33% strategy. The Tories are running a William Hague strategy, get 33% or as close as possible and save as many as you can. It will be a red meat election. Strategically in a lost cause its sensible and with the fury over Farage deserting the good ship UK it could work with a Reform vote to target, and by 'work' I mean hold 200 seats.
Cameron won in 2015 and 2010 with 36-37%, and Blair with 36% in 2001. 33% isn't a million miles away from those figures.
Britain’s armed forces need more money not untrained teenage volunteers, former military leaders and Tory figures have said in a new blow to the Conservatives’ faltering election campaign.
Within hours of being announced, Rishi Sunak’s election pledge to bring back military service for 18-year-olds was rubbished by army chiefs and a former Conservative defence secretary.
Rishi Sunak pledged to introduce mandatory national service which would see young people spend a year in the military or do volunteer work on weekends.
The prime minister doubled down on the proposal on Sunday night, saying that national service schemes in other countries “show just how fulfilling it is for young people”.
Hence the way they behave in the workplace ... in all seriousness.
Engage pedant mode. Pedant mode engaged.
They are “office holders”, not employees or self employed. It is its own thing with its own rules.
Your substantive point still stands.
Thank you - quite right. Definitely needed correction. Or amendment.
It is an interesting point. Could we make them employees of the House of Commons to give them a taste of the actual standards the rest of us are held to? Don’t see why not? They need freedom to vote with their conscience but that’s all.
Would make things like the Boris discipline case easy, because you could just make lying to the House gross misconduct and the burden of proof would be that of an employment tribunal.
Eeeeeeexactly so. I couldn't have summarised my thoughts better myself.
PS: except to make themselves employees of the Public.
33% strategy. The Tories are running a William Hague strategy, get 33% or as close as possible and save as many as you can. It will be a red meat election. Strategically in a lost cause its sensible and with the fury over Farage deserting the good ship UK it could work with a Reform vote to target, and by 'work' I mean hold 200 seats.
Cameron won in 2015 and 2010 with 36-37%, and Blair with 36% in 2001. 33% isn't a million miles away from those figures.
I am guessing they are assuming 40% plus Lab though. I mean 33 is just my representative figure. It's a'fet voting % to a save 200 seats level' (or whatever benchmark they've set )
33% strategy. The Tories are running a William Hague strategy, get 33% or as close as possible and save as many as you can. It will be a red meat election. Strategically in a lost cause its sensible and with the fury over Farage deserting the good ship UK it could work with a Reform vote to target, and by 'work' I mean hold 200 seats.
Cameron won in 2015 and 2010 with 36-37%, and Blair with 36% in 2001. 33% isn't a million miles away from those figures.
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer, stick with nurse as economy is turning corner and standard Tory type offering.
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
I'm not sure. The policy may attract as many voters are it repels, which would leave us where we were before, which was 30% is possible.
33% strategy. The Tories are running a William Hague strategy, get 33% or as close as possible and save as many as you can. It will be a red meat election. Strategically in a lost cause its sensible and with the fury over Farage deserting the good ship UK it could work with a Reform vote to target, and by 'work' I mean hold 200 seats.
Cameron won in 2015 and 2010 with 36-37%, and Blair with 36% in 2001. 33% isn't a million miles away from those figures.
I am guessing they are assuming 40% plus Lab though. I mean 33 is just my representative figure. It's a'fet voting % to a save 200 seats level' (or whatever benchmark they've set )
I have assumed the “catastrophic success” in their war games is 35 to a Labour 39, in which they deny a majority. The hope is as you say, and the low end is as we are.
As you imply, this will shape the whole campaign, and it will continue to be ridiculed on here even if it’s (in their terms) highly successful.
The whole reason the Tories were so desperate to join the EEC and the Single Market is that they would stop absurd autarkic Bennery... Like making graduate schemes prioritise volunteers from state boondoggles. How lost they have become.
If education can't even function with VAT, like any old retailer or professional services firm, then maybe it's a highly inefficient business that can't deliver value for money, and maybe the upper-middle class tax break pushed far too much resources into an inefficient sector.
It's not a business at all. And it's not recovering much in the way of inputs to match it's outputs like retailers do
Private schools are businesses.
They are not, on average. Nothing stopping them being, but the ones I went to and sent my children to (5 in all) were in all cases not for profit trusts. So unlike a business you can't hike profitability to deal with VAT shocks.
Lots of businesses are not for profit. A charity shop's a business. If you charge service users a fee for your offer, you are a business.
So, you favour charging VAT on charity shops then?
They do have to pay VAT for goods they buy in. They pay no VAT for donated goods because those are treated like donations for the aims of the charity but are not subject to Gift Aid. In principle, I would have no problem with VAT on donated goods if Gift Aid were then permitted.
Eh, Gift Aid *is* permitted on donated goods, the value being determined by the actual sale. However, this needs a recording system with sticky labels and numbers and all, so not all charities are organised enough for that.
PS Obviously this depends if the donor is a taxpayer with enough tax, and so on. I get a periodic return from one such charity for my records.
As you say, for your typical charity shop donation of second-hand books or clothes, it will not be the case that gift aid is available. At present, the current system is a fairly low-cost substitute that is probably simpler overall to administer.
I think Carynx is wrong anyway. According to the Charity Tax Group, Gift Aid only applies to money. It does not apply to donated goods.
Is that right? I donate my old books and old clothes to Barnardo's. Every year I get a letter saying how much my donations have raised and how much Gift Aid the Government has chipped in.
Indeed. I've donated stuff to a variety of charity shops over the last few years, and they always ask if you're a "gift aider" and take your name and address if so. Then, like you, I get a letter from each of them detailing how much they sold your donated items for.
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
I'm not sure. The policy may attract as many voters are it repels, which would leave us where we were before, which was 30% is possible.
No one (stand fast some performative posters on here) who was going to vote them last week will change their minds because of this. Some might come “home”. It’s where they are fishing - they are already at rock bottom. Might as well promise owls.
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
I'm not sure. The policy may attract as many voters are it repels, which would leave us where we were before, which was 30% is possible.
I will be shocked if it really attracts that many people. It just isn't a serious policy. Now they doubling down in the fantasy.
Its not like saying we will raise IHT threshold (it might be difficult to cost, but it is something that is definitely actionable).
If education can't even function with VAT, like any old retailer or professional services firm, then maybe it's a highly inefficient business that can't deliver value for money, and maybe the upper-middle class tax break pushed far too much resources into an inefficient sector.
It's not a business at all. And it's not recovering much in the way of inputs to match it's outputs like retailers do
Private schools are businesses.
They are not, on average. Nothing stopping them being, but the ones I went to and sent my children to (5 in all) were in all cases not for profit trusts. So unlike a business you can't hike profitability to deal with VAT shocks.
Lots of businesses are not for profit. A charity shop's a business. If you charge service users a fee for your offer, you are a business.
So, you favour charging VAT on charity shops then?
They do have to pay VAT for goods they buy in. They pay no VAT for donated goods because those are treated like donations for the aims of the charity but are not subject to Gift Aid. In principle, I would have no problem with VAT on donated goods if Gift Aid were then permitted.
Eh, Gift Aid *is* permitted on donated goods, the value being determined by the actual sale. However, this needs a recording system with sticky labels and numbers and all, so not all charities are organised enough for that.
PS Obviously this depends if the donor is a taxpayer with enough tax, and so on. I get a periodic return from one such charity for my records.
As you say, for your typical charity shop donation of second-hand books or clothes, it will not be the case that gift aid is available. At present, the current system is a fairly low-cost substitute that is probably simpler overall to administer.
I think Carynx is wrong anyway. According to the Charity Tax Group, Gift Aid only applies to money. It does not apply to donated goods.
Is that right? I donate my old books and old clothes to Barnardo's. Every year I get a letter saying how much my donations have raised and how much Gift Aid the Government has chipped in.
the loophole is that the shop sells the item on the donor's behalf, the donor of the copy of Gyles Brandreth's 'Breaking the Code' or whatever donates the cash to the charity and then the charity claims gift aid on that.
Seems like a rum way to run a country.
(See also the admission price/donation with free admission thrown in thing.)
It depends on the charity, but the better organised ones keep a record of items donated, and when they sell an item that generates gift aid for them, and tax relief for the donor if they are a higher rate tax payer. Our local Salvation Army shop are very efficient at this and at the end of each year send me a letter confirming how much they have raised from my donations, how much Gift Aid that has generated, and the information goes in my tax return. If, as I did, you have to do a house clearance it is very beneficial.
The whole reason the Tories were so desperate to join the EEC and the Single Market is that they would stop absurd autarkic Bennery... Like making graduate schemes prioritise volunteers from state boondoggles. How lost they have become.
Are you suggesting that Sunak's proposal is the thin end of the wedge?
The whole reason the Tories were so desperate to join the EEC and the Single Market is that they would stop absurd autarkic Bennery... Like making graduate schemes prioritise volunteers from state boondoggles. How lost they have become.
I mean, that definition of why we joined the EC is just utter bollocks. But as the kids say, you do you. You clearly care little for facts.
EXCL: Greg Hands triggers backlash after spamming Whatsapp group of parents of boys at elite St Paul's School - alma mater of George Osborne, etc. - about Labour's private school plans.
Trade minister told "stop assuming everyone's a Tory" and that some feel it is "hard to justify" VAT exemption
Do you agree the VAT exemption on your train tickets should be removed too?
Or is it just some exemptions you object to?
Actually Bart, I've already posted on VAT exemptions. They should in my view really only exist for vital services. Private education is not vital, I would argue transport is.
But actually I don't really care much for the VAT on school fees, I'd rather Labour made state education better first.
By that logic we should abolish VAT on fuel.
That we charge VAT on top of fuel duty is absurd.
I agree that making state education better first would be a better policy and I've suggested how earlier.
We charge fuel duty and VAT on petrol because we're trying to mimimize imports of something that is mostly produced by people who hate us, whether its crazies in the Middle East, Russians or Scotsmen.
Quite a journey Rishi Sunak has gone on, politically. Only two years ago he was cutting back the National Citizens Service (in a budget where near-everything got a real-terms increase!). Now he wants to make it a condition to working on Whitehall.
The whole reason the Tories were so desperate to join the EEC and the Single Market is that they would stop absurd autarkic Bennery... Like making graduate schemes prioritise volunteers from state boondoggles. How lost they have become.
It's increasingly depressing how useless your posts are. And I'd like to +1 some of the sentiment in some of them. But really - twitter @'s are entirely useless unless you link directly to the tweet. You might as well be posting "@djfghdjhfgdkfg Labour are now the government and we have formed a first colony on Europa!"
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer, stick with nurse as economy is turning corner and standard Tory type offering.
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer, stick with nurse as economy is turning corner and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
Sunak is setting new standards in campaigning.
Low ones, but record lows...
David Herdson asks the question, what happens if you run a campaign as bad as T May. but you start 20 points behind instead of 20 points ahead...
Erm. They don’t though do they? Sorry, but facts matter.
Even the Prince of Wales just did taster stuff. And I certainly don’t recall the likes of Princess Eugenie in uniform. Going back a generation, Prince Edward chickened out.
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer, stick with nurse as economy is turning corner and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
Sunak is setting new standards in campaigning.
Low ones, but record lows...
David Herdson asks the question, what happens if you run a campaign as bad as T May. but you start 20 points behind instead of 20 points ahead...
Fight an election on protecting private schools and you will lose.
Nothing to do with arguments or morality it is simply a case of numbers.
I know that. But morality should play a part. I am no fan of private schools either in concept or execution but they are merely an expression of the urge of the wealthy to give their children the best education they can pay for, and for the life of me I don't feel the need to stop them. Wealth redistribution should be done via redistributive taxation, not thru actions like this.
Remembered earlier about the Assisted Places Scheme, which New Labour also canned:
Too many working class people getting ideas above their station, no doubt.
I remember Dr John Rae, then the Head of Westminster, saying that trying to solve education via the assisted places scheme was a little bit like trying to solve child hunger by taking a few lucky kids to lunch at the Ritz. And it's hard to not to agree with that.
Erm. They don’t though do they? Sorry, but facts matter.
Even the Prince of Wales just did taster stuff. And I certainly don’t recall the likes of Princess Eugenie in uniform. Going back a generation, Prince Edward chickened out.
@Samfr As @thhamilton notes it would also make it easier for an immigrant to get a public sector job than a Brit. Just so much genius.
Why would it? Do you have absolutely no critical faculties?
Bit unfair, it's certainly one of the two logical conclusions one can draw.
A. NS Grads from the UK and Immigrants are given first dibs/any chance at all. B. Only NS Grads ... ditto.
And if B happens, don't you think that all the ambassadors and so on will be happy? Just think of all the Brexit deals with lots of welcomes for immigrants to come and work in the UK.
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer, stick with nurse as economy is turning corner and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
Closer to 20 than 30 I think is now possible. 25 if they do well.
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer, stick with nurse as economy is turning corner and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
Closer to 20 than 30 I think is now possible. 25 if they do well.
The whole reason the Tories were so desperate to join the EEC and the Single Market is that they would stop absurd autarkic Bennery... Like making graduate schemes prioritise volunteers from state boondoggles. How lost they have become.
It's increasingly depressing how useless your posts are. And I'd like to +1 some of the sentiment in some of them. But really - twitter @'s are entirely useless unless you link directly to the tweet. You might as well be posting "@djfghdjhfgdkfg Labour are now the government and we have formed a first colony on Europa!"
Scott, don't forget some of us can't even see the blasted tweet till we have the URL for the specific tweet - just gtiving us the twatter handle for the culprit is no good as it just gives us a random selection from about the Crimean WAr era.
Erm. They don’t though do they? Sorry, but facts matter.
Even the Prince of Wales just did taster stuff. And I certainly don’t recall the likes of Princess Eugenie in uniform. Going back a generation, Prince Edward chickened out.
The Mail is stuck a generation or two ago. PtG, Charles, Andrew, assorted others I forget, all put in real time, and even Edward's time in the Marines would probably qualify him for the new Carolingian National Service Medal First Class.
Honestly this site is pure group think at times, almost entirely aligned to Twitter.
I look forward to talking some of your money.
So we don't know our own minds, which are tainted by group think, but you do?
I bow to no-one in my ability to call things wrong, so it is surely possible, but I do feel fairly confident in saying I'm not known for leaping to the most extreme positive or negative interpretations of events. So if I think something is bad I'm really not just going with the flow.
And this national service announcement and follow up is hands down the worst political move I've seen in years. I did not think the Tories might be at existential risk before, whereas now I think it is the most probable option.
@Samfr As @thhamilton notes it would also make it easier for an immigrant to get a public sector job than a Brit. Just so much genius.
Why would it? Do you have absolutely no critical faculties?
Bit unfair, it's certainly one of the two logical conclusions one can draw.
A. NS Grads from the UK and Immigrants are given first dibs/any chance at all. B. Only NS Grads ... ditto.
And if B happens, don't you think that all the ambassadors and so on will be happy? Just think of all the Brexit deals with lots of welcomes for immigrants to come and work in the UK.
Alternatively:
a) No same Government would even let that happen; so
b) In the “pigs might fly” scenario that the Tories actually won, we have to conclude there will be other, probably quite racists and damaging, restrictions on immigrants.
I actively want this government to lose, I just think facts matter, and it should lose for things that are true. It has many sins in its record.
Fight an election on protecting private schools and you will lose.
Nothing to do with arguments or morality it is simply a case of numbers.
I know that. But morality should play a part. I am no fan of private schools either in concept or execution but they are merely an expression of the urge of the wealthy to give their children the best education they can pay for, and for the life of me I don't feel the need to stop them. Wealth redistribution should be done via redistributive taxation, not thru actions like this.
Remembered earlier about the Assisted Places Scheme, which New Labour also canned:
Too many working class people getting ideas above their station, no doubt.
I remember Dr John Rae, then the Head of Westminster, saying that trying to solve education via the assisted places scheme was a little bit like trying to solve child hunger by taking a few lucky kids to lunch at the Ritz. And it's hard to not to agree with that.
Intderesting. I wonder if he was deliberately echoing the old crack about English justice being freely accessible to all, like the Ritz: just so long as one could pay.
@Samfr As @thhamilton notes it would also make it easier for an immigrant to get a public sector job than a Brit. Just so much genius.
Why would it? Do you have absolutely no critical faculties?
Bit unfair, it's certainly one of the two logical conclusions one can draw.
A. NS Grads from the UK and Immigrants are given first dibs/any chance at all. B. Only NS Grads ... ditto.
And if B happens, don't you think that all the ambassadors and so on will be happy? Just think of all the Brexit deals with lots of welcomes for immigrants to come and work in the UK.
Alternatively:
a) No same Government would even let that happen; so
b) In the “pigs might fly” scenario that the Tories actually won, we have to conclude there will be other, probably quite racists and damaging, restrictions on immigrants.
I actively want this government to lose, I just think facts matter, and it should lose for things that are true. It has many sins in its record.
Mm. But hypothetical facts matter too, as do their inherent illogicalities.
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
I'm not sure. The policy may attract as many voters are it repels, which would leave us where we were before, which was 30% is possible.
I will be shocked if it really attracts that many people. It just isn't a serious policy. Now they doubling down in the fantasy.
Its not like saying we will raise IHT threshold (it might be difficult to cost, but it is something that is definitely actionable).
Labour have a phenomenal opportunity here.
47ish% of people under the age of 24 voted, whereas 74% of pensioners voted in 2019.
I cannot think of a policy better placed to get young people off their arses and voting than "vote Labour or it's national service".
There is a huge untapped pool of Labour voters if that 47% can even be brought up to, say, 55%.
Yesterday The FT described 2024 as "the first post TV election" and I really do think a targeted social media campaign aimed at getting out the youth vote could have real cut through this time. "Get off your arses and register, or it's conscription/the gulag for you," fronted by some tiktok influencer nobody over the age of 30 has even heard of but inexplicably has 20 million followers.
Huge opportunity for Labour here. If any policy will get young people off their arses and voting, it's this.
If you don't spend 12 weekends working for the community helping public services then we shall ban you from offering your labour to work for public services.
Honestly this site is pure group think at times, almost entirely aligned to Twitter.
I look forward to talking some of your money.
So we don't know our own minds, which are tainted by group think, but you do?
I bow to no-one in my ability to call things wrong, so it is surely possible, but I do feel fairly confident in saying I'm not known for leaping to the most extreme positive or negative interpretations of events. So if I think something is bad I'm really not just going with the flow.
And this national service announcement and follow up is hands down the worst political move I've seen in years. I did not think the Tories might be at existential risk before, whereas now I think it is the most probable option.
You haven’t considered waiting for, you know, evidence? This all reminds me of this site in 2017 when it failed to understand that some human being might actually like what Corbyn had to offer.
Now I won’t stretch than analogy too far. The Tories aren’t going to win. But I also don’t think they are trying to particularly. If your max target is 35% and you’d be happy at 32%, this site isn’t where your voters live.
Far too many of you have forgotten what something like the 2001 Tory campaign looked like.
Surprised there haven't been more reports of Tory MPs trying to distance themselves from the leadership after the last few days, other than probably the usual suspects.
Granted it is a Sunday, and many are deeply despondent about their chances anyway, but I can't see discipline being maintained in this campaign to remain on message.
"Get off your arses and register, or it's conscription/the gulag for you," fronted by some tiktok influencer nobody over the age of 30 has even heard of but inexplicably has 20 million followers.
Huge opportunity for Labour here. If any policy will get young people off their arses and voting, it's this.
"Get off your arses and register, or it's conscription/the gulag for you," fronted by some tiktok influencer nobody over the age of 30 has even heard of but inexplicably has 20 million followers.
Huge opportunity for Labour here. If any policy will get young people off their arses and voting, it's this.
Richi made his first post on Tik Tok today.
Yes, it's just as shit as you are imagining
He should be banning that Chinese spyware shit not posting on it.
@Samfr As @thhamilton notes it would also make it easier for an immigrant to get a public sector job than a Brit. Just so much genius.
Why would it? Do you have absolutely no critical faculties?
Bit unfair, it's certainly one of the two logical conclusions one can draw.
A. NS Grads from the UK and Immigrants are given first dibs/any chance at all. B. Only NS Grads ... ditto.
And if B happens, don't you think that all the ambassadors and so on will be happy? Just think of all the Brexit deals with lots of welcomes for immigrants to come and work in the UK.
Alternatively:
a) No same Government would even let that happen; so
b) In the “pigs might fly” scenario that the Tories actually won, we have to conclude there will be other, probably quite racists and damaging, restrictions on immigrants.
I actively want this government to lose, I just think facts matter, and it should lose for things that are true. It has many sins in its record.
Mm. But hypothetical facts matter too, as do their inherent illogicalities.
But honestly, suggesting THIS Government, that wants to ship asylum seekers off to Rwanda, would favour immigrants over citizens? It’s someone on Twitter trying to be too clever by half.
The real point to skewer them with is that they haven’t thought through the policy because they know they won’t win.
Honestly this site is pure group think at times, almost entirely aligned to Twitter.
I look forward to talking some of your money.
So we don't know our own minds, which are tainted by group think, but you do?
I bow to no-one in my ability to call things wrong, so it is surely possible, but I do feel fairly confident in saying I'm not known for leaping to the most extreme positive or negative interpretations of events. So if I think something is bad I'm really not just going with the flow.
And this national service announcement and follow up is hands down the worst political move I've seen in years. I did not think the Tories might be at existential risk before, whereas now I think it is the most probable option.
You haven’t considered waiting for, you know, evidence? This all reminds me of this site in 2017 when it failed to understand that some human being might actually like what Corbyn had to offer.
Now I won’t stretch than analogy too far. The Tories aren’t going to win. But I also don’t think they are trying to particularly. If your max target is 35% and you’d be happy at 32%, this site isn’t where your voters live.
Far too many of you have forgotten what something like the 2001 Tory campaign looked like.
I respond to evidence when it emerges and change my views accordingly, but we respond to breaking news and rumour - by your logic we should never proffer a view on something until we can see definitively what impact it has, and usually that would be some way down the line. How long are we supposed to wait here before having a view on the potential impact?
Your initial post doesn't even make any sense on its own terms since it seems to suggest you disagree with the view of twitter - which is indeed generally a good strategy - but you would be doing so without 'evidence', whatever that might be in this context. Why aren't you waiting for evidence before declaring you look forward to taking other people's money, presumably as they will be wrong?
No, I throw out my immediate thoughts on events, and then if I am proven wrong I get egg on my face and have to put my hand up and own being a fool.
But being proven wrong later doesn't bother me, so I just respond honestly - usually I am much more equivocal, but this stuff looks like a disaster. If this is what 2001 was like then it must have been a wild and depressing ride for Tories.
By the end of the campaign I fully expect to have a Leon-esque range of predictions I have made.
Honestly this site is pure group think at times, almost entirely aligned to Twitter.
I look forward to talking some of your money.
Curious. Perhaps Harry Cole and the Daily Mail are part of the leftie liberal blob...
No, they are just stupid. Who mentioned “the blob”? Don’t mistake me for a supporter of the government. All that “blob” nonsense is why I want them gone. The culture war idiocy and the JRM notes on desks.
What I am shouting at the sky about is the pathetic, infantile level of debate centred on half truths and lies. People should debate the actual issues and real facts on the ground. But no one wants to. They want to play their silly Twitter games. They want “their side” to win and that’s it.
To be honest, the Labour line on this is better than all this Twitter crap - it’s desperate ill-thought through rubbish.
There is a serious underlying debate though, which is about a proper modern form of national service, modelled after the Scandis, which we will end up doing anyway so we all ought to discuss the pros and cons. But we won’t. There will be silly Twitter jokes now, and then it will just happen three years down the line, and no one will ever have actually debated it.
9 bloody quid for 2 ice creams may be resonating more than all your fancy ads.
I remember when 99s where 99p....
It is why Biden is in trouble. $15 for McDs.
You can stick all your CPI / RPI falling to 2% where the sun doesn't shine, when people go to the pub, for a takeaway, an ice cream and the prices are twice what they were used to paying, it hits hard even if you can afford it.
9 bloody quid for 2 ice creams may be resonating more than all your fancy ads.
I remember when 99s where 99p....
It is why Biden is in trouble. $15 for McDs.
You can stick all your CPI / RPI where the sun doesn't shine, when people go to the pub, for a takeaway, an ice cream and the prices are twice what they were used to paying, it hits hard.
And he'd only take cards. Standing there with my bloody cash. Lost @anabobzina's vote. Bet he can hear me.
Honestly this site is pure group think at times, almost entirely aligned to Twitter.
I look forward to talking some of your money.
Curious. Perhaps Harry Cole and the Daily Mail are part of the leftie liberal blob...
No, they are just stupid. Who mentioned “the blob”? Don’t mistake me for a supporter of the government. All that “blob” nonsense is why I want them gone. The culture war idiocy and the JRM notes on desks.
What I am shouting at the sky about is the pathetic, infantile level of debate centred on half truths and lies. People should debate the actual issues and real facts on the ground. But no one wants to. They want to play their silly Twitter games. They want “their side” to win and that’s it.
To be honest, the Labour line on this is better than all this Twitter crap - it’s desperate ill-thought through rubbish.
There is a serious underlying debate though, which is about a proper modern form of national service, modelled after the Scandis, which we will end up doing anyway so we all ought to discuss the pros and cons. But we won’t. There will be silly Twitter jokes now, and then it will just happen three years down the line, and no one will ever have actually debated it.
"we will end up doing it anyway" is a big statement. Perhaps we won't. Perhaps it really is horribly unpopular and the party wanting to introduce it will get goose-necked at the election. Perhaps, just perhaps, it's you that's wrong and the ridicule is entirely merited.
9 bloody quid for 2 ice creams may be resonating more than all your fancy ads.
I remember when 99s where 99p....
It is why Biden is in trouble. $15 for McDs.
You can stick all your CPI / RPI falling to 2% where the sun doesn't shine, when people go to the pub, for a takeaway, an ice cream and the prices are twice what they were used to paying, it hits hard even if you can afford it.
bondegezou said: "UK imports of oil are overwhelmingly from Norway and the US, neither of whom particularly hate us:" In fact, most Americans like you: "At the top of the list are Canada (83%), Japan (83%) and Great Britain (82%). Germany, France and Taiwan are all just a notch below, viewed favorably by between 77% and 79%.
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
I'm not sure. The policy may attract as many voters are it repels, which would leave us where we were before, which was 30% is possible.
Who on earth will be attracted by it? Even those who might support the principle will realise it’s completely unworkable. To take one obvious example, are 18 years olds who already have a full time job going to have to take part in this (unpaid) nonsense.
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
I'm not sure. The policy may attract as many voters are it repels, which would leave us where we were before, which was 30% is possible.
Who on earth will be attracted by it? Even those who might support the principle will realise it’s completely unworkable. To take one obvious example, are 18 years olds who already have a full time job going to have to take part in this (unpaid) nonsense.
The thing is you could attract the same voters with something slightly more realistic, like volunteer for good causes and we will give you credit towards uni costs etc. We will expand Territorial Army, and again you can get a uni discount or some money off loan repayment if you carry on.
It does all the same virtue signally, about giving back is good, mixing with people you might never normally meet is good. Sunak could do the whole when I was at school I did this, it was very rewarding.
It won't get the kids vote, but the oldies will more likely decent bloke, that seems ok.
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
I'm not sure. The policy may attract as many voters are it repels, which would leave us where we were before, which was 30% is possible.
Who on earth will be attracted by it? Even those who might support the principle will realise it’s completely unworkable. To take one obvious example, are 18 years olds who already have a full time job going to have to take part in this (unpaid) nonsense.
I did point out yesterday that more than 10% of the TA'S (who we can't recruit cos of shocking pay and conditions) are 18. They'd just love some unpaid busywork on top of their everyday bollocks.
9 bloody quid for 2 ice creams may be resonating more than all your fancy ads.
I took Baby Dumbosaurus, Mrs Dumbosaurus, and Mother Dumbosaurus out for a PIzza Hut this evening. First time I'd been to one in over a decade. Cost over £60 for a "sharing" pizza, wings, a flatbread, and some drinks. Couldn't believe that, how do people without financial resources manage it???
9 bloody quid for 2 ice creams may be resonating more than all your fancy ads.
I took Baby Dumbosaurus, Mrs Dumbosaurus, and Mother Dumbosaurus out for a PIzza Hut this evening. First time I'd been to one in over a decade. Cost over £60 for a "sharing" pizza, wings, a flatbread, and some drinks. Couldn't believe that, how do people without financial resources manage it???
9 bloody quid for 2 ice creams may be resonating more than all your fancy ads.
I took Baby Dumbosaurus, Mrs Dumbosaurus, and Mother Dumbosaurus out for a PIzza Hut this evening. First time I'd been to one in over a decade. Cost over £60 for a "sharing" pizza, wings, a flatbread, and some drinks. Couldn't believe that, how do people without financial resources manage it???
It is why I can't quite get my head around why we haven't had a massive crash (yet).
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer, stick with nurse as economy is turning corner and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
Closer to 20 than 30 I think is now possible. 25 if they do well.
What is the lowest Tory score in modern history?
If modern is since 1918, it's 31% for Major in 1997. In 1832 the Tories polled 29.2% under Wellington.
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer, stick with nurse as economy is turning corner and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
Closer to 20 than 30 I think is now possible. 25 if they do well.
What is the lowest Tory score in modern history?
If modern is since 1918, it's 31% for Major in 1997. In 1832 the Tories polled 29.2% under Wellington.
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer, stick with nurse as economy is turning corner and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
Closer to 20 than 30 I think is now possible. 25 if they do well.
What is the lowest Tory score in modern history?
If modern is since 1918, it's 31% for Major in 1997. In 1832 the Tories polled 29.2% under Wellington.
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer, stick with nurse as economy is turning corner and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
Closer to 20 than 30 I think is now possible. 25 if they do well.
What is the lowest Tory score in modern history?
If modern is since 1918, it's 31% for Major in 1997. In 1832 the Tories polled 29.2% under Wellington.
Yeah they are going to beat that to the downside this time around.
Unfortunately if the first non white PM gets the lowest voteshare for his party since universal suffrage I fear that kills off the likelihood of an ethnic minority leader leading the Conservatives again for a generation. It probably doesn't help the chances of non white potential Labour leaders either
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer, stick with nurse as economy is turning corner and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
Closer to 20 than 30 I think is now possible. 25 if they do well.
What is the lowest Tory score in modern history?
If modern is since 1918, it's 31% for Major in 1997. In 1832 the Tories polled 29.2% under Wellington.
Yeah they are going to beat that to the downside this time around.
Unfortunately if the first non white PM gets the lowest voteshare for his party since universal suffrage I fear that kills off the likelihood of an ethnic minority leader leading the Conservatives again for a generation. It probably doesn't help the chances of non white potential Labour leaders either
i don't think voters hate Sunak because he's brown. They hate him because he's crap. I'm sure the Cons will vote in another non-white leader soon, probably sooner if Suella gets access to edged weapons.
9 bloody quid for 2 ice creams may be resonating more than all your fancy ads.
I took Baby Dumbosaurus, Mrs Dumbosaurus, and Mother Dumbosaurus out for a PIzza Hut this evening. First time I'd been to one in over a decade. Cost over £60 for a "sharing" pizza, wings, a flatbread, and some drinks. Couldn't believe that, how do people without financial resources manage it???
I feel like food, including eating out, has essentially doubled in four years. I don’t know if that’s strictly true, but that’s what it feels like.
And for most is us - a pint, an ice-cream, a maccy dees - was the little treat that got us through the day.
And that’s true even up the income scale.
I paid $50 for a negroni and a G&T at a bar on the Upper East Side last week. Admittedly a “first world problem”, but I actually can’t afford to do this in the way I once did.
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer, stick with nurse as economy is turning corner and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
Closer to 20 than 30 I think is now possible. 25 if they do well.
What is the lowest Tory score in modern history?
If modern is since 1918, it's 31% for Major in 1997. In 1832 the Tories polled 29.2% under Wellington.
Yeah they are going to beat that to the downside this time around.
Unfortunately if the first non white PM gets the lowest voteshare for his party since universal suffrage I fear that kills off the likelihood of an ethnic minority leader leading the Conservatives again for a generation. It probably doesn't help the chances of non white potential Labour leaders either
I really don't think Sunak being non-white is effecting the Tory vote share. Unfortunately, rightly or wrongly, having a incredibly wealthy PM at the moment isn't a good look, which isn't help by his gaffes where he looks very out of touch. I think that is much more of an issue than the fact he isn't white.
That's before we get to the inflation, interest rates, Brexit, and awful campaign.
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer, stick with nurse as economy is turning corner and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
Closer to 20 than 30 I think is now possible. 25 if they do well.
What is the lowest Tory score in modern history?
If modern is since 1918, it's 31% for Major in 1997. In 1832 the Tories polled 29.2% under Wellington.
Yeah they are going to beat that to the downside this time around.
Unfortunately if the first non white PM gets the lowest voteshare for his party since universal suffrage I fear that kills off the likelihood of an ethnic minority leader leading the Conservatives again for a generation. It probably doesn't help the chances of non white potential Labour leaders either
I really don't think Sunak being non-white is effecting the Tory vote share. Unfortunately, rightly or wrongly, having a incredibly wealthy PM at the moment isn't a good look, which isn't help by his gaffes where he looks very out of touch. That's before we get to the inflation, interest rates, Brexit, and awful campaign.
Agree. I often forget that Sunak is the first non-white PM. It’s hardly ever remarked upon.
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
I'm not sure. The policy may attract as many voters are it repels, which would leave us where we were before, which was 30% is possible.
Who on earth will be attracted by it? Even those who might support the principle will realise it’s completely unworkable. To take one obvious example, are 18 years olds who already have a full time job going to have to take part in this (unpaid) nonsense.
I did point out yesterday that more than 10% of the TA'S (who we can't recruit cos of shocking pay and conditions) are 18. They'd just love some unpaid busywork on top of their everyday bollocks.
Truly the UNPAID nature of non-military compulsory "National Service" is perhaps the worst part of the proposal. Along with recognition of situation of youth who are already gainfully employed and/or attending school full-time, often more that 40 hours already.
At gathering of locals at neighborhood coffee shop, even those believing national service is a concept worth considering (including me) found the unpaid nature of compulsory "volunteer" service off-putting, to put it mildly.
Ideally, true national service should be a school for the youth of the nation, and aiding to the present and future welfare of the nation. Including providing some income - not munificent but reasonable - for said youths AND in many cases their families.
Sorta like the CCC (Civilian Conservation Corps) and similar programs established under FDR during the New Deal. America is still littered, but in a good way, with testimonials to work they did and things they built in thousands of communities from Sea to Shining Sea.
9 bloody quid for 2 ice creams may be resonating more than all your fancy ads.
I took Baby Dumbosaurus, Mrs Dumbosaurus, and Mother Dumbosaurus out for a PIzza Hut this evening. First time I'd been to one in over a decade. Cost over £60 for a "sharing" pizza, wings, a flatbread, and some drinks. Couldn't believe that, how do people without financial resources manage it???
It is why I can't quite get my head around why we haven't had a massive crash (yet).
Only thing I can think is people banging it on credit cards, but that can't last long. £60 a day would pay for @Casino_Royale 's school for a kid.
9 bloody quid for 2 ice creams may be resonating more than all your fancy ads.
I took Baby Dumbosaurus, Mrs Dumbosaurus, and Mother Dumbosaurus out for a PIzza Hut this evening. First time I'd been to one in over a decade. Cost over £60 for a "sharing" pizza, wings, a flatbread, and some drinks. Couldn't believe that, how do people without financial resources manage it???
I feel like food, including eating out, has essentially doubled in four years. I don’t know if that’s true, but that’s what it feels like.
And for most is us - a pint, an ice-cream, a maccy dees - was the little treat that got us through the day.
And that’s true even up the income scale. I paid $50 for a negroni and a G&T at a bar on the Upper East Side last week. Admittedly a “first world problem”, but I actually can’t afford to do this in the way I once did.
Eating out in the US is generally about twice as expensive as it would be the UK for the same type of food/experience imo, although that's based mostly on Boston, New York, Washington DC. It may be cheaper elsewhere.
9 bloody quid for 2 ice creams may be resonating more than all your fancy ads.
I took Baby Dumbosaurus, Mrs Dumbosaurus, and Mother Dumbosaurus out for a PIzza Hut this evening. First time I'd been to one in over a decade. Cost over £60 for a "sharing" pizza, wings, a flatbread, and some drinks. Couldn't believe that, how do people without financial resources manage it???
It is why I can't quite get my head around why we haven't had a massive crash (yet).
Only thing I can think is people banging it on credit cards, but that can't last long. £60 a day would pay for @Casino_Royale 's school for a kid.
I believe household debt has actually declined in recent times.
9 bloody quid for 2 ice creams may be resonating more than all your fancy ads.
I took Baby Dumbosaurus, Mrs Dumbosaurus, and Mother Dumbosaurus out for a PIzza Hut this evening. First time I'd been to one in over a decade. Cost over £60 for a "sharing" pizza, wings, a flatbread, and some drinks. Couldn't believe that, how do people without financial resources manage it???
That's why there are some families for whom McDonalds is a rare treat.
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer, stick with nurse as economy is turning corner and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
Closer to 20 than 30 I think is now possible. 25 if they do well.
What is the lowest Tory score in modern history?
If modern is since 1918, it's 31% for Major in 1997. In 1832 the Tories polled 29.2% under Wellington.
Yeah they are going to beat that to the downside this time around.
Unfortunately if the first non white PM gets the lowest voteshare for his party since universal suffrage I fear that kills off the likelihood of an ethnic minority leader leading the Conservatives again for a generation. It probably doesn't help the chances of non white potential Labour leaders either
I really don't think Sunak being non-white is effecting the Tory vote share. Unfortunately, rightly or wrongly, having a incredibly wealthy PM at the moment isn't a good look, which isn't help by his gaffes where he looks very out of touch. That's before we get to the inflation, interest rates, Brexit, and awful campaign.
Agree. I often forget that Sunak is the first non-white PM. It’s hardly ever remarked upon.
There have been leading non-white politicians during Tory era and that didn't seem to effect the vote share or particularly unpopular e.g. Sajid Javid.
9 bloody quid for 2 ice creams may be resonating more than all your fancy ads.
I took Baby Dumbosaurus, Mrs Dumbosaurus, and Mother Dumbosaurus out for a PIzza Hut this evening. First time I'd been to one in over a decade. Cost over £60 for a "sharing" pizza, wings, a flatbread, and some drinks. Couldn't believe that, how do people without financial resources manage it???
I feel like food, including eating out, has essentially doubled in four years. I don’t know if that’s true, but that’s what it feels like.
And for most is us - a pint, an ice-cream, a maccy dees - was the little treat that got us through the day.
And that’s true even up the income scale. I paid $50 for a negroni and a G&T at a bar on the Upper East Side last week. Admittedly a “first world problem”, but I actually can’t afford to do this in the way I once did.
Eating out in the US is generally about twice as expensive as it would be the UK for the same type of food/experience imo, although that's based mostly on Boston, New York, Washington DC. It may be cheaper elsewhere.
I have no problem spending £500 on a meal for two in principle. But £60 on a small family Pizza Hut?
BTW In Durham (I'm as far south as Doncaster today which is the other thing - this isn't southern PH prices) there is an astonishingly good (absolutely Michelin star quality) restaurant that will give you a six course tasting menu for £55/head - and the wine for roughly another £30: https://www.coarse.restaurant/6-course-tasting-menu-restaurant-durham
There's something else very odd going on here and I assume it's rent seeking somewhere.
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
I'm not sure. The policy may attract as many voters are it repels, which would leave us where we were before, which was 30% is possible.
I will be shocked if it really attracts that many people. It just isn't a serious policy. Now they doubling down in the fantasy.
Its not like saying we will raise IHT threshold (it might be difficult to cost, but it is something that is definitely actionable).
Labour have a phenomenal opportunity here.
47ish% of people under the age of 24 voted, whereas 74% of pensioners voted in 2019.
I cannot think of a policy better placed to get young people off their arses and voting than "vote Labour or it's national service".
There is a huge untapped pool of Labour voters if that 47% can even be brought up to, say, 55%.
Yesterday The FT described 2024 as "the first post TV election" and I really do think a targeted social media campaign aimed at getting out the youth vote could have real cut through this time. "Get off your arses and register, or it's conscription/the gulag for you," fronted by some tiktok influencer nobody over the age of 30 has even heard of but inexplicably has 20 million followers.
Huge opportunity for Labour here. If any policy will get young people off their arses and voting, it's this.
I think it will make only a small difference to youth turnout:
1) Everyone my age assumes that Labour will get in 2) Everyone hates the Tories anyway. Diminishing marginal returns
HOWEVER
Millennials are not swinging right like earlier generations, even as they come into prime voting age . This is basically due to tuition fees and housing tenure - despite all the chat about housebuilding, it's actually the proportions of rent:mortgage:outright that has screwed the Tories.
Now they are just starting the process of alienating GenZ with stuff like National Service. That just serves to extend the wilderness period. At some point, they need to accept that the Boomers will die during the 2030s and that's it for their votes.
Oddly enough, I saw a post somewhere which was claiming that the comments under a Liverpool newspaper article about the national service idea were apparently getting mostly positive responses, which is interesting because of course the city is usually the worst place in the country for the Tories. (Trying to find the article myself atm).
9 bloody quid for 2 ice creams may be resonating more than all your fancy ads.
I took Baby Dumbosaurus, Mrs Dumbosaurus, and Mother Dumbosaurus out for a PIzza Hut this evening. First time I'd been to one in over a decade. Cost over £60 for a "sharing" pizza, wings, a flatbread, and some drinks. Couldn't believe that, how do people without financial resources manage it???
I feel like food, including eating out, has essentially doubled in four years. I don’t know if that’s true, but that’s what it feels like.
And for most is us - a pint, an ice-cream, a maccy dees - was the little treat that got us through the day.
And that’s true even up the income scale. I paid $50 for a negroni and a G&T at a bar on the Upper East Side last week. Admittedly a “first world problem”, but I actually can’t afford to do this in the way I once did.
Eating out in the US is generally about twice as expensive as it would be the UK for the same type of food/experience imo, although that's based mostly on Boston, New York, Washington DC. It may be cheaper elsewhere.
I have no problem spending £500 on a meal for two in principle. But £60 on a small family Pizza Hut?
BTW In Durham (I'm as far south as Doncaster today which is the other thing - this isn't southern PH prices) there is an astonishingly good (absolutely Michelin star quality) restaurant that will give you a six course tasting menu for £55/head - and the wine for roughly another £30: https://www.coarse.restaurant/6-course-tasting-menu-restaurant-durham
There's something else very odd going on here and I assume it's rent seeking somewhere.
Remember that minimum wage has gone up significantly as have raw ingredients. Those low end chain restaurants work on much smaller margins than high end based on cheap labour and ingredients, so those increases have to be pushed to the customer.
The raw ingredients for high end restaurants isn't that much higher, the value add is the skill of the chefs. There is only so much more things like wild mushroom costs, even if they were harvested by wild boars.
Comments
Within hours of being announced, Rishi Sunak’s election pledge to bring back military service for 18-year-olds was rubbished by army chiefs and a former Conservative defence secretary.
Rishi Sunak pledged to introduce mandatory national service which would see young people spend a year in the military or do volunteer work on weekends.
The prime minister doubled down on the proposal on Sunday night, saying that national service schemes in other countries “show just how fulfilling it is for young people”.
In the context of the last Chief of the General staff actively proposing a “citizens’ army”.
PS: except to make themselves employees of the Public.
Seems highly unlikely now.
As you imply, this will shape the whole campaign, and it will continue to be ridiculed on here even if it’s (in their terms) highly successful.
The whole reason the Tories were so desperate to join the EEC and the Single Market is that they would stop absurd autarkic Bennery... Like making graduate schemes prioritise volunteers from state boondoggles. How lost they have become.
Its not like saying we will raise IHT threshold (it might be difficult to cost, but it is something that is definitely actionable).
NEXT WEEK:
Chain gangs for so-called "disabled" workshy layabouts
£107m contracts awarded to Tory patrons to operate a new workhouse program
As @thhamilton notes it would also make it easier for an immigrant to get a public sector job than a Brit. Just so much genius.
We are nevertheless still dependent on oil from Russia and Saudi Arabia, because oil is a global market.
Quite a journey Rishi Sunak has gone on, politically. Only two years ago he was cutting back the National Citizens Service (in a budget where near-everything got a real-terms increase!). Now he wants to make it a condition to working on Whitehall.
Low ones, but record lows...
Quite fucking incredible.
Harry Cole
@MrHarryCole
·
54m
Obviously.
They’re royals!!
They do it already.
Ugh.
https://x.com/MrHarryCole/status/1794837506007163352
Even the Prince of Wales just did taster stuff. And I certainly don’t recall the likes of Princess Eugenie in uniform. Going back a generation, Prince Edward chickened out.
A. NS Grads from the UK and Immigrants are given first dibs/any chance at all.
B. Only NS Grads ... ditto.
And if B happens, don't you think that all the ambassadors and so on will be happy? Just think of all the Brexit deals with lots of welcomes for immigrants to come and work in the UK.
I look forward to talking some of your money.
@DavidGauke
It really is quite possible that trying to focus your electoral appeal on UKIP/Brexit Party/Reform UK voters comes with rather significant downsides.
https://x.com/DavidGauke/status/1794846858235507136
https://x.com/jessphillips/status/1794849655739847120
https://x.com/Samfr/status/1794817034338844879?t=tIb6TxaRAqd71XJVrSEIqA&s=19
I bow to no-one in my ability to call things wrong, so it is surely possible, but I do feel fairly confident in saying I'm not known for leaping to the most extreme positive or negative interpretations of events. So if I think something is bad I'm really not just going with the flow.
And this national service announcement and follow up is hands down the worst political move I've seen in years. I did not think the Tories might be at existential risk before, whereas now I think it is the most probable option.
a) No same Government would even let that happen; so
b) In the “pigs might fly” scenario that the Tories actually won, we have to conclude there will be other, probably quite racists and damaging, restrictions on immigrants.
I actively want this government to lose, I just think facts matter, and it should lose for things that are true. It has many sins in its record.
47ish% of people under the age of 24 voted, whereas 74% of pensioners voted in 2019.
I cannot think of a policy better placed to get young people off their arses and voting than "vote Labour or it's national service".
There is a huge untapped pool of Labour voters if that 47% can even be brought up to, say, 55%.
Yesterday The FT described 2024 as "the first post TV election" and I really do think a targeted social media campaign aimed at getting out the youth vote could have real cut through this time. "Get off your arses and register, or it's conscription/the gulag for you," fronted by some tiktok influencer nobody over the age of 30 has even heard of but inexplicably has 20 million followers.
Huge opportunity for Labour here. If any policy will get young people off their arses and voting, it's this.
I mean, it's novel I'll give them that
Now I won’t stretch than analogy too far. The Tories aren’t going to win. But I also don’t think they are trying to particularly. If your max target is 35% and you’d be happy at 32%, this site isn’t where your voters live.
Far too many of you have forgotten what something like the 2001 Tory campaign looked like.
Granted it is a Sunday, and many are deeply despondent about their chances anyway, but I can't see discipline being maintained in this campaign to remain on message.
Yes, it's just as shit as you are imagining
The real point to skewer them with is that they haven’t thought through the policy because they know they won’t win.
Your initial post doesn't even make any sense on its own terms since it seems to suggest you disagree with the view of twitter - which is indeed generally a good strategy - but you would be doing so without 'evidence', whatever that might be in this context. Why aren't you waiting for evidence before declaring you look forward to taking other people's money, presumably as they will be wrong?
No, I throw out my immediate thoughts on events, and then if I am proven wrong I get egg on my face and have to put my hand up and own being a fool.
But being proven wrong later doesn't bother me, so I just respond honestly - usually I am much more equivocal, but this stuff looks like a disaster. If this is what 2001 was like then it must have been a wild and depressing ride for Tories.
By the end of the campaign I fully expect to have a Leon-esque range of predictions I have made.
What I am shouting at the sky about is the pathetic, infantile level of debate centred on half truths and lies. People should debate the actual issues and real facts on the ground. But no one wants to. They want to play their silly Twitter games. They want “their side” to win and that’s it.
To be honest, the Labour line on this is better than all this Twitter crap - it’s desperate ill-thought through rubbish.
There is a serious underlying debate though, which is about a proper modern form of national service, modelled after the Scandis, which we will end up doing anyway so we all ought to discuss the pros and cons. But we won’t. There will be silly Twitter jokes now, and then it will just happen three years down the line, and no one will ever have actually debated it.
It is why Biden is in trouble. $15 for McDs.
You can stick all your CPI / RPI falling to 2% where the sun doesn't shine, when people go to the pub, for a takeaway, an ice cream and the prices are twice what they were used to paying, it hits hard even if you can afford it.
Lost @anabobzina's vote.
Bet he can hear me.
"At the top of the list are Canada (83%), Japan (83%) and Great Britain (82%). Germany, France and Taiwan are all just a notch below, viewed favorably by between 77% and 79%.
Large majorities of Americans also view South Korea, India, Ukraine, Israel, Egypt and Mexico favorably."
source: https://news.gallup.com/poll/612170/americans-china-nation-top-foe-russia-second.aspx
(In the past, Australia sometimes came in first, in similar rankings.)
And why anguished articles about £ 2k+ per month school fees have the opposite effect.
It does all the same virtue signally, about giving back is good, mixing with people you might never normally meet is good. Sunak could do the whole when I was at school I did this, it was very rewarding.
It won't get the kids vote, but the oldies will more likely decent bloke, that seems ok.
They'd just love some unpaid busywork on top of their everyday bollocks.
I expect to see a small bounce in the polls by the end of the week.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1832_United_Kingdom_general_election
And for most is us - a pint, an ice-cream, a maccy dees - was the little treat that got us through the day.
And that’s true even up the income scale.
I paid $50 for a negroni and a G&T at a bar on the Upper East Side last week. Admittedly a “first world problem”, but I actually can’t afford to do this in the way I once did.
That's before we get to the inflation, interest rates, Brexit, and awful campaign.
At gathering of locals at neighborhood coffee shop, even those believing national service is a concept worth considering (including me) found the unpaid nature of compulsory "volunteer" service off-putting, to put it mildly.
Ideally, true national service should be a school for the youth of the nation, and aiding to the present and future welfare of the nation. Including providing some income - not munificent but reasonable - for said youths AND in many cases their families.
Sorta like the CCC (Civilian Conservation Corps) and similar programs established under FDR during the New Deal. America is still littered, but in a good way, with testimonials to work they did and things they built in thousands of communities from Sea to Shining Sea.
BTW In Durham (I'm as far south as Doncaster today which is the other thing - this isn't southern PH prices) there is an astonishingly good (absolutely Michelin star quality) restaurant that will give you a six course tasting menu for £55/head - and the wine for roughly another £30: https://www.coarse.restaurant/6-course-tasting-menu-restaurant-durham
There's something else very odd going on here and I assume it's rent seeking somewhere.
1) Everyone my age assumes that Labour will get in
2) Everyone hates the Tories anyway. Diminishing marginal returns
HOWEVER
Millennials are not swinging right like earlier generations, even as they come into prime voting age . This is basically due to tuition fees and housing tenure - despite all the chat about housebuilding, it's actually the proportions of rent:mortgage:outright that has screwed the Tories.
Now they are just starting the process of alienating GenZ with stuff like National Service. That just serves to extend the wilderness period. At some point, they need to accept that the Boomers will die during the 2030s and that's it for their votes.
The raw ingredients for high end restaurants isn't that much higher, the value add is the skill of the chefs. There is only so much more things like wild mushroom costs, even if they were harvested by wild boars.