Howdy, Stranger!

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

I am now convinced Badenoch is safe in the short term at least – politicalbetting.com

1235789

Comments

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,534
    Less than half of Tory voters opposed. To be fair though the UK already spends the percentage of gdp on defence NATO requires. It is Germany and France falling behind, though Merz may change that
  • glwglw Posts: 10,306

    That is weapons grade bat-shittery.

    It seems that the new US view of "free trade" is that no tariffs OR taxes ought to apply to US goods and services sold overseas. Even assuming we were willing to go along with such a crazy approach it would greatly harm UK businesses, or completely demolish the tax base. We couldn't do it, so the only rational thing to do would be to cease trading with the US. Trump et al. are on a path if they go through with their threats where international trade gets completley upended.

    Canadians are already boycotting US goods, I can see us being in similar position quite soon.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 9,973

    https://x.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1891572283161944433

    On Trade, I have decided, for purposes of Fairness, that I will charge a RECIPROCAL Tariff meaning, whatever Countries charge the United States of America, we will charge them - No more, no less!

    For purposes of this United States Policy, we will consider Countries that use the VAT System, which is far more punitive than a Tariff, to be similar to that of a Tariff. Sending merchandise, product, or anything by any other name through another Country, for purposes of unfairly harming America, will not be accepted. In addition, we will make provision for subsidies provided by Countries in order to take Economic advantage of the United States. Likewise, provisions will be made for Nonmonetary Tariffs and Trade Barriers that some Countries charge in order to keep our product out of their domain or, if they do not even let U.S. businesses operate. We are able to accurately determine the cost of these Nonmonetary Trade Barriers. It is fair to all, no other Country can complain and, in some cases, if a Country feels that the United States would be getting too high a Tariff, all they have to do is reduce or terminate their Tariff against us. There are no Tariffs if you manufacture or build your product in the United States.

    For many years, the U.S. has been treated unfairly by other Countries, both friend and foe. This System will immediately bring Fairness and Prosperity back into the previously complex and unfair System of Trade. America has helped many Countries throughout the years, at great financial cost. It is now time that these Countries remember this, and treat us fairly – A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD FOR AMERICAN WORKERS. I have instructed my Secretary of State, Secretary of Commerce, Secretary of the Treasury, and United States Trade Representative (USTR) to do all work necessary to deliver RECIPROCITY to our System of Trade!

    We should have gone in with Canada when they got this treatment. We're going to get picked off one by one.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 14,692

    That is weapons grade bat-shittery.
    Or if you’re Musk, shit battery.
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 5,173
    stodge said:

    There’s a debate which we are simply not having.

    Do we think there is a need for increased defence spending? The Americans play their usual “we carried Europe for decades” argument but American defence spending included parts of the world outside NATO’s purview.

    The nature of “the threat” has changed. Gone are the days of 100 Warsaw Pact armored divisions powering through the Fulda Gap - if they ever existed.

    Governments love a good threat or two - it keeps people frightened and docile. Whether it’s Russia, China, Islamic fundamentalism or foreigners in general, it’s all grist to the propaganda mill.

    A wise man once said “we have nothing to fear but fear itself” but modern democracies, and I’m ashamed to admit, many calling themselves “liberal” work on fear.

    The other point is most people are wrong about most things most of the time and trying to define the future is right up there if you want to see stupidity in extremis. I doubt I can find the winner of the first at Taunton tomorrow so trying to define geopolitical trends over a decade is beyond me.

    The problem is planning for a future whose parameters you have probably defined incorrectly rarely ends well but what else can you do?

    I think trying to hunt down a few million here and there in Government “waste” falls nicely into the law of diminishing returns. @pigeon cites £33 billion can be raised by a 5p rise in basic rate tax - put 5p on higher rate but unfreeze thresholds and commit to raising them at double RPI would be my way forward.

    As an aside, central and local Government does scenario based budget planning all the time. I imagine most Councils have contingencies for a 10% real terms cut in funding but it’s the Councillors who have to go out to the communities and explain why the library, youth centre or community centre has to close - that’s proper politics, selling the unsellable.
    On the last point, that's the entire purpose of local Government - to deflect blame from Whitehall.

    We do need much stronger conventional defences, because the Russians need to know that if they try to conquer our allies they will get the living shit beaten out of them. Essentially, their leader is a bloodthirsty emperor and most of their people are eager accomplices in his behaviour, who only understand brute strength. If presented with insufficient resolve then they will devour Europe a chunk at a time, with actual force or the threat of it, and the only means we'll have left to stop them is to threaten to retaliate with nuclear weapons. That's not somewhere we want to be going.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,534

    Are you daring TSE to refer you?
    I prefer Starmer to Putin but his damage to family farms is undeniable
  • TimSTimS Posts: 14,692
    edited February 17
    Eabhal said:

    We should have gone in with Canada when they got this treatment. We're going to get picked off one by one.
    Canada are utter beasts on the trade negotiation front. The last UK government abandoned FTA negotiations with them because they weren’t yielding on anything.
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 5,173
    glw said:

    It seems that the new US view of "free trade" is that no tariffs OR taxes ought to apply to US goods and services sold overseas. Even assuming we were willing to go along with such a crazy approach it would greatly harm UK businesses, or completely demolish the tax base. We couldn't do it, so the only rational thing to do would be to cease trading with the US. Trump et al. are on a path if they go through with their threats where international trade gets completley upended.

    Canadians are already boycotting US goods, I can see us being in similar position quite soon.
    This kind of behaviour will end with everyone pivoting to China. Xi probably can't believe his luck.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 62,090
    This time it will be Britain, France and Poland.

    The original allies. This time, I hope we don't let Poland down.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 62,090
    HYUFD said:


    Less than half of Tory voters opposed. To be fair though the UK already spends the percentage of gdp on defence NATO requires. It is Germany and France falling behind, though Merz may change that
    That poll tells me Reform are a real problem.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 14,692
    HYUFD said:

    I prefer Starmer to Putin but his damage to family farms is undeniable
    One for the HYUFD archives. Very good!
  • eek said:

    A trade war with all of Europe based on a complete misunderstanding of how VAT works..
    More likely, a trade war based on:

    a) wanting the money

    b) the Loser-in-Chief wanting to give his loser supporters a scapegoat to blame.

    If someone were to explain to DJT the functioning of VAT with the intelligence of a Cambridge seminar and the simplicity of Janet and John, he'd still want an excuse to impose tariffs on the countries of Europe.

    At least this screed doesn't refer to Fair And Reciprocal Tariffs like some of the earlier ones. That acronym presumably came from Musk.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,481
    TimS said:

    I know you’re not actually interested in this topic but some might be. There is an argument for VAT to be reformed and replaced with end customer sales taxes, which could be at much lower headline rates while bringing in the same revenue, because unlike VAT they are not recoverable.

    The original benefit of VAT over sales taxes was that it’s collected throughout the supply chain so it’s harder to evade and easier to police, as well as being a bit better for cash flow. But now VAT is largely automated and the informal economy is much shrunken it’s arguable those advantages have faded. We’re probably not there yet but it could be a thing in future.
    Actually I posted several months ago that it might be a good idea to use our Brexit Freedoms to replace VAT with an Australian-style sales tax.
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 4,429

    Good. It was an awful policy introduced by Brown. Good riddance.

    Cold weather payments still exist for those who need them and are eligible for them.
    As a soon to be pensioner married to a pensioner I have to agree. We don't need the money. It usually got spent on Christmas presents for grandkids. Also my wife is over 75 so we can qualify for a free license. Not sure I will though it is unfair.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 13,825

    Any PBers in Hull wanting to report from the front line?


    Nigel Farage MP

    @Nigel_Farage
    ·
    1h
    Join me for a big Reform UK rally in Hull on the 27th of February.

    Philip Larkin on Hull; ripe for Reform I should think:

    Here domes and statues, spires and cranes cluster
    Beside grain-scattered streets, barge-crowded water,
    And residents from raw estates, brought down
    The dead straight miles by stealing flat-faced trolleys,
    Push through plate-glass swing doors to their desires—
    Cheap suits, red kitchen-ware, sharp shoes, iced lollies,
    Electric mixers, toasters, washers, driers—

    A cut-price crowd, urban yet simple, dwelling
    Where only salesmen and relations come
    Within a terminate and fishy-smelling
    Pastoral of ships up streets, the slave museum,
    Tattoo-shops, consulates, grim head-scarfed wives;
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,534

    Good. It was an awful policy introduced by Brown. Good riddance.

    Cold weather payments still exist for those who need them and are eligible for them.
    A tiny amount not consistent while more low income pensioners succumb to pneumonia also adding to pressure on NHS
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 18,431

    This time it will be Britain, France and Poland.

    The original allies. This time, I hope we don't let Poland down.

    There was little we could either in 1939 or 1945 to help as the French were not prepared to invade Germany to aid Poland. And yet history suggests that if they had it would have caused Germany real issues in the West.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,744
    HYUFD said:

    I prefer Starmer to Putin but his damage to family farms is undeniable
    I think Putin may have damaged more family farms than Starmer, though not in his own country.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,534
    edited February 17
    Omnium said:

    Only a matter of time though for Richard Burgon!?
    More likely Streeting or Burnham
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 62,090
    .

    11% cut in government department budgets to pay for increase in defence spending !!!

    https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1891519026104356915?t=rZMOVRcI0On885wgIok88Q&s=19

    Good.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 62,090
    kle4 said:

    So with Health and Welfare probably not going to make that amount, everyone else will probably have to make even more?

    The service will revolt presumably, or departments which already have cut waste will have to cut non-waste.
    FUCK health and welfare.

    I'm tired of them sucking out every penny out the economy.
  • As a soon to be pensioner married to a pensioner I have to agree. We don't need the money. It usually got spent on Christmas presents for grandkids. Also my wife is over 75 so we can qualify for a free license. Not sure I will though it is unfair.
    If that is the TV licence the 75 age exemption ended in 2020 unless you receive pension credit
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 3,879
    So was anything of any real substance agreed at the special emergency European summit, or was it just a chance for a bunch of leaders to look like they've any idea what's going on or indeed involved in any way?
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 11,400

    This time it will be Britain, France and Poland.

    The original allies. This time, I hope we don't let Poland down.

    France is due a good war.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,534
    eek said:

    So you voted for someone who thought painting over Mickey Mouse was the future of the Tory party...
    My first preference was Tugendhat who I think would now have a comfortable poll lead with Labour maybe third behind the Conservatives and Reform and the LDs back under 10%
  • That poll tells me Reform are a real problem.
    And the only people with half a chance of winning that argument are the remaining solid conservatives. Wets, libs and ghastly socialists aren't going to get any sort of hearing.

    In all sincerity- good luck. Sometimes, being the opposition still means you have a responsibility to fulfil. (One that Corbyn definitely failed over Salisbury, and EdM arguably failed over Syria.)
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,869
    Eabhal said:

    We should have gone in with Canada when they got this treatment. We're going to get picked off one by one.
    It's as though a maladjusted four-year-old child has been elected President.
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 5,173

    totally unworkable but iirc housing benefit is £30bn per year.

    And defence spending is about £30bn short.

    It would play havoc with all sorts of dependencies and cause the comedy of rioting landlords.

    Most MPs would be storming their own barricades.

    I’d like to see the end of state subsidy support for generationally debilitating house pricing though.

    I’d settle for 10% now. 10% more next year. £3bn would buy some drones and 155mm shells.

    I agree that mass landlordism is a complete social disaster, but cutting back on housing benefit will simply lead to vast numbers of evictions, and the costs going straight back onto the state balance sheet with interest as councils are compelled to rehouse huge numbers of homeless families. Mostly, I should imagine, in simultaneously grotty and expensive temporary accommodation, purchased from... landlords.

    Cutting the private rented sector back down to size would take an immense amount of time and effort, and it's not going to happen. Instead, coming soon to a new build housing estate near you, build-to-let. Industrial scale rent farming to help meet the Government's housing targets. There'll be a larger percentage of the population in rented property, and a correspondingly higher housing benefit bill, when this lot get booted out than there was when they were elected.
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 5,540
    eek said:

    So you voted for someone who thought painting over Mickey Mouse was the future of the Tory party...
    HY don't impress Shania much?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 73,083
    Chris said:

    It's as though a maladjusted four-year-old child has been elected President.
    That's very unkind.

    Unless you've had a particularly bad experience of maladjusted four year olds.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 62,090
    People think the government take quite enough tax from them already, and should make do with what they have?

    I'm surprised it's not higher, tbh. 30% is a decent minority and with strong political leadership it could be built upon.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 73,083

    More likely, a trade war based on:

    a) wanting the money

    b) the Loser-in-Chief wanting to give his loser supporters a scapegoat to blame.

    If someone were to explain to DJT the functioning of VAT with the intelligence of a Cambridge seminar and the simplicity of Janet and John, he'd still want an excuse to impose tariffs on the countries of Europe.

    At least this screed doesn't refer to Fair And Reciprocal Tariffs like some of the earlier ones. That acronym presumably came from Musk.
    He's clearly got the wind up over it.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,794

    This time it will be Britain, France and Poland.

    The original allies. This time, I hope we don't let Poland down.

    Yup, there's no room for Germany in a European military alliance. They would rather appease Russia than deploy troop unfortunately which means they will drag their heels constantly.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 62,090

    Let's see how they feel when Russia has taken Moldova and then invades the Baltics.
    A lot of people still wouldn't care provided they didn't threaten Walton-on-the-Naze.

    There's a strong isolationist consistency, even in Britain, that thinks we have no business doing anything military outside our own borders.

    However, I don't think it's a decisive one.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,836

    This time it will be Britain, France and Poland.

    The original allies. This time, I hope we don't let Poland down.

    Willing to bet the East Politics group in Germany wins.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,617
    Eabhal said:

    What typically happens is people who live in a traffic-calmed area overwhelmingly in favour, while those who drive through them (often from a neighbouring LTN) are opposed. Councillors are elected on small enough geographies for them to side with the local residents who elected them.

    Consultations != referendums, particularly when a twitter warrior from Edinburgh can make a submission on a 20mph limit in Wales ;)
    As I recall, a remarkable number of Conservatives in England were active in that 'consultation', political agitation, etc.

    They may think it normal to impose their view on ...
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,534
    Starmer says there must be a US backstop to any Ukraine peace deal with Russia

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/crr0gngkjrvt
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 23,253
    edited February 17
    HYUFD said:

    A tiny amount not consistent while more low income pensioners succumb to pneumonia also adding to pressure on NHS
    Actually infants are more likely to succumb to pneumonia than pensioners of any age.

    So if you were to do the policy based on need, then it universally being granted to all infants would make more sense.

    But infants don't vote.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 62,090

    And the only people with half a chance of winning that argument are the remaining solid conservatives. Wets, libs and ghastly socialists aren't going to get any sort of hearing.

    In all sincerity- good luck. Sometimes, being the opposition still means you have a responsibility to fulfil. (One that Corbyn definitely failed over Salisbury, and EdM arguably failed over Syria.)
    Yeah, well, it's pretty darn lonely at times.
  • FossFoss Posts: 1,347

    Any PBers in Hull wanting to report from the front line?


    Nigel Farage MP

    @Nigel_Farage
    ·
    1h
    Join me for a big Reform UK rally in Hull on the 27th of February.

    The Electoral Calculus MRP currently has pretty much all of the old Humberside Westminster seats as trending Reform. If the general predictions of support are to be believed then they should do well in both the Hull and Lincolnshire spring mayorals.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 9,973

    Actually infants are more likely to succumb to pneumonia than pensioners of any age.

    So if you were to do the policy based on need, then it universally being granted to all infants would make more sense.

    But infants don't vote.
    And up universal credit to state pension levels.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 18,431
    edited February 17

    Actually infants are more likely to succumb to pneumonia than pensioners of any age.

    So if you were to do the policy based on need, then it universally being granted to all infants would make more sense.

    But infants don't vote.
    Give Labour enough time and they probably will…
    #votesat16justthestart
  • TimSTimS Posts: 14,692

    Actually I posted several months ago that it might be a good idea to use our Brexit Freedoms to replace VAT with an Australian-style sales tax.
    Australian GST is a VAT, with the same credit and recovery mechanism and tax arising on import. Operates the same way, just has a different name. It wouldn’t make sense to replace with GST, you’d want to go the whole hog to a non-VAT.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 13,825
    I have been occupied in stuff for a few days, and out of touch and a bit distant from the media and PB. Sorry if I am the millionth to have had this thought about Mr Trump.

    Trumps' downsides are obvious; and potentially deadly. I think he and his plutocratic oligarchy gangster friends are appalling.

    But he general awfulness does not arise from a situation in which he is by his character derogating from planetary perfection.

    Ask one question. There are lots of others but this will do. Trump has a plan for ending the Ukraine war. On 20th January, what was the plan of the EU/free Europe for ending it?

    There wasn't one. It was going to go on indefinitely.

    Ttrump's odd quality is that he will get other outfits to ask, and answer, questions they were very comfortable not answering on 20th January. This is not all bad.
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 4,429

    If that is the TV licence the 75 age exemption ended in 2020 unless you receive pension credit
    Yes agreed, I misread an or for an and. Hay hoe.
  • algarkirk said:

    I have been occupied in stuff for a few days, and out of touch and a bit distant from the media and PB. Sorry if I am the millionth to have had this thought about Mr Trump.

    Trumps' downsides are obvious; and potentially deadly. I think he and his plutocratic oligarchy gangster friends are appalling.

    But he general awfulness does not arise from a situation in which he is by his character derogating from planetary perfection.

    Ask one question. There are lots of others but this will do. Trump has a plan for ending the Ukraine war. On 20th January, what was the plan of the EU/free Europe for ending it?

    There wasn't one. It was going to go on indefinitely.

    Ttrump's odd quality is that he will get other outfits to ask, and answer, questions they were very comfortable not answering on 20th January. This is not all bad.

    Support Ukraine to defeat Russia was the plan.

    Ending the war by surrender is worse than continuing the war, not an improvement.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 73,083
    algarkirk said:

    I have been occupied in stuff for a few days, and out of touch and a bit distant from the media and PB. Sorry if I am the millionth to have had this thought about Mr Trump.

    Trumps' downsides are obvious; and potentially deadly. I think he and his plutocratic oligarchy gangster friends are appalling.

    But he general awfulness does not arise from a situation in which he is by his character derogating from planetary perfection.

    Ask one question. There are lots of others but this will do. Trump has a plan for ending the Ukraine war. On 20th January, what was the plan of the EU/free Europe for ending it?

    There wasn't one. It was going to go on indefinitely.

    Ttrump's odd quality is that he will get other outfits to ask, and answer, questions they were very comfortable not answering on 20th January. This is not all bad.

    We do not know that he has an actual *plan* for ending the Ukraine war. We know he wants to talk to the man who started it and refuses to end it, which is not at all the same thing.

    The big worry is that he will end up selling out the Ukrainians which would be both a moral disaster and a major strategic defeat for Europe and the US just so he can wave his undersized cock yelling he's got a deal - much as he did in Afghanistan.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 14,692
    edited February 17
    algarkirk said:

    I have been occupied in stuff for a few days, and out of touch and a bit distant from the media and PB. Sorry if I am the millionth to have had this thought about Mr Trump.

    Trumps' downsides are obvious; and potentially deadly. I think he and his plutocratic oligarchy gangster friends are appalling.

    But he general awfulness does not arise from a situation in which he is by his character derogating from planetary perfection.

    Ask one question. There are lots of others but this will do. Trump has a plan for ending the Ukraine war. On 20th January, what was the plan of the EU/free Europe for ending it?

    There wasn't one. It was going to go on indefinitely.

    Ttrump's odd quality is that he will get other outfits to ask, and answer, questions they were very comfortable not answering on 20th January. This is not all bad.

    Bad guys throughout history have forced others to focus minds and form coalitions. Napoleon forced the continental powers to put aside their differences. OPEC in the 70s forced the West to take energy efficiency and independence seriously. The threat of communist revolution forced capitalist governments to introduce social policies.

    Putin has had a similar, though still as yet incomplete, galvanising effect on the European defence establishment,
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,481
    TimS said:

    Australian GST is a VAT, with the same credit and recovery mechanism and tax arising on import. Operates the same way, just has a different name. It wouldn’t make sense to replace with GST, you’d want to go the whole hog to a non-VAT.
    It seems that Australian-style solutions aren't all they're cracked up to be.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 26,195
    edited February 17



    No point in continuing discussion with you until the Welsh counties have all made their decisions

    At least with @MattW he engages in sensible discussion on this subject and not infantile point scoring

    Now, now ladies :wink: . Handbags at Dawn (copyright Iain Dale) is more decorous.

    On a separate point, I see that Wrexham (North Wales) looks to be changing 50 stretches of road back to 50mp default.

    That, Conwy (15-20 for review) and Monmouthshire (none for review) seems to fit the pattern that the criteria were applied more strictly in the North, so there is a bit more relaxation being introduced now.

    But with Wrexham County Borough being 50k people and 200sqm, I can live with 50 being adjusted - they are likely generally to be the right ones.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3vp4l1qe10o

    So I reckon it's going to end up with getting on for all the residential roads at 20mph within community boundaries. And I'll take that as good progress.

    Now, how the fuckety-fuck do I get Mansfield done? It's going to need something like a honey trap and blackmail.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 73,083
    edited February 17
    MattW said:

    Now, now ladies :wink: . Handbags at Dawn (copyright Iain Dale) is more decorous.

    On a separate point, I see that Wrexham (North Wales) looks to be changing 50 stretches of road back to 50mp default.

    That, Conwy (15-20 for review) and Monmouthshire (none for review) seems to fit the pattern that the criteria were applied more strictly in the North, so there is a bit more relaxation being introduced now.

    But with Wrexham County Borough being 50k people and 200sqm, I can live with 50 being adjusted - they are likely generally to be the right ones.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3vp4l1qe10o

    So I reckon it's going to end up with getting on for all the residential roads at 20mph within community boundaries. And I'll take that as good progress.

    Now, how the fuckety-fuck do I get Mansfield done?
    20mph for all purely residential routes would be fine (and in the real world, make very little difference).

    The big problem in Wales was the blanket imposition across all routes, including a number of major arterial routes that happened to have the odd house on them. This also incidentally included adding wider 30 and 40 limits around them, without asking anyone. Which slowed traffic considerably and was simply not sensible.

    Bypasses would have been a better solution but the Welsh government don't care about the areas outside the Valleys so have decided to stop paying for them.
  • MattW said:

    Now, now ladies :wink: . Handbags at Dawn (copyright Iain Dale) is more decorous.

    On a separate point, I see that Wrexham (North Wales) looks to be changing 50 stretches of road back to 50mp default.

    That, Conwy (15-20 for review) and Monmouthshire (none for review) seems to fit the pattern that the criteria were applied more strictly in the North, so there is a bit more relaxation being introduced now.

    But with Wrexham County Borough being 50k people and 200sqm, I can live with 50 being adjusted - they are likely generally to be the right ones.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3vp4l1qe10o

    So I reckon it's going to end up with getting on for all the residential roads at 20mph within community boundaries. And I'll take that as good progress.

    Now, how the fuckety-fuck do I get Mansfield done? It's going to need something like a honey trap and blackmail.
    Agreed and sensible
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 5,487

    We have been warning for years that Trump sees VAT as a tariff. This is not new.
    Since Brexit, there’s no reason why we can’t rename VAT to Purchase Tax. It would confuse the Trumpbaby.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 13,825

    Support Ukraine to defeat Russia was the plan.

    Ending the war by surrender is worse than continuing the war, not an improvement.
    Nice try on your first point. If you are right then Europe will carrry on executing their cunning plan, and Ukraine will be independent, free and safe. Hope you are right.

    Your second point misses my point. What Trump will perhaps achieve is not the execution of his plan, but will flush out the better alternatives that Europe has been hiding away for so long. If they have not got any, it is hard to criticise a sub optimal plan.
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 5,487
    glw said:

    It seems that the new US view of "free trade" is that no tariffs OR taxes ought to apply to US goods and services sold overseas. Even assuming we were willing to go along with such a crazy approach it would greatly harm UK businesses, or completely demolish the tax base. We couldn't do it, so the only rational thing to do would be to cease trading with the US. Trump et al. are on a path if they go through with their threats where international trade gets completley upended.

    Canadians are already boycotting US goods, I can see us being in similar position quite soon.
    I already do, as far as possible.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 73,083
    algarkirk said:

    Nice try on your first point. If you are right then Europe will carrry on executing their cunning plan, and Ukraine will be independent, free and safe. Hope you are right.

    Your second point misses my point. What Trump will perhaps achieve is not the execution of his plan, but will flush out the better alternatives that Europe has been hiding away for so long. If they have not got any, it is hard to criticise a sub optimal plan.
    Again, what plan? What plan has he shown any sign of having?

    You are making an assumption there that I simply do not see being supported by the information we have.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 26,195
    edited February 17
    TimS said:

    Bad guys throughout history have forced others to focus minds and form coalitions. Napoleon forced the continental powers to put aside their differences. OPEC in the 70s forced the West to take energy efficiency and independence seriously. The threat of communist revolution forced capitalist governments to introduce social policies.

    Putin has had a similar, though still as yet incomplete, galvanising effect on the European defence establishment,
    One problem with Trump's plan is that it *won't* end the war; it will just end it for Trump's period in office, and then there will be another one. I think he's playing self-serving games, as the USA used to in the late 19C (Spanish War, Mexican War) as his Victorian heroes did.

    And in the meantime the occupied part of Ukraine is likely to be like the occupied Sudeten land in WW2,or the Stalin occupied Ukraine after WW2. *

    Unless Europe manages something spectacular (I live in hope).
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 13,825
    ydoethur said:

    We do not know that he has an actual *plan* for ending the Ukraine war. We know he wants to talk to the man who started it and refuses to end it, which is not at all the same thing.

    The big worry is that he will end up selling out the Ukrainians which would be both a moral disaster and a major strategic defeat for Europe and the US just so he can wave his undersized cock yelling he's got a deal - much as he did in Afghanistan.
    If I am right, Trump doesn't need a plan. he needs to propose a plan, the effect of which is to galvanise others. Yes, this may end up in sellout. But only if, in truth, Europe doesn'r care enough to sort it a better way.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 73,083
    edited February 17
    MattW said:

    The problem with Trumps plan is that it *won't* end the war, it will just end it for Trump's period in office, and then there will be another one.

    And in the meantime the occupied part of Ukraine is likely to be like the occupied Sudeten land in WW2,or the Stalin occupied Ukraine after WW2. *

    Unless Europe manages something spectacular (I live in hope).
    The Sudetenland was treated as part of Germany and dominated by German speakers. Do you mean the protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia?
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,003

    You can wang on about “envy” all you want but it changes nothing. It also changes nothing whether the people inheriting the land are bothered about the value of it (which is clearly bollocks). The fact of the matter is that inheriting million of pounds of assets is an immense privilege and if these businesses cannot plan for such an event or are not viable then that’s a problem with the business (or maybe our trade policies). If you can’t see that then you are out of touch completely.
    Somebody works hard all their life to provide for their family and the vultures are just waiting to get at it rather than actually helping themselves, prefer to get other people's hard earned cash. Is it any wonder the UK is F**ked.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,617
    edited February 17

    Actually infants are more likely to succumb to pneumonia than pensioners of any age.

    So if you were to do the policy based on need, then it universally being granted to all infants would make more sense.

    But infants don't vote.
    Er, that pneumonia thing changed many years back. Much smaller infant death rates (if that's what you mean by 'succumb') than old people now. And that's worldwide - so much more weight on childhood disease than in, say, the UK [edit: intuitively, but on second thoughts one would need to check that].

    https://ourworldindata.org/pneumonia
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,994

    I think we can all recognise that Clarkson was (possibly like yourself) indulging in a little extreme hyperbole (is it possible to be extremely hyperbolic?). The best way to think of Clarkson is like a more intelligent Leon, except he has a lot of followers, and he doesn't believe in Brexit or aliens.
    They both try to provoke...
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 73,083
    edited February 17
    algarkirk said:

    If I am right, Trump doesn't need a plan. he needs to propose a plan, the effect of which is to galvanise others. Yes, this may end up in sellout. But only if, in truth, Europe doesn'r care enough to sort it a better way.
    How do you propose a plan if you don't have one?
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,502
    algarkirk said:

    Nice try on your first point. If you are right then Europe will carrry on executing their cunning plan, and Ukraine will be independent, free and safe. Hope you are right.

    Your second point misses my point. What Trump will perhaps achieve is not the execution of his plan, but will flush out the better alternatives that Europe has been hiding away for so long. If they have not got any, it is hard to criticise a sub optimal plan.
    I think you make a fair, if depressing, point. It might not be a big thing, but at the very least, Europe needs to insist that whatever deal is done, Russia doesn't get to come back to the sporting and cultural world. If that means Europe boycotting the 2026 World Cup and 2028 Olympics, then so be it.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 26,195
    edited February 17
    ydoethur said:

    20mph for all purely residential routes would be fine (and in the real world, make very little difference).

    The big problem in Wales was the blanket imposition across all routes, including a number of major arterial routes that happened to have the odd house on them. This also incidentally included adding wider 30 and 40 limits around them, without asking anyone. Which slowed traffic considerably and was simply not sensible.

    Bypasses would have been a better solution but the Welsh government don't care about the areas outside the Valleys so have decided to stop paying for them.
    I'm not going down the rabbit hole, but aiui it *wasn't* a blanket imposition. That was the anti-lobby propaganda, and especially when the Conservatives turned their coat from demanding that it be done more quickly, to creating a culture war about it - including constant use of that misleading language.

    There was a careful process, and a year for Councils to propose exceptions.

    I can link a 45 minute post-project evaluation video if you like.

    But either way, I'm happy to await the outturn.

    We'll get a 20mph on the Severn Bridges later :smiley: .
  • ohnotnowohnotnow Posts: 4,564
    Omnium said:

    There's complexity in that though. Defence spending in that era created jobs for the many talented engineers etc. Something of the good of what we have now came from that.

    One can have too much butter.
    Wait. What?
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 13,825
    MattW said:

    The problem with Trumps plan is that it *won't* end the war, it will just end it for Trump's period in office, and then there will be another one.

    And in the meantime the occupied part of Ukraine is likely to be like the occupied Sudeten land in WW2,or the Stalin occupied Ukraine after WW2. *

    Unless Europe manages something spectacular (I live in hope).
    Noted, but the upside of Trump's 'plan' is it requires Europe to do its job, without which your gloomy prediction comes true. Among the people who spotted this more or less at once is Keir Starmer, whose next few months as PM will possibly make or break him.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,481
    The top table of European politics:

    image
  • ohnotnowohnotnow Posts: 4,564
    ydoethur said:

    How do you propose a plan if you don't have one?
    You'll never make senior management at this rate.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,003

    Actually I posted several months ago that it might be a good idea to use our Brexit Freedoms to replace VAT with an Australian-style sales tax.
    WTF is the difference giving it another name
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 22,124
    algarkirk said:

    I have been occupied in stuff for a few days, and out of touch and a bit distant from the media and PB. Sorry if I am the millionth to have had this thought about Mr Trump.

    Trumps' downsides are obvious; and potentially deadly. I think he and his plutocratic oligarchy gangster friends are appalling.

    But he general awfulness does not arise from a situation in which he is by his character derogating from planetary perfection.

    Ask one question. There are lots of others but this will do. Trump has a plan for ending the Ukraine war. On 20th January, what was the plan of the EU/free Europe for ending it?

    There wasn't one. It was going to go on indefinitely.

    Ttrump's odd quality is that he will get other outfits to ask, and answer, questions they were very comfortable not answering on 20th January. This is not all bad.

    The status quo ante from Biden and Europe was to maintain pressure on Russia until it buckled. By and large this also had the support of Ukraine itself.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 73,083
    MattW said:

    I'm not going down the rabbit hole, but it *wasn't* a blanket imposition. That was the anti-lobby propaganda, and especially when the Conservatives turned their coat from demanding that it be done more quickly, to creating a culture war about it - including constant use of that misleading language.

    There was a careful process, and a year for Councils to propose exceptions.

    I can link a 45 minute post-project evaluation video if you like.
    You can link to it by all means, but I'll take the evidence of my own eyes driving about Wales. For example, whoever thought a 20mph limit was needed on the A44 in Llangurig when all bar four houses are on a separate road clearly hadn't bothered to do any evaluation at all. And bringing in the 30 limit for two miles beyond it was absolute lunacy.

    Equally, I can see why a 20mph limit on St David's Road in Aberystwyth makes no difference, as you never get to do more than 10mph anyway.

    Maybe there should have been a process, but in far too many places it's very clear either there wasn't, or that no thought had been given to negative impacts of the changes being brought in.
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 5,487

    Since Brexit, there’s no reason why we can’t rename VAT to Purchase Tax. It would confuse the Trumpbaby.
    Or we could call it the Fair And Reasonable Tariff tax, or FART for short.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 73,083
    ohnotnow said:

    You'll never make senior management at this rate.
    Too late, I'm chief executive of an international education company.

    I'll never become boss of an academy chain, of course. I'm an experienced teacher.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,481

    The status quo ante from Biden and Europe was to maintain pressure on Russia until it buckled. By and large this also had the support of Ukraine itself.
    The "until it buckled" was questionable. Biden had a tendency of going soft whenever it looked like Russia might lose.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,003
    ydoethur said:

    We do not know that he has an actual *plan* for ending the Ukraine war. We know he wants to talk to the man who started it and refuses to end it, which is not at all the same thing.

    The big worry is that he will end up selling out the Ukrainians which would be both a moral disaster and a major strategic defeat for Europe and the US just so he can wave his undersized cock yelling he's got a deal - much as he did in Afghanistan.
    If the dumb clown can make a dollar out of it he will stitch them up like a kipper. Time Europe told him to take his USA and stick it up his fat arse.
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 5,487
    tlg86 said:

    I think you make a fair, if depressing, point. It might not be a big thing, but at the very least, Europe needs to insist that whatever deal is done, Russia doesn't get to come back to the sporting and cultural world. If that means Europe boycotting the 2026 World Cup and 2028 Olympics, then so be it.
    Excellent idea. Boycotting both would affect the USA financially, and hopefully embarrass them as well.
  • ohnotnowohnotnow Posts: 4,564

    The top table of European politics:

    image

    Giorgia Meloni is the only one who has had the decency to dress up like a WW1 photo-op. Italians - always so stylish.

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,003

    Yes agreed, I misread an or for an and. Hay hoe.
    Any chance to punch a pensioner is popular on here.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 14,692
    malcolmg said:

    WTF is the difference giving it another name
    I now realise it was a (fair enough, moderately humorous) quip about Brexiteers replacing free movement with an “Australian-style points system”
  • MattWMattW Posts: 26,195
    ydoethur said:

    You can link to it by all means, but I'll take the evidence of my own eyes driving about Wales. For example, whoever thought a 20mph limit was needed on the A44 in Llangurig when all bar four houses are on a separate road clearly hadn't bothered to do any evaluation at all. And bringing in the 30 limit for two miles beyond it was absolute lunacy.

    Equally, I can see why a 20mph limit on St David's Road in Aberystwyth makes no difference, as you never get to do more than 10mph anyway.

    Maybe there should have been a process, but in far too many places it's very clear either there wasn't, or that no thought had been given to negative impacts of the changes being brought in.
    Indeed - that's why there was a later review process possible as well, which is what has happened. There's also a bit of analysis of things that were not as well executed as could have been - I think down to Covid in part. One of these was the order of some comms.

    (But of course - I can't question your personal account, and accept that things went wrong in that case - as I was not there.)

    Here's the link (warning: incoming Lee Waters):
    https://youtu.be/C61sBe39u1c?t=526
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,003

    Actually I posted several months ago that it might be a good idea to use our Brexit Freedoms to replace VAT with an Australian-style sales tax.
    It was a pish suggestion then and is a shit suggestion now.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 13,825

    The status quo ante from Biden and Europe was to maintain pressure on Russia until it buckled. By and large this also had the support of Ukraine itself.
    If this is true and effective I will be delighted to see Europe continue to put it into effect. USA and Russia talks can't tell Ukraine or Europe waght to do.

    My own tentative view is that if that was the plan it wasn't working, and must be made to work if it can. But I think the real deal as on 20th January was a slowly losing attrition continuation without a further future in sight. I would be very pleased to be wrong.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 75,898
    Foxy said:

    I wouldn't start with a percentage, I would start with a shopping list of what we need and the timescales. Some ammunition stockpiles for example. What troops do we need? Should we set up a new drone corps, similar to the Machine Gun Corps of WW1 which went from creation to 100 000 strong in four years? Should we greatly increase the Territorials as a cheap way of increasing trained reserves?

    like foreign aid it shouldnt be about percentages, it should be about what capability we need.

    Right now I think we can usefully deploy no more than a brigade (about 5,000 bods max), as we don’t have the logistical support for anything more.

    I’ve no idea how long recruiting, training and equipping the numbers to increase that would take, let alone the cost, but it can’t be either cheap or quick.

    If we’re not going to wait for what’s likely now an irrelevant defence review (and for it to be relevant would mean its taking even longer), the we should do the no brainer stuff first.
    For example, accelerating and increasing the program to build “warfighting” ammunition stocks.
    https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/uk-aiming-to-have-warfighting-levels-of-ammunition/
    Or getting this into service in quantity:
    https://www.raf.mod.uk/news/articles/first-successful-firing-of-new-guided-cruise-missile/
  • ohnotnowohnotnow Posts: 4,564
    ydoethur said:

    Too late, I'm chief executive of an international education company.

    I'll never become boss of an academy chain, of course. I'm an experienced teacher.
    I see where you've gone wrong now. Having experience of the field is basically cheating.

    You'll never make proper senior management. With a certification in proper management. Which you can wave at people as you fail upwards.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,534
    edited February 17

    Actually infants are more likely to succumb to pneumonia than pensioners of any age.

    So if you were to do the policy based on need, then it universally being granted to all infants would make more sense.

    But infants don't vote.
    Infants likely have 2 parents on at least minimum wage and probably average wage or more paying their heating bills plus child benefit.

    Pensioners on just state pension with no winter fuel allowance and who are widows or a widower have 1 below minimum wage income to pay their winter heating bills
  • TimSTimS Posts: 14,692
    ohnotnow said:

    Giorgia Meloni is the only one who has had the decency to dress up like a WW1 photo-op. Italians - always so stylish.

    It would be fascinating to be a fly on the wall. Who’s the talker that fills all the awkward gaps (I reckon Macron)? Who’s the contrarian always challenging what the others are saying (Meloni? Tusk?). Who’s the quiet studied one that everyone turns to when they want to know if they’re in agreement (UvdL)? Where does Starmer fit in this?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,778
    Omnium said:

    There's complexity in that though. Defence spending in that era created jobs for the many talented engineers etc. Something of the good of what we have now came from that.

    One can have too much butter.
    Not much benefit though.

    Different bits of government expenditure have different GDP multipliers. That is because some forms of government spending get recycled into the economy multiple times, generating GDP growth.

    In terms of GDP multipliers Defence spending is amongst the worst, with a multiplier of 0.4-0.6 (anything less that 1 meaning the amount of GDP generated is less than that which is spent). There are valid reasons to spend on defence, but in economic terms it is what we might consider chucking money in a hole.

    There are forms of government spending that have GDP multipliers well over 1, so in theory are effectively self funding. Health and Education are the 2 obvious ones, at 3.6 and 2.4 respectively in a recent report.

    The same goes for tax cuts etc. Tax cuts for the rich have a much lower GDP multiplier as the rich can afford to save than tax cuts for the poor (such as the LD policy to raise the personal allowance) as the poor tend to spend rather than save. Similarly cutting government expenditure on welfare tends to shrink the economy.

    Sure, we need to be physically secure and safe, but in economic terms butter beats guns hands down.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 26,195
    ohnotnow said:

    Wait. What?
    1 - The 11% cut is an "up to" number, aiui.

    2 - It won't be anything like £33bn extra per annum - that's for the birds. Lammy was talking about "need to work towards 2.5%".

    2.5% is an extra ~£5bn pa. Even 2.7%, which is where I would put it, is only an extra ~£10bn pa. That can be met by a couple of changes like tweaking tax relief on pensions.

    Or a more cunning suggestion that tax threshold freezes be extended, but not implemented if growth happens. I'm not sure how that works in the fiscal modelling, but I think it does. And it leaves RR saying either "look how well the economy grew and we can cancel the increase", or "we need to maintain this" and leaving everyone able to know what will be happening - so no flippety-floppety-slapping around and scaring the horses.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 73,083
    algarkirk said:

    If this is true and effective I will be delighted to see Europe continue to put it into effect. USA and Russia talks can't tell Ukraine or Europe waght to do.

    My own tentative view is that if that was the plan it wasn't working, and must be made to work if it can. But I think the real deal as on 20th January was a slowly losing attrition continuation without a further future in sight. I would be very pleased to be wrong.
    The deal on the 4th November was that Russia had failed in pretty much all its strategic objectives and was suffering badly from the economic consequences of sanctions, but couldn't withdraw because the damage to the reputation of the governing clique might well have involved lampposts and sodomy by a used bayonet.

    Putin was hanging on hoping for regime change in America leading to a President who liked him coming to power.

    And most unfortunately, he got it.
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 3,311
    People will start avoiding plane travel soon. How many does that make?
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 38,342
    algarkirk said:

    I have been occupied in stuff for a few days, and out of touch and a bit distant from the media and PB. Sorry if I am the millionth to have had this thought about Mr Trump.

    Trumps' downsides are obvious; and potentially deadly. I think he and his plutocratic oligarchy gangster friends are appalling.

    But he general awfulness does not arise from a situation in which he is by his character derogating from planetary perfection.

    Ask one question. There are lots of others but this will do. Trump has a plan for ending the Ukraine war. On 20th January, what was the plan of the EU/free Europe for ending it?

    There wasn't one. It was going to go on indefinitely.

    Ttrump's odd quality is that he will get other outfits to ask, and answer, questions they were very comfortable not answering on 20th January. This is not all bad.

    The plan was to “keep buggering on.” What other plan in war can there be?

  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 18,431

    The top table of European politics:

    image

    Purge - original comment was too much
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 73,083
    ohnotnow said:

    I see where you've gone wrong now. Having experience of the field is basically cheating.

    You'll never make proper senior management. With a certification in proper management. Which you can wave at people as you fail upwards.
    I did actually look at doing a management course with the CIPD.

    But ultimately I decided I had better things to spend the money on.
  • ohnotnowohnotnow Posts: 4,564
    MattW said:

    1 - The 11% cut is an "up to" number, aiui.

    2 - It won't be anything like £33bn extra per annum - that's for the birds. Lammy was talking about "need to work towards 2.5%".

    2.5% is an extra ~£5bn pa. Even 2.7%, which is where I would put it, is only an extra ~£10bn pa. That can be met by a couple of changes like tweaking tax relief on pensions.

    Or a more cunning suggestion that tax threshold freezes be extended, but not implemented if growth happens. I'm not sure how that works in the fiscal modelling, but I think it does. And it leaves RR saying either "look how well the economy grew and we can cancel the increase", or "we need to maintain this" and leaving everyone able to know what will be happening - so no flippety-floppety-slapping around and scaring the horses.
    It was the butter statement I was questioning. The rest is neither here nor there in the grand scheme.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,502
    edited February 17

    Excellent idea. Boycotting both would affect the USA financially, and hopefully embarrass them as well.
    It's a happy coincidence that they are in the states. Whether Spain et al would go for it with football, I don't know, but it would be funny if it all went wrong for Infantino.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 75,898

    We have been warning for years that Trump sees VAT as a tariff. This is not new.
    Trump is an ignoramus, who will do us enormous harm, and william is celebrating the fact.
  • ohnotnowohnotnow Posts: 4,564
    ydoethur said:

    I did actually look at doing a management course with the CIPD.

    But ultimately I decided I had better things to spend the money on.
    You need more ITIL in your life. Maybe some PRINCE2 if you're even more retro. One of the few things I look forward to in our AI-overlord future is some generated avatar laying waste to the certification racket.
This discussion has been closed.