for the 'insurance' - 50 year olds, 60 year olds, 70 year olds, 80 year olds etc.? Does someone go back in time and tot up all they have used so far? What happens if they can't afford the insurance?

    How about: No health care for the over 80s?

    You've had your life, you've had your chances, here's a ton of excellent opiates, bye

    I'm quite serious. That would be my health policy

    I'd start it at 60 if you are clinically obese. Time to wise up, you fat slobs
    There is a certain plausibility / ethical basis to that argument. It's called the fair innings argument. Google it. Alan Williams.

    Certainly makes more sense than the mad £150K + insurance idea.

    But I just think it might be difficult saying fuck off in practice to all the oldies. But maybe the NHS could employ you to do it with a loud speaker, touring the hospital wards up and down the country?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 35,597
    HYUFD said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Phil said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    FPT
    Question and I am genuinely happy to hear an answer from left or right as it puzzles me.

    Many of our public services whether national or local throughout the years have been giving funding increases above inflation and then announced they have to cut services. Either the inflation figure is a fiction or the money is somehow being siphoned off. The nhs is a good example of this...plenty of years of above inflation increases in budget while service is cut.

    Medical inflation is higher than CPI. Not just because of costly new treatments, but also the obvious one of an ageing boomer population, so more demand.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/05/health/05iht-obese.1.9748884.html

    Needed to fit a source in somewhere for what I had been saying so not specifically aimed at you
    “The study, paid for by the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports, did not take into account other potential costs of obesity and smoking, such as lost economic productivity or social costs.”

    Yeah. What do you think happens to all those uncontrolled diabetes patients who end up losing a limb?
    Losing a limb through diabetes isnt common as most get caught before that point, certainly not to the point of distorting the figures.
    Diabetes foot disease is the cause of more diabetic inpatient days than anything else.
    Didn't claim it wasnt what I disputed is that a lot of diabetics ended up losing a limb.

    If 50% of diabetics lose a limb thats a big deal....if its 0.05% then hardly disrupting the figures.

    You are a doctor...what percentage of diabetics lose a limb?
    You started off by asking why the NHS is cutting services whilst the budget is increasing.

    You got the correct answer in the first response. People are living longer with more things wrong with them. So demand is up and the budget isn't increasing fast enough to match that increase.

    We also have a raft of new expensive technologies and people expect more nowadays.
    Which is why we need life time budgets and you can insure against exceeding it
    Sorry I don't really know what that means in practice.
    It means the people most likely to need insurance cannot afford it, so we are supposed to let them die on the hospital doorstep.

    Welcome to the world of libertarianism.
    Far better to encourage the rich to take out private insurance so the NHS focuses on those who need it most
    Private insurance won't cover maternity, psychiatry, or even long term conditions.

    Better to save the premiums into a savings account that you can spend as you choose and remain in control of the money. As
    I proposed in my first PB header, which I think has aged well.

    https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2018/07/01/three-score-and-ten-has-the-nhs-reached-the-end-of-its-natural-life/

  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 36,203

    MaxPB said:

    Our analysts have written their analysis on the special fiscal operation, their précis.

    Great for anybody earning above £150k and terrible for the country.

    We're likely to have something to rival Black Wednesday soon.

    Yes, that about sums up ours too. A tiny proportion of the nation will benefit, everyone else will face higher inflation due to sterling tanking and higher real interest rates because the benchmark rates (5y and 10y gilts) have gone up significantly.

    The BoE will need a 100 point raise in rates in the coming week just to support sterling and stave off short term import inflation.
    It's tragic, you and I are both going to benefit from today's changes, and what are we likely to do with it?

    Invest it, save it for our kids and our retirement which isn't going to boost the economy.
    Investing it does help the economy.
    Not really. Unless it's in a very high risk fund it will largely just attract dividend income rather than capital growth.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 28,024
    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Phil said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    FPT
    Question and I am genuinely happy to hear an answer from left or right as it puzzles me.

    Many of our public services whether national or local throughout the years have been giving funding increases above inflation and then announced they have to cut services. Either the inflation figure is a fiction or the money is somehow being siphoned off. The nhs is a good example of this...plenty of years of above inflation increases in budget while service is cut.

    Medical inflation is higher than CPI. Not just because of costly new treatments, but also the obvious one of an ageing boomer population, so more demand.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/05/health/05iht-obese.1.9748884.html

    Needed to fit a source in somewhere for what I had been saying so not specifically aimed at you
    “The study, paid for by the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports, did not take into account other potential costs of obesity and smoking, such as lost economic productivity or social costs.”

    Yeah. What do you think happens to all those uncontrolled diabetes patients who end up losing a limb?
    Losing a limb through diabetes isnt common as most get caught before that point, certainly not to the point of distorting the figures.
    Diabetes foot disease is the cause of more diabetic inpatient days than anything else.
    Didn't claim it wasnt what I disputed is that a lot of diabetics ended up losing a limb.

    If 50% of diabetics lose a limb thats a big deal....if its 0.05% then hardly disrupting the figures.

    You are a doctor...what percentage of diabetics lose a limb?
    You started off by asking why the NHS is cutting services whilst the budget is increasing.

    You got the correct answer in the first response. People are living longer with more things wrong with them. So demand is up and the budget isn't increasing fast enough to match that increase.

    We also have a raft of new expensive technologies and people expect more nowadays.
    Which is why we need life time budgets and you can insure against exceeding it
    Sorry I don't really know what that means in practice.
    It means the people most likely to need insurance cannot afford it, so we are supposed to let them die on the hospital doorstep.

    Welcome to the world of libertarianism.
    Ort have people in accidents screaming at Good Samaritans to cancel the ambulance that the latter have just phoned for, to avoid the bills.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 105,062
    edited September 23
    Andy_JS said:

    Does anyone know what the voting hours will be in Italy?

    Polls close at 10pm UK time on Sunday, 11pm Italian time. Truss I am sure will be hoping for a Meloni win to give her an ally at the G7
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 19,576
    edited September 23

    Jonathan said:

    So if we had a reset button, which could take the country back to date in the past 30 years we would all press it. We perhaps would not agree on the date we went back to, but we would all press it.

    Things are worse today than they were yesterday. That's a serious political problem that someone needs to fix.

    I would press it and it would take me back to 2016. If I had the chance I would not have voted Brexit in 2016. My mistake, probably the biggest I've made in my life.

    The prospects for this country are looking very bleak.

    Brexit takes us through the reasonably sane governance of Cameron, to the slowly losing connection with reality May, to the flatulent Boris, the tragi-comedy of Boris Mk II, and now the pencils-in-your-nose full on madness of Truss and parody-man Rees-Mogg.

    We could really do with an election right now. Sir Keir, you are our only hope.
    You've clearly not yet had the epiphany moment where you realise that the parlous state of the economy now is due precisely to the wasted years under the so-called 'reasonably sane governance' which you look back on with such affection. Our shit energy security happened then. Money flooded out of the country and shit got sold off willy nilly then. We gold-plated every bit of European drivel then. You can't run a country down like that then, without what we're dealing with now.
    Nah. We had people who believed in reality / evidence / the modern world running us.

    Now we've got Rees-Mogg.
    That's meaningless. You must realise that. This situation developed over decades. It wouldn't matter if the Cameronites were still in power - it wouldn't even matter if we were still in the EU (we'd just have less options as to what to do about it). Sell off, rip off, don't give a shit Britain is Cameron and Osborne's Britain.
    No the Cameronites were correlated with reasonably good governance. We are a middling power with huge structural problems - a long-tail of very poorly educated individuals, terrible demographics in terms of health, a welfare system that is totally dysfunctional and creates dysfunctional people, an older class of individuals who are hateful towards the young with their voting behaviour and the way they influence policy.

    The Labour party had found a model for the UK that was roughly working, Cameron continued it. Then Brexit. The rest will be history, bad history.

    No decent thinkers, particularly from the right, can try and fix the problem because Brexit is a big part of the problem. So the lunatics come in and things like fracking, as an example, gets put up as a serious solution to one of the problems we are facing. I appreciate, that excites you, but in the nicest possible way, if you are excited about something, it's probably because we are going in the wrong direction.
    Aww, bless you. You're a poor reasoner, and this post, like remainerism itself, tries to gussy up as logic what is actually performative identification with an 'insider' identity that you aspire to. Statements like 'hateful towards the young in their voting behaviour' and designations like 'lunatic' don't come from a logical and well-ordered mind.

    Cameron's Governments, like Blair/Brown's before them, oversaw a massive cheap sell off of the UK's assets, a structural BOP deficit, an undermining of domestically-produced energy in favour of imported gas and interconnectors, making us dependent on the continent for power, an economy totally dependent on financial services for revenue. They introduced deathwatch beetle into the roof whilst the sun was shining. Take a look under the bonnet of any issue that we have now, and it starts then.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 16,605
    edited September 23
    Apparently, in terms of size, this is about twice the Lawson boom and only a bit shy of the Barber one.

    It would be interesting to see a comparison of the distributional effects, and the use of borrowing.

    Is this the biggest and most regressive “giveaway” ever, uniquely paid for on the never-never?
  • Pagan2 said:

    Ok laying myself on the line here because people probably think I am callous.

    My father is 82. He is in reasonable physical health. However his mind is almost gone. Doctors insist on treating him everytime he gets ill but he has no real life anymore. He doesnt know he is, who we are, what day of the week it is. Why are we spending money keeping him going he is a walking zombie to be frank. I love my dad to bits but thats just a physical shell the person has long since departed. The only reason he isn't in a home is because the people round him spend time trying to keep him safe and out of one. Do I want him gone...hell no but I find less and less reasons to go out of the way to keep him from passing

    Sympathies.

    It would be interesting to know how much the NHS etc spend on keeping sick oldies alive for a few more weeks of low quality life.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 42,790
    Andy_JS said:

    Does anyone know what the voting hours will be in Italy?

    No, but voting for the mid terms opened on four US states today
This discussion has been closed.