Why things can get worse for the Tories – politicalbetting.com
NEW: One in six Tory voters are likely to be dead by the next electionAssuming nothing else changes, the total impact of demographic change alone would mean +29 seats for Labour and -34 for the Conservatives @Smyth_Chris @thetimes https://t.co/F8RZrTAdb8 pic.twitter.com/qviNev6dfV
Comments
-
Yeah but the old are the growing part of our society so....
Where they are in real trouble is that generation rent are far less likely to turn Tory as they get older than the first time buyers of my generation and the one after it. By allowing home ownership to go beyond the reach of so many they have burnt the seed corn of the next generation of Tories.9 -
The Tories stopped being the party of aspiration when they chose Cameron.2
-
Good morning, everyone.
Sorry for going off-topic (although slightly related to the last thread discussion), but isn't a major problem simply that equality doesn't work well for romantic matches, hence rising singleness?
What I mean by this is that women have equality in the workplace. That's a good thing. Women also tend to want to marry up. The economic circumstances of a man matters way more to a woman than the economic circumstances of a woman do to a man.
But that's a problem because equality means roughly the same earning potential so lines drawn according to economic circumstance will average out to being horizontal between men and women. Hence, middle and lower income chaps find things very difficult, because the desire line of marrying up just cuts out a ton of men.
This tallies with what's been remarked upon here before, that overall frisky time is the same as ever, but guys at the top are having tons whereas men at the bottom are getting none. But on a societal level that's no way to reach a standard of stable families and most people being happily married with kids.
Anyway, that's some sleepy waffling psychological rambling, but it might have something to it.3 -
IDS was both extreme and inept. With hindsight, the party should have been quietly put to sleep then.Alanbrooke said:The Tories stopped being the party of aspiration when they chose Cameron.
0 -
What or who would have replaced them in your view ?Cicero said:
IDS was both extreme and inept. With hindsight, the party should have been quietly put to sleep then.Alanbrooke said:The Tories stopped being the party of aspiration when they chose Cameron.
0 -
What do the Tories do to attract the young?
The obvious is to go back to conservatism- sound finances, work and reward, home ownership. The problem is that all of these things are against what their owners want (as they profit from the reverse) and against what their remaining 7 voters have been gaslit to want.
We will instead see them flirting with whipping the flames of anger to pick up the angry young man vote because no girl wants to shag their abusive if ignorant ass.0 -
The shade here.
Joey Barton has been charged with making ‘malicious communications’ towards ex-England star Eni Aluko
Barton has repeatedly criticised Aluko, who has 102 caps for England
Meanwhile, he once played 12 minutes for the Three Lions
https://x.com/MetroUK/status/18153694124650251161 -
Seems appropriate that the Conservative leadership result will be announced on 2nd November - The Day of the Dead.1
-
Given he said the party should have been quietly put to sleep then, presumably nobody?Alanbrooke said:
What or who would have replaced them in your view ?Cicero said:
IDS was both extreme and inept. With hindsight, the party should have been quietly put to sleep then.Alanbrooke said:The Tories stopped being the party of aspiration when they chose Cameron.
1 -
The Taiwan article I posted in the last thread suggests a different paradigm.Morris_Dancer said:Good morning, everyone.
Sorry for going off-topic (although slightly related to the last thread discussion), but isn't a major problem simply that equality doesn't work well for romantic matches, hence rising singleness?
What I mean by this is that women have equality in the workplace. That's a good thing. Women also tend to want to marry up. The economic circumstances of a man matters way more to a woman than the economic circumstances of a woman do to a man.
But that's a problem because equality means roughly the same earning potential so lines drawn according to economic circumstance will average out to being horizontal between men and women. Hence, middle and lower income chaps find things very difficult, because the desire line of marrying up just cuts out a ton of men.
This tallies with what's been remarked upon here before, that overall frisky time is the same as ever, but guys at the top are having tons whereas men at the bottom are getting none. But on a societal level that's no way to reach a standard of stable families and most people being happily married with kids.
Anyway, that's some sleepy waffling psychological rambling, but it might have something to it.
https://alethios.substack.com/p/unexplored-unsaid
...Curiously, TSMC stands apart here. Their Taiwanese workforce accounts for a staggering 1.8% of births in Taiwan (and growing quickly, up from 1.4% in 2019), despite being just 0.3% of the population. After adjusting for demographic differences, I estimate10 that TSMC employees have 2.8x more children than the national average, giving a TFR of around 2.45 children per woman. This is especially noteworthy since every statistical indicator predicts lower-than-average fertility. Employees are overwhelmingly urban, highly educated, irreligious, work long hours, and have a 2:1 skew in gender ratio - all of which would predict lower fertility than the Taiwanese average...0 -
Changing the sex ratio so that there is one man for every say 5 or 6 women might work well - women in charge and getting the work done, male violence much reduced, but the remaining straight males get to lounge around, play football, crack dad-jokes or show off their pub quiz knowledge under the covetous gaze of admiring females.Morris_Dancer said:Good morning, everyone.
Sorry for going off-topic (although slightly related to the last thread discussion), but isn't a major problem simply that equality doesn't work well for romantic matches, hence rising singleness?
What I mean by this is that women have equality in the workplace. That's a good thing. Women also tend to want to marry up. The economic circumstances of a man matters way more to a woman than the economic circumstances of a woman do to a man.
But that's a problem because equality means roughly the same earning potential so lines drawn according to economic circumstance will average out to being horizontal between men and women. Hence, middle and lower income chaps find things very difficult, because the desire line of marrying up just cuts out a ton of men.
This tallies with what's been remarked upon here before, that overall frisky time is the same as ever, but guys at the top are having tons whereas men at the bottom are getting none. But on a societal level that's no way to reach a standard of stable families and most people being happily married with kids.
Anyway, that's some sleepy waffling psychological rambling, but it might have something to it.
Like lions in their prides - seems to work for them.1 -
OTOH, they do stunningly well with landlords and outright owners. Unfortunately, these kinds of people tend to rely on the NHS more than most...DavidL said:Yeah but the old are the growing part of our society so....
Where they are in real trouble is that generation rent are far less likely to turn Tory as they get older than the first time buyers of my generation and the one after it. By allowing home ownership to go beyond the reach of so many they have burnt the seed corn of the next generation of Tories.
The structural issue is that there are fewer people with mortgages now, so the Tories need to win over a much bigger proportion of them or else start to target renters.
0 -
Thats a bit like saying you should stick with sandals and muesli.RochdalePioneers said:What do the Tories do to attract the young?
The obvious is to go back to conservatism- sound finances, work and reward, home ownership. The problem is that all of these things are against what their owners want (as they profit from the reverse) and against what their remaining 7 voters have been gaslit to want.
We will instead see them flirting with whipping the flames of anger to pick up the angry young man vote because no girl wants to shag their abusive if ignorant ass.
Currently all the political parties are struggling to engage with the electorate. It might be that the electorate is now too is now too splintered for FPTP to be able to deliver an effective government or it may be that the politicians need to get their act together and start delivering what they promised. Problem is of course they always over promise to get elected.0 -
Cameron and Osborne took some positive steps to boost aspiration and home ownership which was cratering under Blair and Brown.Alanbrooke said:The Tories stopped being the party of aspiration when they chose Cameron.
Price/income ratios under them stabilised and started to marginally fall again, despite the low interest rates, from the peaks under Blair and Brown and home ownership rates started to rise again.
The problem is that was too little. Under Boris the party had some good ideas with planning reforms but the rebellion by May et al killed that stone dead and then Sunak made things even worse.
They knew what the problem was, but didn't fix it.0 -
This is what happens when your prioritise older voters at the expense of younger voters and stop being the party of aspiration.
For example by tripling university tuition fees at the same time as triple locking pensions.
Some of us warned at the time that the George Osborne strategy would bring long term damage to the Conservatives.0 -
Mr. B, that's remarkable, but doesn't the end actually agree with me?
Namely, "Employees are overwhelmingly urban, highly educated, irreligious, work long hours, and have a 2:1 skew in gender ratio - all of which would predict lower fertility than the Taiwanese average..."
We see in Korea how horrendous expectations for both men and women to work extremely hard can be for child-raising (this is exacerbated by very high living costs too). It'd be intriguing to know just why Taiwan bucks that trend.
Mr. S, it's fascinating to consider whether such a ratio would see men empowered or oppressed. An ugly man in that scenario would probably just be a labour slave. Ages ago, I tried to work out how a medieval-ish society with a huge number of women to men would work. My conclusion was it would be ****ed, because any disease or war would dramatically shaft the demographics. Men are, in that sense, far more expendable.0 -
Osborne dicked about with over complex schemes to manage the housing market.BartholomewRoberts said:
Cameron and Osborne took some positive steps to boost aspiration and home ownership which was cratering under Blair and Brown.Alanbrooke said:The Tories stopped being the party of aspiration when they chose Cameron.
Price/income ratios under them stabilised and started to marginally fall again, despite the low interest rates, from the peaks under Blair and Brown and home ownership rates started to rise again.
The problem is that was too little. Under Boris the party had some good ideas with planning reforms but the rebellion by May et al killed that stone dead and then Sunak made things even worse.
They knew what the problem was, but didn't fix it.
He ducked the issues that the country needed. Build substantially more houses, invest in the infrastructure to go with them and get industry moving.
3 -
Interesting theory but I think it falls on "Women also tend to want to marry up." Dare I suggest you might be subconsciously stereotyping a bit there?Morris_Dancer said:Good morning, everyone.
Sorry for going off-topic (although slightly related to the last thread discussion), but isn't a major problem simply that equality doesn't work well for romantic matches, hence rising singleness?
What I mean by this is that women have equality in the workplace. That's a good thing. Women also tend to want to marry up. The economic circumstances of a man matters way more to a woman than the economic circumstances of a woman do to a man.
But that's a problem because equality means roughly the same earning potential so lines drawn according to economic circumstance will average out to being horizontal between men and women. Hence, middle and lower income chaps find things very difficult, because the desire line of marrying up just cuts out a ton of men.
This tallies with what's been remarked upon here before, that overall frisky time is the same as ever, but guys at the top are having tons whereas men at the bottom are getting none. But on a societal level that's no way to reach a standard of stable families and most people being happily married with kids.
Anyway, that's some sleepy waffling psychological rambling, but it might have something to it.
In a world of marked gender inequality that may have been the case, and may have been a sensible strategy but these days, where's the evidence?0 -
The places that have swung towards the Conservatives look like they correspond to those with affordable housing.DavidL said:Yeah but the old are the growing part of our society so....
Where they are in real trouble is that generation rent are far less likely to turn Tory as they get older than the first time buyers of my generation and the one after it. By allowing home ownership to go beyond the reach of so many they have burnt the seed corn of the next generation of Tories.
Whereas their much worse performance in southern England compared with 1997 would also match areas of housing unaffordability.1 -
It's a sobering figure in the header, the Tories needing to recruit a million voters just to stand still, and a further million in the parliament after that.
It really is hard to identify anything that they offer to people of working age, and it isn't just economics. The youngest boomers are now 60, and culturally they seem anathema To Gen X, Millenials and Gen Z.
It seems that rather like taste in clothes and music that taste in politics now is part of people's persona for life. Politics is now a cohort effect rather than an age effect.1 -
What's TSMC?Nigelb said:
The Taiwan article I posted in the last thread suggests a different paradigm.Morris_Dancer said:Good morning, everyone.
Sorry for going off-topic (although slightly related to the last thread discussion), but isn't a major problem simply that equality doesn't work well for romantic matches, hence rising singleness?
What I mean by this is that women have equality in the workplace. That's a good thing. Women also tend to want to marry up. The economic circumstances of a man matters way more to a woman than the economic circumstances of a woman do to a man.
But that's a problem because equality means roughly the same earning potential so lines drawn according to economic circumstance will average out to being horizontal between men and women. Hence, middle and lower income chaps find things very difficult, because the desire line of marrying up just cuts out a ton of men.
This tallies with what's been remarked upon here before, that overall frisky time is the same as ever, but guys at the top are having tons whereas men at the bottom are getting none. But on a societal level that's no way to reach a standard of stable families and most people being happily married with kids.
Anyway, that's some sleepy waffling psychological rambling, but it might have something to it.
https://alethios.substack.com/p/unexplored-unsaid
...Curiously, TSMC stands apart here. Their Taiwanese workforce accounts for a staggering 1.8% of births in Taiwan (and growing quickly, up from 1.4% in 2019), despite being just 0.3% of the population. After adjusting for demographic differences, I estimate10 that TSMC employees have 2.8x more children than the national average, giving a TFR of around 2.45 children per woman. This is especially noteworthy since every statistical indicator predicts lower-than-average fertility. Employees are overwhelmingly urban, highly educated, irreligious, work long hours, and have a 2:1 skew in gender ratio - all of which would predict lower fertility than the Taiwanese average...0 -
So you make it easier for young people to go off for 3 years of debt fuelled bingeing and take them out of the workforce. And then you make it easier for oldies to retire earlier by having access to pensions at 55 instead of 65.another_richard said:This is what happens when your prioritise older voters at the expense of younger voters and stop being the party of aspiration.
For example by tripling university tuition fees at the same time as triple locking pensions.
Some of us warned at the time that the George Osborne strategy would bring long term damage to the Conservatives.
Further down the line you then start moaning about where have all the people we need to do jobs gone ?1 -
Wokies are histrionic, blind, dumb and thick - even when presented with a nuanced argument.
We've clearly established that on the last thread.
Good. Glad we got that straight.0 -
I am not aware of any evidence for this. I've not seen any reports of an increasing correlation between number of sexual partners and income.Morris_Dancer said:Good morning, everyone.
Sorry for going off-topic (although slightly related to the last thread discussion), but isn't a major problem simply that equality doesn't work well for romantic matches, hence rising singleness?
What I mean by this is that women have equality in the workplace. That's a good thing. Women also tend to want to marry up. The economic circumstances of a man matters way more to a woman than the economic circumstances of a woman do to a man.
But that's a problem because equality means roughly the same earning potential so lines drawn according to economic circumstance will average out to being horizontal between men and women. Hence, middle and lower income chaps find things very difficult, because the desire line of marrying up just cuts out a ton of men.
This tallies with what's been remarked upon here before, that overall frisky time is the same as ever, but guys at the top are having tons whereas men at the bottom are getting none. But on a societal level that's no way to reach a standard of stable families and most people being happily married with kids.
Anyway, that's some sleepy waffling psychological rambling, but it might have something to it.1 -
Probably one of the most important companies youve never heard of.Benpointer said:
What's TSMC?Nigelb said:
The Taiwan article I posted in the last thread suggests a different paradigm.Morris_Dancer said:Good morning, everyone.
Sorry for going off-topic (although slightly related to the last thread discussion), but isn't a major problem simply that equality doesn't work well for romantic matches, hence rising singleness?
What I mean by this is that women have equality in the workplace. That's a good thing. Women also tend to want to marry up. The economic circumstances of a man matters way more to a woman than the economic circumstances of a woman do to a man.
But that's a problem because equality means roughly the same earning potential so lines drawn according to economic circumstance will average out to being horizontal between men and women. Hence, middle and lower income chaps find things very difficult, because the desire line of marrying up just cuts out a ton of men.
This tallies with what's been remarked upon here before, that overall frisky time is the same as ever, but guys at the top are having tons whereas men at the bottom are getting none. But on a societal level that's no way to reach a standard of stable families and most people being happily married with kids.
Anyway, that's some sleepy waffling psychological rambling, but it might have something to it.
https://alethios.substack.com/p/unexplored-unsaid
...Curiously, TSMC stands apart here. Their Taiwanese workforce accounts for a staggering 1.8% of births in Taiwan (and growing quickly, up from 1.4% in 2019), despite being just 0.3% of the population. After adjusting for demographic differences, I estimate10 that TSMC employees have 2.8x more children than the national average, giving a TFR of around 2.45 children per woman. This is especially noteworthy since every statistical indicator predicts lower-than-average fertility. Employees are overwhelmingly urban, highly educated, irreligious, work long hours, and have a 2:1 skew in gender ratio - all of which would predict lower fertility than the Taiwanese average...
They make all the most sophisticated semiconductors that run the world around you.7 -
Maybe we really are seeing the slow death of the Conservative Party? When the younger generations become disillusioned with Labour they are more likely to turn to the Greens, LDs or Reform than the Tories (imo).Foxy said:It's a sobering figure in the header, the Tories needing to recruit a million voters just to stand still, and a further million in the parliament after that.
It really is hard to identify anything that they offer to people of working age, and it isn't just economics. The youngest boomers are now 60, and culturally they seem anathema To Gen X, Millenials and Gen Z.
It seems that rather like taste in clothes and music that taste in politics now is part of people's persona for life. Politics is now a cohort effect rather than an age effect.1 -
Indeed the converse for my boys. It seems that treating intelligent young women with courtesy and respect works wonders in the relationship market.Benpointer said:
Interesting theory but I think it falls on "Women also tend to want to marry up." Dare I suggest you might be subconsciously stereotyping a bit there?Morris_Dancer said:Good morning, everyone.
Sorry for going off-topic (although slightly related to the last thread discussion), but isn't a major problem simply that equality doesn't work well for romantic matches, hence rising singleness?
What I mean by this is that women have equality in the workplace. That's a good thing. Women also tend to want to marry up. The economic circumstances of a man matters way more to a woman than the economic circumstances of a woman do to a man.
But that's a problem because equality means roughly the same earning potential so lines drawn according to economic circumstance will average out to being horizontal between men and women. Hence, middle and lower income chaps find things very difficult, because the desire line of marrying up just cuts out a ton of men.
This tallies with what's been remarked upon here before, that overall frisky time is the same as ever, but guys at the top are having tons whereas men at the bottom are getting none. But on a societal level that's no way to reach a standard of stable families and most people being happily married with kids.
Anyway, that's some sleepy waffling psychological rambling, but it might have something to it.
In a world of marked gender inequality that may have been the case, and may have been a sensible strategy but these days, where's the evidence?4 -
Nope I think the only thing we established is that your viewpoint differs from others and is incredibly set..Casino_Royale said:Wokies are histrionic, blind, dumb and thick - even when presented with a nuanced argument.
We've clearly established that on the last thread.
Good. Glad we got that straight.2 -
Its not remotely stupid that women feel safer with a bear than a strange man. Maybe you should stop moaning about identity politics and actually listen women and their concerns instead.Casino_Royale said:
I think Wokery, turbocharged by social media, is driving misogyny amongst boys and misandry amongst girls. Just look at that stupid poll on young women preferring to be with a bear than a man in a forest upthread.JosiasJessop said:"Online influencers like Andrew Tate are radicalising boys into extreme misogyny in a way that is "quite terrifying", police are warning."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cne4vw1x83po
Identity politics must end.
I heard this from my wife long before I heard it on this site, and she said bear too. The context given was that it was a stranger not a man you know in case that makes a difference to you.
A bear is likely to leave you alone. Far fewer women are attacked by bears than men. Instead of moaning about identity politics, how about we deal with the predators that make so many women feel unsafe - and those predators are not bears!3 -
Read up on Paraguay after 1870.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. B, that's remarkable, but doesn't the end actually agree with me?
Namely, "Employees are overwhelmingly urban, highly educated, irreligious, work long hours, and have a 2:1 skew in gender ratio - all of which would predict lower fertility than the Taiwanese average..."
We see in Korea how horrendous expectations for both men and women to work extremely hard can be for child-raising (this is exacerbated by very high living costs too). It'd be intriguing to know just why Taiwan bucks that trend.
Mr. S, it's fascinating to consider whether such a ratio would see men empowered or oppressed. An ugly man in that scenario would probably just be a labour slave. Ages ago, I tried to work out how a medieval-ish society with a huge number of women to men would work. My conclusion was it would be ****ed, because any disease or war would dramatically shaft the demographics. Men are, in that sense, far more expendable.
Some say that 80% of the male population over 15 were dead. The Catholic Church took the view that polygamy should be ignored.1 -
Odd comments to make when FPTP has just delivered a massive majority to Labour, who's entire election campaign was based around promising as little as possible.Alanbrooke said:
Thats a bit like saying you should stick with sandals and muesli.RochdalePioneers said:What do the Tories do to attract the young?
The obvious is to go back to conservatism- sound finances, work and reward, home ownership. The problem is that all of these things are against what their owners want (as they profit from the reverse) and against what their remaining 7 voters have been gaslit to want.
We will instead see them flirting with whipping the flames of anger to pick up the angry young man vote because no girl wants to shag their abusive if ignorant ass.
Currently all the political parties are struggling to engage with the electorate. It might be that the electorate is now too is now too splintered for FPTP to be able to deliver an effective government or it may be that the politicians need to get their act together and start delivering what they promised. Problem is of course they always over promise to get elected.1 -
Have we covered this?
Harris is home and dry for the nomination.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2024/jul/23/kamala-harris-says-she-is-looking-forward-to-accepting-democratic-nomination-as-she-secures-support-of-enough-delegates-live0 -
Thing is, he did that for (what looked like) smart political reasons. Oldies are the ones who vote, so superserving them (protect pensions and healthcare, even as everything else was cut) was a winning move.Alanbrooke said:
Osborne dicked about with over complex schemes to manage the housing market.BartholomewRoberts said:
Cameron and Osborne took some positive steps to boost aspiration and home ownership which was cratering under Blair and Brown.Alanbrooke said:The Tories stopped being the party of aspiration when they chose Cameron.
Price/income ratios under them stabilised and started to marginally fall again, despite the low interest rates, from the peaks under Blair and Brown and home ownership rates started to rise again.
The problem is that was too little. Under Boris the party had some good ideas with planning reforms but the rebellion by May et al killed that stone dead and then Sunak made things even worse.
They knew what the problem was, but didn't fix it.
He ducked the issues that the country needed. Build substantially more houses, invest in the infrastructure to go with them and get industry moving.
See also attitudes to planning (older homeowners don't want new stuff built), investment (better to spend the money on us now), social issues (the boomer revolution was great, everything since is an abomination), and Europe.
Unfortunately, some of those stances are things that people aren't growing into as they age, and others are just bad governance.0 -
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company - they make latest generation semiconductors for literally everyone and are about 3-10 years ahead of the opposition..Alanbrooke said:
Probably one of the most important companies youve never heard of.Benpointer said:
What's TSMC?Nigelb said:
The Taiwan article I posted in the last thread suggests a different paradigm.Morris_Dancer said:Good morning, everyone.
Sorry for going off-topic (although slightly related to the last thread discussion), but isn't a major problem simply that equality doesn't work well for romantic matches, hence rising singleness?
What I mean by this is that women have equality in the workplace. That's a good thing. Women also tend to want to marry up. The economic circumstances of a man matters way more to a woman than the economic circumstances of a woman do to a man.
But that's a problem because equality means roughly the same earning potential so lines drawn according to economic circumstance will average out to being horizontal between men and women. Hence, middle and lower income chaps find things very difficult, because the desire line of marrying up just cuts out a ton of men.
This tallies with what's been remarked upon here before, that overall frisky time is the same as ever, but guys at the top are having tons whereas men at the bottom are getting none. But on a societal level that's no way to reach a standard of stable families and most people being happily married with kids.
Anyway, that's some sleepy waffling psychological rambling, but it might have something to it.
https://alethios.substack.com/p/unexplored-unsaid
...Curiously, TSMC stands apart here. Their Taiwanese workforce accounts for a staggering 1.8% of births in Taiwan (and growing quickly, up from 1.4% in 2019), despite being just 0.3% of the population. After adjusting for demographic differences, I estimate10 that TSMC employees have 2.8x more children than the national average, giving a TFR of around 2.45 children per woman. This is especially noteworthy since every statistical indicator predicts lower-than-average fertility. Employees are overwhelmingly urban, highly educated, irreligious, work long hours, and have a 2:1 skew in gender ratio - all of which would predict lower fertility than the Taiwanese average...
They make all the most sophisticated semiconductors that run the world around you.0 -
ThanksAlanbrooke said:
Probably one of the most important companies youve never heard of.Benpointer said:
What's TSMC?Nigelb said:
The Taiwan article I posted in the last thread suggests a different paradigm.Morris_Dancer said:Good morning, everyone.
Sorry for going off-topic (although slightly related to the last thread discussion), but isn't a major problem simply that equality doesn't work well for romantic matches, hence rising singleness?
What I mean by this is that women have equality in the workplace. That's a good thing. Women also tend to want to marry up. The economic circumstances of a man matters way more to a woman than the economic circumstances of a woman do to a man.
But that's a problem because equality means roughly the same earning potential so lines drawn according to economic circumstance will average out to being horizontal between men and women. Hence, middle and lower income chaps find things very difficult, because the desire line of marrying up just cuts out a ton of men.
This tallies with what's been remarked upon here before, that overall frisky time is the same as ever, but guys at the top are having tons whereas men at the bottom are getting none. But on a societal level that's no way to reach a standard of stable families and most people being happily married with kids.
Anyway, that's some sleepy waffling psychological rambling, but it might have something to it.
https://alethios.substack.com/p/unexplored-unsaid
...Curiously, TSMC stands apart here. Their Taiwanese workforce accounts for a staggering 1.8% of births in Taiwan (and growing quickly, up from 1.4% in 2019), despite being just 0.3% of the population. After adjusting for demographic differences, I estimate10 that TSMC employees have 2.8x more children than the national average, giving a TFR of around 2.45 children per woman. This is especially noteworthy since every statistical indicator predicts lower-than-average fertility. Employees are overwhelmingly urban, highly educated, irreligious, work long hours, and have a 2:1 skew in gender ratio - all of which would predict lower fertility than the Taiwanese average...
They make all the most sophisticated semiconductors that run the world around you.0 -
Good day everyone.
PB men theorising about women episode 30675
. 1 -
I think thats just too PBish. Most people dont think about politics and only really do so near an election. There are few hard and fast positions except for the activists. Most people have politics as background noise as they get on with their lives. The age issues are imo over egged, you would think parents and their kids didnt speak. But I have a regular dialogue with my three and we often come to a position on which we all agree.Foxy said:It's a sobering figure in the header, the Tories needing to recruit a million voters just to stand still, and a further million in the parliament after that.
It really is hard to identify anything that they offer to people of working age, and it isn't just economics. The youngest boomers are now 60, and culturally they seem anathema To Gen X, Millenials and Gen Z.
It seems that rather like taste in clothes and music that taste in politics now is part of people's persona for life. Politics is now a cohort effect rather than an age effect.
1 -
People don`t stop growing older...0
-
Foxy said:
Indeed the converse for my boys. It seems that treating intelligent young women with courtesy and respect works wonders in the relationship market.Benpointer said:
Interesting theory but I think it falls on "Women also tend to want to marry up." Dare I suggest you might be subconsciously stereotyping a bit there?Morris_Dancer said:Good morning, everyone.
Sorry for going off-topic (although slightly related to the last thread discussion), but isn't a major problem simply that equality doesn't work well for romantic matches, hence rising singleness?
What I mean by this is that women have equality in the workplace. That's a good thing. Women also tend to want to marry up. The economic circumstances of a man matters way more to a woman than the economic circumstances of a woman do to a man.
But that's a problem because equality means roughly the same earning potential so lines drawn according to economic circumstance will average out to being horizontal between men and women. Hence, middle and lower income chaps find things very difficult, because the desire line of marrying up just cuts out a ton of men.
This tallies with what's been remarked upon here before, that overall frisky time is the same as ever, but guys at the top are having tons whereas men at the bottom are getting none. But on a societal level that's no way to reach a standard of stable families and most people being happily married with kids.
Anyway, that's some sleepy waffling psychological rambling, but it might have something to it.
In a world of marked gender inequality that may have been the case, and may have been a sensible strategy but these days, where's the evidence?
Who'da thunk it, eh?4 -
To be expected from the Metro.TheScreamingEagles said:The shade here.
Joey Barton has been charged with making ‘malicious communications’ towards ex-England star Eni Aluko
Barton has repeatedly criticised Aluko, who has 102 caps for England
Meanwhile, he once played 12 minutes for the Three Lions
https://x.com/MetroUK/status/1815369412465025116
He is criticising her punditry not her ability as a womens soccer player.
It seems the tweet that he has been charged with is one that targetted Aluko and another female pundit and likened them to Fred and Rose West.
Unpleasant, for sure. Not sure it merits a charge.
His comments about Jeremy Vine were terrible and he deserved his output0 -
And shortening for pres. Can't decide to take 125 now or hang on in hope of 700 (huge sums in terms of my betting)Benpointer said:Have we covered this?
Harris is home and dry for the nomination.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2024/jul/23/kamala-harris-says-she-is-looking-forward-to-accepting-democratic-nomination-as-she-secures-support-of-enough-delegates-live0 -
Good morning
The thread is quite relevant to me personally as with my health issues I would be delighted to be able to cast my vote in GE29
However, I think it is fair to say the change to renters, rather than home owners, is laying the foundation for very difficult problems as these renters retire with rent still to pay unlike most retiring mortgage free home owners
I do not know the solution and even if the conservative party of the next GE will be unrecognisable to many of us, there will be a party of the centre right in some form or other2 -
Cash out your original stake, or perhaps a small profit, and let the rest run if you still think she will win.Tweedledee said:
And shortening for pres. Can't decide to take 125 now or hang on in hope of 700 (huge sums in terms of my betting)Benpointer said:Have we covered this?
Harris is home and dry for the nomination.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2024/jul/23/kamala-harris-says-she-is-looking-forward-to-accepting-democratic-nomination-as-she-secures-support-of-enough-delegates-live0 -
Either Mark Kelly from Arizona or Andy Beshear from Kentucky would seem the best VP picks for Harris .
Kelly’s senate seat would be filled a by a fellow Democrat until the next mid terms .0 -
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/crime/article/violence-against-women-and-girls-a-national-emergency-68x8pw7dr
And without any actual women present.MattW said:Good day everyone.
PB men theorising about women episode 30675 .0 -
Levelling up.
Brexit was won not by Bill Cash arguing for sovereignty or John Redwood's Singapore-on-Thames. Brexit was won by a supercharged NOTA vote from habitual non-voters in left-behind communities. Brexit was a vote for levelling up.
Then Boris sacked Dominic Cummings, and Rishi, first as Chancellor, then as Prime Minister, spent the money elsewhere.1 -
Do they, always ?Alanbrooke said:
Thats a bit like saying you should stick with sandals and muesli.RochdalePioneers said:What do the Tories do to attract the young?
The obvious is to go back to conservatism- sound finances, work and reward, home ownership. The problem is that all of these things are against what their owners want (as they profit from the reverse) and against what their remaining 7 voters have been gaslit to want.
We will instead see them flirting with whipping the flames of anger to pick up the angry young man vote because no girl wants to shag their abusive if ignorant ass.
Currently all the political parties are struggling to engage with the electorate. It might be that the electorate is now too is now too splintered for FPTP to be able to deliver an effective government or it may be that the politicians need to get their act together and start delivering what they promised. Problem is of course they always over promise to get elected.
You were complaining before the election that Labour hadn't promised anything.1 -
Sir Andy Murray to retire after the Olympics.
His career was never the same after he endorsed Scottish nationalism.0 -
Osborne didnt have a monopoly on shit decisions he simply carried on the policies of Blair and Brown. And I would also say that the political nostrum that Osborne had policies to favour oldies is also suspect. He gave with one hand and took with the other. I bailed my kids out on extortionate uni fees so that they did not start life with a mountain of debt and when it comes to housing its been bank of mum and dad that has been getting them on the housing ladder. Needless to say I stopped voting Conservative in 2011 as they offer nothing.Stuartinromford said:
Thing is, he did that for (what looked like) smart political reasons. Oldies are the ones who vote, so superserving them (protect pensions and healthcare, even as everything else was cut) was a winning move.Alanbrooke said:
Osborne dicked about with over complex schemes to manage the housing market.BartholomewRoberts said:
Cameron and Osborne took some positive steps to boost aspiration and home ownership which was cratering under Blair and Brown.Alanbrooke said:The Tories stopped being the party of aspiration when they chose Cameron.
Price/income ratios under them stabilised and started to marginally fall again, despite the low interest rates, from the peaks under Blair and Brown and home ownership rates started to rise again.
The problem is that was too little. Under Boris the party had some good ideas with planning reforms but the rebellion by May et al killed that stone dead and then Sunak made things even worse.
They knew what the problem was, but didn't fix it.
He ducked the issues that the country needed. Build substantially more houses, invest in the infrastructure to go with them and get industry moving.
See also attitudes to planning (older homeowners don't want new stuff built), investment (better to spend the money on us now), social issues (the boomer revolution was great, everything since is an abomination), and Europe.
Unfortunately, some of those stances are things that people aren't growing into as they age, and others are just bad governance.0 -
Great news for cricket lovers. The Hundred is back.0
-
It’s worth emphasising the size of the problem - when you own a house and retire your mortgage is likely paid off so you outgoings relative to when you were previously working will be lower.Big_G_NorthWales said:Good morning
The thread is quite relevant to me personally as with my health issues I would be delighted to be able to cast my vote in GE29
However, I think it is fair to say the change to renters, rather than home owners, is laying the foundation for very difficult problems as these renters retire with rent still to pay unlike most retiring mortgage free home owners
I do not know the solution and even if the conservative party of the next GE will be unrecognisable to many of us, but there will be a party of the centre right in some form or other
That isn’t the case if you are still renting your home. You still need to find the £700-2000 a month to pay the rent. It’s going to be a truly massive problem in 2 decades or so time.3 -
Tell me about it !!!!!!!SMukesh said:People don`t stop growing older...
3 -
Is he playing? Why? Sleepy Andy doing a BidenTheScreamingEagles said:Sir Andy Murray to retire after the Olympics.
His career was never the same after he endorsed Scottish nationalism.0 -
Absolutely right. It is/was a travesty that the levelling up agenda, whatever that might have been, was binned. And that was down to Johnson's laziness, lack of focus, inability to put good people in around him and let them do the work.DecrepiterJohnL said:Levelling up.
Brexit was won not by Bill Cash arguing for sovereignty or John Redwood's Singapore-on-Thames. Brexit was won by a supercharged NOTA vote from habitual non-voters in left-behind communities. Brexit was a vote for levelling up.
Then Boris sacked Dominic Cummings, and Rishi, first as Chancellor, then as Prime Minister, spent the money elsewhere.
That said, Covid.
A hell of a lot went out of the window once that hit and we loaded up the helicopters with cash.2 -
This is counter-intuitive. Far more women are attacked by men they know than by strangers.BartholomewRoberts said:
Its not remotely stupid that women feel safer with a bear than a strange man. Maybe you should stop moaning about identity politics and actually listen women and their concerns instead.Casino_Royale said:
I think Wokery, turbocharged by social media, is driving misogyny amongst boys and misandry amongst girls. Just look at that stupid poll on young women preferring to be with a bear than a man in a forest upthread.JosiasJessop said:"Online influencers like Andrew Tate are radicalising boys into extreme misogyny in a way that is "quite terrifying", police are warning."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cne4vw1x83po
Identity politics must end.
I heard this from my wife long before I heard it on this site, and she said bear too. The context given was that it was a stranger not a man you know in case that makes a difference to you.
A bear is likely to leave you alone. Far fewer women are attacked by bears than men. Instead of moaning about identity politics, how about we deal with the predators that make so many women feel unsafe - and those predators are not bears!0 -
Taiwan doesn't buck that trend. It has a huge demographic problem, almost as bad as S Korea's.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. B, that's remarkable, but doesn't the end actually agree with me?
Namely, "Employees are overwhelmingly urban, highly educated, irreligious, work long hours, and have a 2:1 skew in gender ratio - all of which would predict lower fertility than the Taiwanese average..."
We see in Korea how horrendous expectations for both men and women to work extremely hard can be for child-raising (this is exacerbated by very high living costs too). It'd be intriguing to know just why Taiwan bucks that trend...
TSMC bucks that trend - with highly educated career women having kids at nearly triple the national average rate.1 -
Is it just possible that that's a factor in the issue described in the header? Namely that remarkably few young people would even consider voting Conservative?Casino_Royale said:Wokies are histrionic, blind, dumb and thick - even when presented with a nuanced argument.
We've clearly established that on the last thread.
Good. Glad we got that straight.0 -
It did nothing of the sort. A split opposition delivered Labour its majority combined with a Conservative party on a suicide mission.bondegezou said:
Odd comments to make when FPTP has just delivered a massive majority to Labour, who's entire election campaign was based around promising as little as possible.Alanbrooke said:
Thats a bit like saying you should stick with sandals and muesli.RochdalePioneers said:What do the Tories do to attract the young?
The obvious is to go back to conservatism- sound finances, work and reward, home ownership. The problem is that all of these things are against what their owners want (as they profit from the reverse) and against what their remaining 7 voters have been gaslit to want.
We will instead see them flirting with whipping the flames of anger to pick up the angry young man vote because no girl wants to shag their abusive if ignorant ass.
Currently all the political parties are struggling to engage with the electorate. It might be that the electorate is now too is now too splintered for FPTP to be able to deliver an effective government or it may be that the politicians need to get their act together and start delivering what they promised. Problem is of course they always over promise to get elected.0 -
And also a fantastic success story. I spent a little time a few years back looking at their foundation and rise, and trying to work out what 'magic' led to their success when others, even in Japan, failed. My conclusion? A lot of it is down to good management, strong innovation, and very strong governmental support. But a lot is also plain luck; especially with their competitors making wrong turns (ref. Intel, Fujitsu et al...)Alanbrooke said:
Probably one of the most important companies youve never heard of.Benpointer said:
What's TSMC?Nigelb said:
The Taiwan article I posted in the last thread suggests a different paradigm.Morris_Dancer said:Good morning, everyone.
Sorry for going off-topic (although slightly related to the last thread discussion), but isn't a major problem simply that equality doesn't work well for romantic matches, hence rising singleness?
What I mean by this is that women have equality in the workplace. That's a good thing. Women also tend to want to marry up. The economic circumstances of a man matters way more to a woman than the economic circumstances of a woman do to a man.
But that's a problem because equality means roughly the same earning potential so lines drawn according to economic circumstance will average out to being horizontal between men and women. Hence, middle and lower income chaps find things very difficult, because the desire line of marrying up just cuts out a ton of men.
This tallies with what's been remarked upon here before, that overall frisky time is the same as ever, but guys at the top are having tons whereas men at the bottom are getting none. But on a societal level that's no way to reach a standard of stable families and most people being happily married with kids.
Anyway, that's some sleepy waffling psychological rambling, but it might have something to it.
https://alethios.substack.com/p/unexplored-unsaid
...Curiously, TSMC stands apart here. Their Taiwanese workforce accounts for a staggering 1.8% of births in Taiwan (and growing quickly, up from 1.4% in 2019), despite being just 0.3% of the population. After adjusting for demographic differences, I estimate10 that TSMC employees have 2.8x more children than the national average, giving a TFR of around 2.45 children per woman. This is especially noteworthy since every statistical indicator predicts lower-than-average fertility. Employees are overwhelmingly urban, highly educated, irreligious, work long hours, and have a 2:1 skew in gender ratio - all of which would predict lower fertility than the Taiwanese average...
They make all the most sophisticated semiconductors that run the world around you.
In short: it would be very hard to replicate their success. And even harder with the business and political culture we suffer from in the UK.1 -
Try this for size.BartholomewRoberts said:
Its not remotely stupid that women feel safer with a bear than a strange man. Maybe you should stop moaning about identity politics and actually listen women and their concerns instead.Casino_Royale said:
I think Wokery, turbocharged by social media, is driving misogyny amongst boys and misandry amongst girls. Just look at that stupid poll on young women preferring to be with a bear than a man in a forest upthread.JosiasJessop said:"Online influencers like Andrew Tate are radicalising boys into extreme misogyny in a way that is "quite terrifying", police are warning."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cne4vw1x83po
Identity politics must end.
I heard this from my wife long before I heard it on this site, and she said bear too. The context given was that it was a stranger not a man you know in case that makes a difference to you.
A bear is likely to leave you alone. Far fewer women are attacked by bears than men. Instead of moaning about identity politics, how about we deal with the predators that make so many women feel unsafe - and those predators are not bears!
https://x.com/itvnews/status/1813887551523951008/mediaviewer
Utterly disgusting.0 -
That's a fair comment.No_Offence_Alan said:
This is counter-intuitive. Far more women are attacked by men they know than by strangers.BartholomewRoberts said:
Its not remotely stupid that women feel safer with a bear than a strange man. Maybe you should stop moaning about identity politics and actually listen women and their concerns instead.Casino_Royale said:
I think Wokery, turbocharged by social media, is driving misogyny amongst boys and misandry amongst girls. Just look at that stupid poll on young women preferring to be with a bear than a man in a forest upthread.JosiasJessop said:"Online influencers like Andrew Tate are radicalising boys into extreme misogyny in a way that is "quite terrifying", police are warning."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cne4vw1x83po
Identity politics must end.
I heard this from my wife long before I heard it on this site, and she said bear too. The context given was that it was a stranger not a man you know in case that makes a difference to you.
A bear is likely to leave you alone. Far fewer women are attacked by bears than men. Instead of moaning about identity politics, how about we deal with the predators that make so many women feel unsafe - and those predators are not bears!
And both dwarf attacks by bears.2 -
Indeed and of course little inheritance for their familieseek said:
It’s worth emphasising the size of the problem - when you own a house and retire your mortgage is likely paid off so you outgoings relative to when you were previously working will be lower.Big_G_NorthWales said:Good morning
The thread is quite relevant to me personally as with my health issues I would be delighted to be able to cast my vote in GE29
However, I think it is fair to say the change to renters, rather than home owners, is laying the foundation for very difficult problems as these renters retire with rent still to pay unlike most retiring mortgage free home owners
I do not know the solution and even if the conservative party of the next GE will be unrecognisable to many of us, but there will be a party of the centre right in some form or other
That isn’t the case if you are still renting your home. You still need to find the £700-2000 a month to pay the rent. It’s going to be a truly massive problem in 2 decades or so time.0 -
Plus in news from the 1950s, I hear from PB that women "marry up".1
-
Urgh.Mexicanpete said:
Try this for size.BartholomewRoberts said:
Its not remotely stupid that women feel safer with a bear than a strange man. Maybe you should stop moaning about identity politics and actually listen women and their concerns instead.Casino_Royale said:
I think Wokery, turbocharged by social media, is driving misogyny amongst boys and misandry amongst girls. Just look at that stupid poll on young women preferring to be with a bear than a man in a forest upthread.JosiasJessop said:"Online influencers like Andrew Tate are radicalising boys into extreme misogyny in a way that is "quite terrifying", police are warning."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cne4vw1x83po
Identity politics must end.
I heard this from my wife long before I heard it on this site, and she said bear too. The context given was that it was a stranger not a man you know in case that makes a difference to you.
A bear is likely to leave you alone. Far fewer women are attacked by bears than men. Instead of moaning about identity politics, how about we deal with the predators that make so many women feel unsafe - and those predators are not bears!
https://x.com/itvnews/status/1813887551523951008/mediaviewer
Utterly disgusting.
Look at all those bears.1 -
That isn’t the problem - the question is who is going to be paying that £2000 in rent because I suspect it will very quickly become the state’s problem..Big_G_NorthWales said:
Indeed and of course little inheritance for their familieseek said:
It’s worth emphasising the size of the problem - when you own a house and retire your mortgage is likely paid off so you outgoings relative to when you were previously working will be lower.Big_G_NorthWales said:Good morning
The thread is quite relevant to me personally as with my health issues I would be delighted to be able to cast my vote in GE29
However, I think it is fair to say the change to renters, rather than home owners, is laying the foundation for very difficult problems as these renters retire with rent still to pay unlike most retiring mortgage free home owners
I do not know the solution and even if the conservative party of the next GE will be unrecognisable to many of us, but there will be a party of the centre right in some form or other
That isn’t the case if you are still renting your home. You still need to find the £700-2000 a month to pay the rent. It’s going to be a truly massive problem in 2 decades or so time.1 -
Far more women are attacked by men they know than by strangers, but also far more women are attacked by strangers than by bears.No_Offence_Alan said:
This is counter-intuitive. Far more women are attacked by men they know than by strangers.BartholomewRoberts said:
Its not remotely stupid that women feel safer with a bear than a strange man. Maybe you should stop moaning about identity politics and actually listen women and their concerns instead.Casino_Royale said:
I think Wokery, turbocharged by social media, is driving misogyny amongst boys and misandry amongst girls. Just look at that stupid poll on young women preferring to be with a bear than a man in a forest upthread.JosiasJessop said:"Online influencers like Andrew Tate are radicalising boys into extreme misogyny in a way that is "quite terrifying", police are warning."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cne4vw1x83po
Identity politics must end.
I heard this from my wife long before I heard it on this site, and she said bear too. The context given was that it was a stranger not a man you know in case that makes a difference to you.
A bear is likely to leave you alone. Far fewer women are attacked by bears than men. Instead of moaning about identity politics, how about we deal with the predators that make so many women feel unsafe - and those predators are not bears!3 -
I see Don_Quixote_Royale has joined the conversation.Casino_Royale said:Wokies are histrionic, blind, dumb and thick - even when presented with a nuanced argument.
We've clearly established that on the last thread.
Good. Glad we got that straight.0 -
He was universally reviled after he said to Tim Henman, as great banter, he always supported Scotland and whoever was playing England.TheScreamingEagles said:Sir Andy Murray to retire after the Olympics.
His career was never the same after he endorsed Scottish nationalism.0 -
Im referring to future elections.Nigelb said:
Do they, always ?Alanbrooke said:
Thats a bit like saying you should stick with sandals and muesli.RochdalePioneers said:What do the Tories do to attract the young?
The obvious is to go back to conservatism- sound finances, work and reward, home ownership. The problem is that all of these things are against what their owners want (as they profit from the reverse) and against what their remaining 7 voters have been gaslit to want.
We will instead see them flirting with whipping the flames of anger to pick up the angry young man vote because no girl wants to shag their abusive if ignorant ass.
Currently all the political parties are struggling to engage with the electorate. It might be that the electorate is now too is now too splintered for FPTP to be able to deliver an effective government or it may be that the politicians need to get their act together and start delivering what they promised. Problem is of course they always over promise to get elected.
You were complaining before the election that Labour hadn't promised anything.
Labour's say nothing policy will come to bit them in the arse over the next couple of years,0 -
But who would win in a fight bear vs shark is the more important question.0
-
I’m pretty sure Labour won a massive majority and that we voted under FPTP… although I agree that the electorate is more splintered and that may produce problems for FPTP’s ability to deliver an effective government in the future.Alanbrooke said:
It did nothing of the sort. A split opposition delivered Labour its majority combined with a Conservative party on a suicide mission.bondegezou said:
Odd comments to make when FPTP has just delivered a massive majority to Labour, who's entire election campaign was based around promising as little as possible.Alanbrooke said:
Thats a bit like saying you should stick with sandals and muesli.RochdalePioneers said:What do the Tories do to attract the young?
The obvious is to go back to conservatism- sound finances, work and reward, home ownership. The problem is that all of these things are against what their owners want (as they profit from the reverse) and against what their remaining 7 voters have been gaslit to want.
We will instead see them flirting with whipping the flames of anger to pick up the angry young man vote because no girl wants to shag their abusive if ignorant ass.
Currently all the political parties are struggling to engage with the electorate. It might be that the electorate is now too is now too splintered for FPTP to be able to deliver an effective government or it may be that the politicians need to get their act together and start delivering what they promised. Problem is of course they always over promise to get elected.
And you haven’t addressed Labour’s strategy of not promising much.0 -
It would be useful to unpick their secret sauce; if it's culture as well as practicalities, what is it about the culture and how much is for export?Nigelb said:
Taiwan doesn't buck that trend. It has a huge demographic problem, almost as bad as S Korea's.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. B, that's remarkable, but doesn't the end actually agree with me?
Namely, "Employees are overwhelmingly urban, highly educated, irreligious, work long hours, and have a 2:1 skew in gender ratio - all of which would predict lower fertility than the Taiwanese average..."
We see in Korea how horrendous expectations for both men and women to work extremely hard can be for child-raising (this is exacerbated by very high living costs too). It'd be intriguing to know just why Taiwan bucks that trend...
TSMC bucks that trend - with highly educated career women having kids at nearly triple the national average rate.
What's pretty clear is that the UK is failing on both.1 -
It is a huge problem that will explode into the economy in the next few years and is almost certainty a worry to many thinking of retirement even noweek said:
That isn’t the problem - the question is who is going to be paying that £2000 in rent because I suspect it will very quickly become the state’s problem..Big_G_NorthWales said:
Indeed and of course little inheritance for their familieseek said:
It’s worth emphasising the size of the problem - when you own a house and retire your mortgage is likely paid off so you outgoings relative to when you were previously working will be lower.Big_G_NorthWales said:Good morning
The thread is quite relevant to me personally as with my health issues I would be delighted to be able to cast my vote in GE29
However, I think it is fair to say the change to renters, rather than home owners, is laying the foundation for very difficult problems as these renters retire with rent still to pay unlike most retiring mortgage free home owners
I do not know the solution and even if the conservative party of the next GE will be unrecognisable to many of us, but there will be a party of the centre right in some form or other
That isn’t the case if you are still renting your home. You still need to find the £700-2000 a month to pay the rent. It’s going to be a truly massive problem in 2 decades or so time.1 -
And if you only have a state pension, the rest of us will be paying that rent for you in housing benefit.eek said:
It’s worth emphasising the size of the problem - when you own a house and retire your mortgage is likely paid off so you outgoings relative to when you were previously working will be lower.Big_G_NorthWales said:Good morning
The thread is quite relevant to me personally as with my health issues I would be delighted to be able to cast my vote in GE29
However, I think it is fair to say the change to renters, rather than home owners, is laying the foundation for very difficult problems as these renters retire with rent still to pay unlike most retiring mortgage free home owners
I do not know the solution and even if the conservative party of the next GE will be unrecognisable to many of us, but there will be a party of the centre right in some form or other
That isn’t the case if you are still renting your home. You still need to find the £700-2000 a month to pay the rent. It’s going to be a truly massive problem in 2 decades or so time.4 -
Just horrible and unacceptableMexicanpete said:
Try this for size.BartholomewRoberts said:
Its not remotely stupid that women feel safer with a bear than a strange man. Maybe you should stop moaning about identity politics and actually listen women and their concerns instead.Casino_Royale said:
I think Wokery, turbocharged by social media, is driving misogyny amongst boys and misandry amongst girls. Just look at that stupid poll on young women preferring to be with a bear than a man in a forest upthread.JosiasJessop said:"Online influencers like Andrew Tate are radicalising boys into extreme misogyny in a way that is "quite terrifying", police are warning."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cne4vw1x83po
Identity politics must end.
I heard this from my wife long before I heard it on this site, and she said bear too. The context given was that it was a stranger not a man you know in case that makes a difference to you.
A bear is likely to leave you alone. Far fewer women are attacked by bears than men. Instead of moaning about identity politics, how about we deal with the predators that make so many women feel unsafe - and those predators are not bears!
https://x.com/itvnews/status/1813887551523951008/mediaviewer
Utterly disgusting.1 -
https://ifstudies.org/blog/better-educated-women-still-prefer-higher-earning-husbands
"Did it surprise you at all that despite women having more education and opportunity than ever before, most still prefer to marry men with higher incomes?
Yue Qian: No, I was not really surprised because prior research has found a stalling of progress toward gender equality since the 1990s, suggesting that the norm against marriages in which women have higher status than their husbands may also have changed little in recent decades. My study resonated with this line of research and showed that men and women continued to form marriages in which the wife's socioeconomic status did not exceed that of the husband."
Also:
"Do you believe that a husband’s income will continue to play a considerable role in marriage patterns in the future?
Yue Qian: My study did not discredit the importance of education in shaping marriage patterns, but it advanced prior research toward a more comprehensive understanding of mate selection by taking income into consideration. Indeed, income may have become increasingly important in the selection of marriage partners in recent decades. As individuals marry at later ages, and often after they have attained stable employment, income, and even wealth, they may increasingly use income, as opposed to education level, as the main marker of a potential spouse’s economic prospects. As long as gender pay gaps continue to favor men, the role of the remarkable advances in women’s educational attainment in redefining gender role expectations in American families may be more limited than assumed."
Study is 8 years old, mind.
Edited extra bit: also, growing income equality (married couples, US), from 2023: https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2023/04/13/in-a-growing-share-of-u-s-marriages-husbands-and-wives-earn-about-the-same/
Edited 2: So, it seems I was either wrong or becoming wrong.1 -
So it’s a problem when politicians over promise, and a say-nothing approach “will come to bit[e] them in the arse”. So, what exactly are politicians meant to say?Alanbrooke said:
Im referring to future elections.Nigelb said:
Do they, always ?Alanbrooke said:
Thats a bit like saying you should stick with sandals and muesli.RochdalePioneers said:What do the Tories do to attract the young?
The obvious is to go back to conservatism- sound finances, work and reward, home ownership. The problem is that all of these things are against what their owners want (as they profit from the reverse) and against what their remaining 7 voters have been gaslit to want.
We will instead see them flirting with whipping the flames of anger to pick up the angry young man vote because no girl wants to shag their abusive if ignorant ass.
Currently all the political parties are struggling to engage with the electorate. It might be that the electorate is now too is now too splintered for FPTP to be able to deliver an effective government or it may be that the politicians need to get their act together and start delivering what they promised. Problem is of course they always over promise to get elected.
You were complaining before the election that Labour hadn't promised anything.
Labour's say nothing policy will come to bit them in the arse over the next couple of years,0 -
How many women interact regularly with bears, vs how many regularly interact with strange men?bondegezou said:
Far more women are attacked by men they know than by strangers, but also far more women are attacked by strangers than by bears.No_Offence_Alan said:
This is counter-intuitive. Far more women are attacked by men they know than by strangers.BartholomewRoberts said:
Its not remotely stupid that women feel safer with a bear than a strange man. Maybe you should stop moaning about identity politics and actually listen women and their concerns instead.Casino_Royale said:
I think Wokery, turbocharged by social media, is driving misogyny amongst boys and misandry amongst girls. Just look at that stupid poll on young women preferring to be with a bear than a man in a forest upthread.JosiasJessop said:"Online influencers like Andrew Tate are radicalising boys into extreme misogyny in a way that is "quite terrifying", police are warning."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cne4vw1x83po
Identity politics must end.
I heard this from my wife long before I heard it on this site, and she said bear too. The context given was that it was a stranger not a man you know in case that makes a difference to you.
A bear is likely to leave you alone. Far fewer women are attacked by bears than men. Instead of moaning about identity politics, how about we deal with the predators that make so many women feel unsafe - and those predators are not bears!
FWIW, a grizzly bear or a polar bear sees you as lunch, and you’d better have your gun handy. A brown bear, other than a sow protecting cubs, is usually curious but will ignore you if you stay calm and carry on what you’re doing. But still have the gun handy.0 -
My photo of the Day.
Jumping the Electric Shark.
What does Chump do when the battery is *on* the shark, and will one of his pet snakes save him?
Being a little highflown, I think the important questions are:
1 - Can the Republican party take the poison out of its soul?
I think we need a Republican flip as great as the Democrat flip in the 20C.
2 - Assuming Harris wins POTUS, can the constitutional system be reformed to recover the USA as a democratic society?
If the answers to either one is NO, then Houston they have a problem, as so do we by extension since the UK is most in bed with them of perhaps almost any European country.2 -
...
Careful you don't get labelled as "woke" for finding such behaviour unacceptable.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Just horrible and unacceptableMexicanpete said:
Try this for size.BartholomewRoberts said:
Its not remotely stupid that women feel safer with a bear than a strange man. Maybe you should stop moaning about identity politics and actually listen women and their concerns instead.Casino_Royale said:
I think Wokery, turbocharged by social media, is driving misogyny amongst boys and misandry amongst girls. Just look at that stupid poll on young women preferring to be with a bear than a man in a forest upthread.JosiasJessop said:"Online influencers like Andrew Tate are radicalising boys into extreme misogyny in a way that is "quite terrifying", police are warning."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cne4vw1x83po
Identity politics must end.
I heard this from my wife long before I heard it on this site, and she said bear too. The context given was that it was a stranger not a man you know in case that makes a difference to you.
A bear is likely to leave you alone. Far fewer women are attacked by bears than men. Instead of moaning about identity politics, how about we deal with the predators that make so many women feel unsafe - and those predators are not bears!
https://x.com/itvnews/status/1813887551523951008/mediaviewer
Utterly disgusting.0 -
Isn't there a risk they'd lose Kentucky if they go with Beshear? But if he's term limited then switching him into the VP role is worth it?nico679 said:Either Mark Kelly from Arizona or Andy Beshear from Kentucky would seem the best VP picks for Harris .
Kelly’s senate seat would be filled a by a fellow Democrat until the next mid terms .0 -
It's a simple formula:Foxy said:
Indeed the converse for my boys. It seems that treating intelligent young women with courtesy and respect works wonders in the relationship market.Benpointer said:
Interesting theory but I think it falls on "Women also tend to want to marry up." Dare I suggest you might be subconsciously stereotyping a bit there?Morris_Dancer said:Good morning, everyone.
Sorry for going off-topic (although slightly related to the last thread discussion), but isn't a major problem simply that equality doesn't work well for romantic matches, hence rising singleness?
What I mean by this is that women have equality in the workplace. That's a good thing. Women also tend to want to marry up. The economic circumstances of a man matters way more to a woman than the economic circumstances of a woman do to a man.
But that's a problem because equality means roughly the same earning potential so lines drawn according to economic circumstance will average out to being horizontal between men and women. Hence, middle and lower income chaps find things very difficult, because the desire line of marrying up just cuts out a ton of men.
This tallies with what's been remarked upon here before, that overall frisky time is the same as ever, but guys at the top are having tons whereas men at the bottom are getting none. But on a societal level that's no way to reach a standard of stable families and most people being happily married with kids.
Anyway, that's some sleepy waffling psychological rambling, but it might have something to it.
In a world of marked gender inequality that may have been the case, and may have been a sensible strategy but these days, where's the evidence?
- Treat women with respect and people rather than objects to be won.
- Look after yourself and some semblance of being healthy.
- Acceptance and resilience in the face of failure.
There's no need for the sort of misogynistic game playing (or worse) of Tate.6 -
Mr. Sandpit, excitingly, I recently saw a fun video about bears and how they see humans.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=05Z_bkdmmlA0 -
I am happy to be called woke for calling out anything that is misogynistic, demeaning, or threatening to any womanMexicanpete said:...
Careful you don't get labelled as "woke" for finding such behaviour unacceptable.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Just horrible and unacceptableMexicanpete said:
Try this for size.BartholomewRoberts said:
Its not remotely stupid that women feel safer with a bear than a strange man. Maybe you should stop moaning about identity politics and actually listen women and their concerns instead.Casino_Royale said:
I think Wokery, turbocharged by social media, is driving misogyny amongst boys and misandry amongst girls. Just look at that stupid poll on young women preferring to be with a bear than a man in a forest upthread.JosiasJessop said:"Online influencers like Andrew Tate are radicalising boys into extreme misogyny in a way that is "quite terrifying", police are warning."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cne4vw1x83po
Identity politics must end.
I heard this from my wife long before I heard it on this site, and she said bear too. The context given was that it was a stranger not a man you know in case that makes a difference to you.
A bear is likely to leave you alone. Far fewer women are attacked by bears than men. Instead of moaning about identity politics, how about we deal with the predators that make so many women feel unsafe - and those predators are not bears!
https://x.com/itvnews/status/1813887551523951008/mediaviewer
Utterly disgusting.3 -
Mr. Ratters, "Acceptance and resilience in the face of failure" is excellent advice for many things.2
-
Zero point saving for a private pension if it’s just going to disappear in rent.Benpointer said:
And if you only have a state pension, the rest of us will be paying that rent for you in housing benefit.eek said:
It’s worth emphasising the size of the problem - when you own a house and retire your mortgage is likely paid off so you outgoings relative to when you were previously working will be lower.Big_G_NorthWales said:Good morning
The thread is quite relevant to me personally as with my health issues I would be delighted to be able to cast my vote in GE29
However, I think it is fair to say the change to renters, rather than home owners, is laying the foundation for very difficult problems as these renters retire with rent still to pay unlike most retiring mortgage free home owners
I do not know the solution and even if the conservative party of the next GE will be unrecognisable to many of us, but there will be a party of the centre right in some form or other
That isn’t the case if you are still renting your home. You still need to find the £700-2000 a month to pay the rent. It’s going to be a truly massive problem in 2 decades or so time.
House first, pension second is the sane financial approach and unless we find a way that ensures people have bought a house the pension fund is money that will just disappear.
And as I write this best buy another rental property or 3…1 -
Sun bears, spectacled bears and pandas are relatively safe too, should we want to cover all the ursid species.Sandpit said:
How many women interact regularly with bears, vs how many regularly interact with strange men?bondegezou said:
Far more women are attacked by men they know than by strangers, but also far more women are attacked by strangers than by bears.No_Offence_Alan said:
This is counter-intuitive. Far more women are attacked by men they know than by strangers.BartholomewRoberts said:
Its not remotely stupid that women feel safer with a bear than a strange man. Maybe you should stop moaning about identity politics and actually listen women and their concerns instead.Casino_Royale said:
I think Wokery, turbocharged by social media, is driving misogyny amongst boys and misandry amongst girls. Just look at that stupid poll on young women preferring to be with a bear than a man in a forest upthread.JosiasJessop said:"Online influencers like Andrew Tate are radicalising boys into extreme misogyny in a way that is "quite terrifying", police are warning."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cne4vw1x83po
Identity politics must end.
I heard this from my wife long before I heard it on this site, and she said bear too. The context given was that it was a stranger not a man you know in case that makes a difference to you.
A bear is likely to leave you alone. Far fewer women are attacked by bears than men. Instead of moaning about identity politics, how about we deal with the predators that make so many women feel unsafe - and those predators are not bears!
FWIW, a grizzly bear or a polar bear sees you as lunch, and you’d better have your gun handy. A brown bear, other than a sow protecting cubs, is usually curious but will ignore you if you stay calm and carry on what you’re doing. But still have the gun handy.1 -
There's very few polar bears in forests though, so the brown bear is more relevant and yes it will tend to leave you alone. I wouldn't want to be with a grizzly.Sandpit said:
How many women interact regularly with bears, vs how many regularly interact with strange men?bondegezou said:
Far more women are attacked by men they know than by strangers, but also far more women are attacked by strangers than by bears.No_Offence_Alan said:
This is counter-intuitive. Far more women are attacked by men they know than by strangers.BartholomewRoberts said:
Its not remotely stupid that women feel safer with a bear than a strange man. Maybe you should stop moaning about identity politics and actually listen women and their concerns instead.Casino_Royale said:
I think Wokery, turbocharged by social media, is driving misogyny amongst boys and misandry amongst girls. Just look at that stupid poll on young women preferring to be with a bear than a man in a forest upthread.JosiasJessop said:"Online influencers like Andrew Tate are radicalising boys into extreme misogyny in a way that is "quite terrifying", police are warning."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cne4vw1x83po
Identity politics must end.
I heard this from my wife long before I heard it on this site, and she said bear too. The context given was that it was a stranger not a man you know in case that makes a difference to you.
A bear is likely to leave you alone. Far fewer women are attacked by bears than men. Instead of moaning about identity politics, how about we deal with the predators that make so many women feel unsafe - and those predators are not bears!
FWIW, a grizzly bear or a polar bear sees you as lunch, and you’d better have your gun handy. A brown bear, other than a sow protecting cubs, is usually curious but will ignore you if you stay calm and carry on what you’re doing. But still have the gun handy.
Brown bears are very real and ever-present danger where my in-laws live, they're in the Rockies and bears will wander into town.
I believe the facts are still more women attacked by men than bears there too.0 -
That is true, but our culture is currently persuading far too many that they do. I don't think that's solely the case due to the bad men saying the bad things, you always get push and pull factors, and something is pushing people towards seeing that stuff as persuasive.Ratters said:
It's a simple formula:Foxy said:
Indeed the converse for my boys. It seems that treating intelligent young women with courtesy and respect works wonders in the relationship market.Benpointer said:
Interesting theory but I think it falls on "Women also tend to want to marry up." Dare I suggest you might be subconsciously stereotyping a bit there?Morris_Dancer said:Good morning, everyone.
Sorry for going off-topic (although slightly related to the last thread discussion), but isn't a major problem simply that equality doesn't work well for romantic matches, hence rising singleness?
What I mean by this is that women have equality in the workplace. That's a good thing. Women also tend to want to marry up. The economic circumstances of a man matters way more to a woman than the economic circumstances of a woman do to a man.
But that's a problem because equality means roughly the same earning potential so lines drawn according to economic circumstance will average out to being horizontal between men and women. Hence, middle and lower income chaps find things very difficult, because the desire line of marrying up just cuts out a ton of men.
This tallies with what's been remarked upon here before, that overall frisky time is the same as ever, but guys at the top are having tons whereas men at the bottom are getting none. But on a societal level that's no way to reach a standard of stable families and most people being happily married with kids.
Anyway, that's some sleepy waffling psychological rambling, but it might have something to it.
In a world of marked gender inequality that may have been the case, and may have been a sensible strategy but these days, where's the evidence?
- Treat women with respect and people rather than objects to be won.
- Look after yourself and some semblance of being healthy.
- Acceptance and resilience in the face of failure.
There's no need for the sort of misogynistic game playing (or worse) of Tate.
That makes combating it a tad more complicated than us merely ridiculing the Tates of the world, though that should also be done.0 -
JD Vance manages both a stutter and a weird laugh, and Jeb Bush style energy.
https://x.com/Acyn/status/18154553048235750010 -
Sorry but the bit in bold is really quite a stupid comment when arguing that women feel safer with bears than a strange man.BartholomewRoberts said:
Its not remotely stupid that women feel safer with a bear than a strange man. Maybe you should stop moaning about identity politics and actually listen women and their concerns instead.Casino_Royale said:
I think Wokery, turbocharged by social media, is driving misogyny amongst boys and misandry amongst girls. Just look at that stupid poll on young women preferring to be with a bear than a man in a forest upthread.JosiasJessop said:"Online influencers like Andrew Tate are radicalising boys into extreme misogyny in a way that is "quite terrifying", police are warning."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cne4vw1x83po
Identity politics must end.
I heard this from my wife long before I heard it on this site, and she said bear too. The context given was that it was a stranger not a man you know in case that makes a difference to you.
A bear is likely to leave you alone. Far fewer women are attacked by bears than men. Instead of moaning about identity politics, how about we deal with the predators that make so many women feel unsafe - and those predators are not bears!
Of course fewer women are attacked by bears - very, very few women come into contact with bears in their lifetime yet alone on a daily basis. If women came into contact with men as infrequently as they come into contact with a bear then violence against women by men might have similar or lower levels.
What proportion of random men attack random women in relation to the number of encounters compared to the number of bear attacks on random women.
Also bears are not “not attacking” women because bears are kinder to women - they don’t discriminate because you are a woman - if you “threaten” their cubs you are toast regardless of what you identify as.1 -
whatever that might have beenTOPPING said:
Absolutely right. It is/was a travesty that the levelling up agenda, whatever that might have been, was binned. And that was down to Johnson's laziness, lack of focus, inability to put good people in around him and let them do the work.DecrepiterJohnL said:Levelling up.
Brexit was won not by Bill Cash arguing for sovereignty or John Redwood's Singapore-on-Thames. Brexit was won by a supercharged NOTA vote from habitual non-voters in left-behind communities. Brexit was a vote for levelling up.
Then Boris sacked Dominic Cummings, and Rishi, first as Chancellor, then as Prime Minister, spent the money elsewhere.
That said, Covid.
A hell of a lot went out of the window once that hit and we loaded up the helicopters with cash.
The key words.
Anyone lamenting a supposed lack of 'levelling up' needs to first define what hey mean by 'levelling up'.
If it was full employment, high pay for those with in demand skillsets and affordable housing in an improved environment then that's been achieved.
If it was turning northern England into London and the waitrose belt then it hasn't but how many people in northern England actually want that unaffordability, inequality and congestion ?
If it was making people with low quality skillsets into millionaires this time next year then that was never going to be possible.0 -
My personal view is that policticians should recognise they cant do half the things they say they can. The so called third way doesnt work. It would be better to roll back what the state seeks to deliver to a core of essentials and do them well. And while we're at it it would be best to decentralise large amounts of government to the local level. Citizens are best left to manage their own lives.bondegezou said:
So it’s a problem when politicians over promise, and a say-nothing approach “will come to bit[e] them in the arse”. So, what exactly are politicians meant to say?Alanbrooke said:
Im referring to future elections.Nigelb said:
Do they, always ?Alanbrooke said:
Thats a bit like saying you should stick with sandals and muesli.RochdalePioneers said:What do the Tories do to attract the young?
The obvious is to go back to conservatism- sound finances, work and reward, home ownership. The problem is that all of these things are against what their owners want (as they profit from the reverse) and against what their remaining 7 voters have been gaslit to want.
We will instead see them flirting with whipping the flames of anger to pick up the angry young man vote because no girl wants to shag their abusive if ignorant ass.
Currently all the political parties are struggling to engage with the electorate. It might be that the electorate is now too is now too splintered for FPTP to be able to deliver an effective government or it may be that the politicians need to get their act together and start delivering what they promised. Problem is of course they always over promise to get elected.
You were complaining before the election that Labour hadn't promised anything.
Labour's say nothing policy will come to bit them in the arse over the next couple of years,
Our politicians have allowed themselves to think they can solve every problem - they cant. They should be looking at creating the conditions for citizens to succeed rather than pretending they can deliver success for all.1 -
Actually in Canada and America there are many women in the same forest as a bear every single day.boulay said:
Sorry but the bit in bold is really quite a stupid comment when arguing that women feel safer with bears than a strange man.BartholomewRoberts said:
Its not remotely stupid that women feel safer with a bear than a strange man. Maybe you should stop moaning about identity politics and actually listen women and their concerns instead.Casino_Royale said:
I think Wokery, turbocharged by social media, is driving misogyny amongst boys and misandry amongst girls. Just look at that stupid poll on young women preferring to be with a bear than a man in a forest upthread.JosiasJessop said:"Online influencers like Andrew Tate are radicalising boys into extreme misogyny in a way that is "quite terrifying", police are warning."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cne4vw1x83po
Identity politics must end.
I heard this from my wife long before I heard it on this site, and she said bear too. The context given was that it was a stranger not a man you know in case that makes a difference to you.
A bear is likely to leave you alone. Far fewer women are attacked by bears than men. Instead of moaning about identity politics, how about we deal with the predators that make so many women feel unsafe - and those predators are not bears!
Of course fewer women are attacked by bears - very, very few women come into contact with bears in their lifetime yet alone on a daily basis. If women came into contact with men as infrequently as they come into contact with a bear then violence against women by men might have similar or lower levels.
What proportion of random men attack random women in relation to the number of encounters compared to the number of bear attacks on random women.
Also bears are not “not attacking” women because bears are kinder to women - they don’t discriminate because you are a woman - if you “threaten” their cubs you are toast regardless of what you identify as.
They don't encounter them much though because bears will leave people alone and vice-versa.
Too many men do not want to leave women alone.2 -
Merging council pensions schemes could unlock a pot of cash to invest in infrastructure/give to middlemen and administrators.
It’s going to happen, isn’t it. Pensions seen by both parties as pots of cash to use. The govt are so good at spending money and investing. Nothing could go wrong.
https://www.cityam.com/merge-council-pension-schemes-to-unlock-40bn-investment-bonanza-reeves-told/1 -
.
That's decent advice.Sandpit said:
Cash out your original stake, or perhaps a small profit, and let the rest run if you still think she will win.Tweedledee said:
And shortening for pres. Can't decide to take 125 now or hang on in hope of 700 (huge sums in terms of my betting)Benpointer said:Have we covered this?
Harris is home and dry for the nomination.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2024/jul/23/kamala-harris-says-she-is-looking-forward-to-accepting-democratic-nomination-as-she-secures-support-of-enough-delegates-live
My gut feeling, FWIW, is that her odds will shorten over the next week or two.
I actually increased my stake last night.
If it gets anywhere near evens, I'll take some off the table.
0 -
Perhaps we just deem all Usonians demented.Nigelb said:JD Vance manages both a stutter and a weird laugh, and Jeb Bush style energy.
https://x.com/Acyn/status/18154553048235750010
