Howdy, Stranger!

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

If these numbers persist then Vance is unlikely to win in 2028 – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,431
edited April 25 in General
If these numbers persist then Vance is unlikely to win in 2028 – politicalbetting.com

It’s 100 days in, and the polls consistently look very bad for Trump, even on his core issues of the economy and immigration. I dive into what the numbers say and what they could mean going forward, in today’s write-up. Check it out in the replies. pic.twitter.com/msBotY19kt

Read the full story here

«134

Comments

  • MattWMattW Posts: 26,670
    Ooh. First.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 26,670
    edited April 25
    OT.
    @TSE dethreaded me. Bah.

    Battlebus said:

    So one year on the horizon and no sign of 1.5 million new houses

    You should see the rate they are going up on the South Coast. There's a lot going on - except where the local council has got into the building game (2-3 years late)
    We build abour 200,000 houses in a normal year, but were not building 400,000 houses which is what we need.
    We have quite major developments starting here in Ashfield, including a continuation of building more Council Houses that have been a thing for several years. They are trying to build on several areas of open land on older housing estates, where dogwalkers go etc, which is getting some blowback.

    Looking at the numbers, they are massively lumpy, and come out 4 months behind - so 2024 Q4 is due out in the next week. Starts by quarter from 2022 Q1 look weird as Covid worked it way out - no conclusions are possible. WTF is 80k, 29k, 24k across Q2-Q4 2023 ?

    But this is one, like NHS waiting lists, where the Govt have to deliver significant improvement towards their 1.5 million: target

    Housing Starts - UK

    2022 Q1 - No data
    2022 Q2 - 65,200
    2022 Q3 - 56,180
    2022 Q4 - 39,350
    2023 Q1 - 44,850
    2023 Q2 - 79,710
    2023 Q3 - 28,750
    2023 Q4 - 23,940
    2024 Q1 - 30,010
    2024 Q2 - 33,390
    2024 Q3 - 37,030
    2024 Q1 - soon

    I can only put it down to marketing shenanigans that the Cons indulged in before the Election to stroke Nimbies as they were circling the drain - eg the abolition of Housing Targets by Council, which they had never touched before.

    But that is just my surmise.

    Source of data: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/housing/datasets/ukhousebuildingpermanentdwellingsstartedandcompleted

    (Now I will read the header.)
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 30,205
    Trump 45's numbers were bad too yet here is 47.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 73,567
    Vance won't win in 2028 whatever happens.

    If Trump tries to hang on, he can't run.

    If the Republicans are unpopular, he'll be tainted. That includes if he has become President, which is fairly likely given Trump's age and state of decay. This means either he will be primaried out, or he will lose.

    For me, the likelier Republican candidate is Ramaswamy. If they double down on whatever they're smoking, he's the obvious contender - younger, more plausible, more coherent and even more batshit than Trump and Musk.

    But what it really shows is how broken the American political system is if they can elect somebody to carry out policies that will blow up their lives, and then be surprised or disapproving about it.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 73,567

    Trump 45's numbers were bad too yet here is 47.

    But he still lost in 2020 despite his efforts to rig the vote. 2032 might be a different story but 2028 already looks very difficult for the Republicans.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,787
    MattW said:

    OT.
    @TSE dethreaded me. Bah.

    Battlebus said:

    So one year on the horizon and no sign of 1.5 million new houses

    You should see the rate they are going up on the South Coast. There's a lot going on - except where the local council has got into the building game (2-3 years late)
    We build abour 200,000 houses in a normal year, but were not building 400,000 houses which is what we need.
    We have quite major developments starting here in Ashfield, including a continuation of building more Council Houses that have been a thing for several years. They are trying to build on several areas of open land on older housing estates, where dogwalkers go etc, which is getting some blowback.

    Looking at the numbers, they are massively lumpy, and come out 4 months behind - so 2024 Q4 is due out in the next week. Starts by quarter from 2022 Q1 look weirdly lumpy as Covid worked out - no conclusions are possible. But this is one, like NHS waiting lists, where the Govt have to deliver significant improvement towards their 1.5 million: target

    Housing Starts - UK

    2022 Q1 - No data
    2022 Q2 - 65,200
    2022 Q3 - 56,180
    2022 Q4 - 39,350
    2023 Q1 - 44,850
    2023 Q2 - 79,710
    2023 Q3 - 28,750
    2023 Q4 - 23,940
    2024 Q1 - 30,010
    2024 Q2 - 33,390
    2024 Q3 - 37,030
    2024 Q1 - soon

    I can only put it down to marketing shenanigans that the Cons indulged in before the Election to stroke Nimbies as they were circling the drain - eg the abolition of Housing Targets by Council, which they had never touched before.

    But that is just my surmise.

    Source of data: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/housing/datasets/ukhousebuildingpermanentdwellingsstartedandcompleted

    (Now I will read the header.)
    Labour has no chance of hitting its target, theyre as useless as the Conservatives. LDs are not much better nationally they proclaim the need for housing and then locally oppose everything.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 24,280
    ydoethur said:

    Vance won't win in 2028 whatever happens.

    If Trump tries to hang on, he can't run.

    If the Republicans are unpopular, he'll be tainted. That includes if he has become President, which is fairly likely given Trump's age and state of decay. This means either he will be primaried out, or he will lose.

    For me, the likelier Republican candidate is Ramaswamy. If they double down on whatever they're smoking, he's the obvious contender - younger, more plausible, more coherent and even more batshit than Trump and Musk.

    But what it really shows is how broken the American political system is if they can elect somebody to carry out policies that will blow up their lives, and then be surprised or disapproving about it.

    I still don't understand why we can't back the likely 2028 winner on Betfair. If people think he won't run or be allowed to stand they can just lay him bigly.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 26,670
    edited April 25
    Thank-you for the header, and good morning everyone.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 18,366

    Trump 45's numbers were bad too yet here is 47.

    That goes back to the other elephant in the room- the behaviour of the elephants in the room.

    The Republican primary process really shouldn't have ended up with Trump as the candidate last year, but it did. How that plays out when a simple reading of the law doesn't allow him to run in 2028 remains to be seen.

    After all, he's never let a simple reading of the law stop him before.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 26,670

    MattW said:

    OT.
    @TSE dethreaded me. Bah.

    Battlebus said:

    So one year on the horizon and no sign of 1.5 million new houses

    You should see the rate they are going up on the South Coast. There's a lot going on - except where the local council has got into the building game (2-3 years late)
    We build abour 200,000 houses in a normal year, but were not building 400,000 houses which is what we need.
    We have quite major developments starting here in Ashfield, including a continuation of building more Council Houses that have been a thing for several years. They are trying to build on several areas of open land on older housing estates, where dogwalkers go etc, which is getting some blowback.

    Looking at the numbers, they are massively lumpy, and come out 4 months behind - so 2024 Q4 is due out in the next week. Starts by quarter from 2022 Q1 look weirdly lumpy as Covid worked out - no conclusions are possible. But this is one, like NHS waiting lists, where the Govt have to deliver significant improvement towards their 1.5 million: target

    Housing Starts - UK

    2022 Q1 - No data
    2022 Q2 - 65,200
    2022 Q3 - 56,180
    2022 Q4 - 39,350
    2023 Q1 - 44,850
    2023 Q2 - 79,710
    2023 Q3 - 28,750
    2023 Q4 - 23,940
    2024 Q1 - 30,010
    2024 Q2 - 33,390
    2024 Q3 - 37,030
    2024 Q1 - soon

    I can only put it down to marketing shenanigans that the Cons indulged in before the Election to stroke Nimbies as they were circling the drain - eg the abolition of Housing Targets by Council, which they had never touched before.

    But that is just my surmise.

    Source of data: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/housing/datasets/ukhousebuildingpermanentdwellingsstartedandcompleted

    (Now I will read the header.)
    Labour has no chance of hitting its target, theyre as useless as the Conservatives. LDs are not much better nationally they proclaim the need for housing and then locally oppose everything.
    I agree they won't hit their target - you just can't ramp up housebuilding that quickly in 2024. It will take 2-4 years to create the capacity. That was one of Corbyn's errors when he said he could pull half a million council houses out of thin air tomorrow.

    I laid out my suggestions for what they actually need to do to have a positive message at the next Election, and that is a significant increase by year 4 - perhaps to 250-300k per annum. Then there is something worthwhile to point at as an achievement. There are also factors around starts/completions data, which are roughly 1 year apart.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 76,769

    Trump 45's numbers were bad too yet here is 47.

    Vance's approval rating is below Trump's.

    The Popebane is toast electorally.
    But he could still be the next President...
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 73,567
    Nigelb said:

    Trump's former VP weighs in.

    Following last night’s brutal assault on Kyiv, it’s clear Putin has no interest in peace. Time to answer Russia’s ongoing invasion in Ukraine with renewed American strength and give our ally the military support they need to win a victory for freedom.
    https://x.com/Mike_Pence/status/1915432808366981276

    Hmmm. Given Trump's hatred of Pence and his habit of acting out of personal spite, however well-intentioned I'm not sure that's a helpful thing to say.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,095
    Trump's approval rating is now near identical to what it was at this stage of his first term and only slightly below. In 2020 Trump of course was only narrowly beaten by Biden for re election. So all is not completely lost for Vance even if the Democrats should now be favourites for the midterms and next presidential election. Especially given the poor approval numbers for Trump's handling of the economy, tariffs and foreign policy even if his immigration policy still gets reasonable approval ratings
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 10,160
    MattW said:

    Thank-you for the header, and good morning everyone.

    Morning Matt. Quite astonishing cycling figures from the City of London yesterday - they've blown through their 2030 target of a 50% increase by achieving 70% six years early.

    I've enjoyed roasters pivoting from "we're not like the Dutch" to "we're not like Londoners".
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 76,769
    Historians dispute Bayeux tapestry penis tally after lengthy debate
    Two Bayeux scholars at loggerheads over whether dangling shape depicts dagger or the embroidery’s 94th phallus
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/apr/25/bayeux-tapestry-historian-genitalia-dispute
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 51,131
    Nigelb said:

    Trump's former VP weighs in.

    Following last night’s brutal assault on Kyiv, it’s clear Putin has no interest in peace. Time to answer Russia’s ongoing invasion in Ukraine with renewed American strength and give our ally the military support they need to win a victory for freedom.
    https://x.com/Mike_Pence/status/1915432808366981276

    Never mind U-turn; this administration seems to be perfecting the art of the O-turn.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,095
    ydoethur said:

    Vance won't win in 2028 whatever happens.

    If Trump tries to hang on, he can't run.

    If the Republicans are unpopular, he'll be tainted. That includes if he has become President, which is fairly likely given Trump's age and state of decay. This means either he will be primaried out, or he will lose.

    For me, the likelier Republican candidate is Ramaswamy. If they double down on whatever they're smoking, he's the obvious contender - younger, more plausible, more coherent and even more batshit than Trump and Musk.

    But what it really shows is how broken the American political system is if they can elect somebody to carry out policies that will blow up their lives, and then be surprised or disapproving about it.

    There is no way MAGA voters vote for Ramaswamay and his pro immigration views in the primaries. Donald Trump Jr and Haley and DeSantis again are more plausible opponents for Vance than him
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 13,724
    Meta 'too slow' during UK riots to deal with violent posts online, says independent review

    https://news.sky.com/story/meta-too-slow-during-uk-riots-to-deal-with-violent-posts-online-says-independent-review-13354324
  • FishingFishing Posts: 5,509
    edited April 25
    MattW said:

    Battlebus said:

    So one year on the horizon and no sign of 1.5 million new houses

    You should see the rate they are going up on the South Coast. There's a lot going on - except where the local council has got into the building game (2-3 years late)
    We build abour 200,000 houses in a normal year, but were not building 400,000 houses which is what we need.
    We have quite major developments starting here in Ashfield, including a continuation of building more Council Houses that have been a thing for several years. They are trying to build on several areas of open land on older housing estates, where dogwalkers go etc, which is getting some blowback.

    Looking at the numbers, they are massively lumpy, and come out 4 months behind - so 2024 Q4 is due out in the next week. Starts by quarter from 2022 Q1 look weirdly lumpy as Covid worked out - no conclusions are possible. But this is one, like NHS waiting lists, where the Govt have to deliver significant improvement towards their 1.5 million: target

    Housing Starts - UK

    2022 Q1 - No data
    2022 Q2 - 65,200
    2022 Q3 - 56,180
    2022 Q4 - 39,350
    2023 Q1 - 44,850
    2023 Q2 - 79,710
    2023 Q3 - 28,750
    2023 Q4 - 23,940
    2024 Q1 - 30,010
    2024 Q2 - 33,390
    2024 Q3 - 37,030
    2024 Q1 - soon

    I can only put it down to marketing shenanigans that the Cons indulged in before the Election to stroke Nimbies as they were circling the drain - eg the abolition of Housing Targets by Council, which they had never touched before.

    But that is just my surmise.

    Source of data: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/housing/datasets/ukhousebuildingpermanentdwellingsstartedandcompleted
    My surmise would be that the number of housing starts fell as the economy slowed from the roaring economic boom of 2021-2 and as the pent up approvals from the pandemic ran out.

    Whatever, it's a dismal record, especially as most if not all will be tiny, shoddy new builds a third of the size of their American counterparts, rather than the large family homes we need if our birthrate is to rise.

    We need 8 million new houses to match France, which has a similar population. Allowing for population increase and demolition that's at least 500,000/year for 20 years. It really is the challenge of our generation, one that we're failing totally and spectacularly, and they need to be in exactly the kind of places that don't want them. The Economist highlighted recently that booming Oxford has built fewer new homes than shitheap Doncaster. Mad.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 73,567
    HYUFD said:

    Trump's approval rating is now near identical to what it was at this stage of his first term and only slightly below. In 2020 Trump of course was only narrowly beaten by Biden for re election. So all is not completely lost for Vance even if the Democrats should now be favourites for the midterms and next presidential election. Especially given the poor approval numbers for Trump's handling of the economy, tariffs and foreign policy even if his immigration policy still gets reasonable approval ratings

    It was not narrow, Hyufd. It was an absolute thumping. Biden won by 4.5% and got over 50% of the vote, despite the shall we say, creative behaviour of certain Republican officials. That translated to over 300 EC votes. By contrast, although Trump also got over 300 EC votes in 2024, he won by just 1.5% of the popular vote.
  • DopermeanDopermean Posts: 943

    ydoethur said:

    Vance won't win in 2028 whatever happens.

    If Trump tries to hang on, he can't run.

    If the Republicans are unpopular, he'll be tainted. That includes if he has become President, which is fairly likely given Trump's age and state of decay. This means either he will be primaried out, or he will lose.

    For me, the likelier Republican candidate is Ramaswamy. If they double down on whatever they're smoking, he's the obvious contender - younger, more plausible, more coherent and even more batshit than Trump and Musk.

    But what it really shows is how broken the American political system is if they can elect somebody to carry out policies that will blow up their lives, and then be surprised or disapproving about it.

    I still don't understand why we can't back the likely 2028 winner on Betfair. If people think he won't run or be allowed to stand they can just lay him bigly.
    Are Betfair refusing to list Trump? They've listed numerous celebs, though, as far as I can tell, no one ineligible such as Musk or Schwarzenegger. Is that why Trump isn't listed, currently ineligible?
  • boulayboulay Posts: 6,156
    Completely O/T but heard The Last Post on some news story on radio and realised I didn’t know what the history was. Remembered there is a thing called google and it’s actually mildly interesting. I’m moderately thrilled now to know where the military “tattoo” comes from and it’s tied up why light infantry have a bugle symbol.

    Really nice light geeky info for a Friday morning.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_Post#External_links
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 29,849
    The next President? Depends on whether King Donald falls out with his chosen heirs. So often the successor to the tyrant is not the expected one, so I agree that it's unlikely to be Vance.

    Trump is moaning about the Supreme Court blocking him. HIS judges. They have already got around the court once, surely it seems likely that the next move will be to simply bypass it.

    Remember folks - they are already laying the ground for this. Activist judges, woke liberal lawyers, traitors of the American people - the abuse is already lined up. To sue the US government you need lawyers - and the government are busy smashing them. To stop the US government you need a legislature willing to speak out. Trump got impeached twice and wasn't stopped. And congress as currently elected is submissive. To stop the US government you need an independent media willing to speak truth to power. That has gone.

    I'm very serious when I float questions about midterms and future elections. Trump is rapidly moving to squash the constitution and all opposition. He can sit there in the Oval Office with chinese-made MAGA hats on his desk signing endless executive orders and nobody is going to stop him.

    The only question is how far will he go?
  • DopermeanDopermean Posts: 943
    Dopermean said:

    ydoethur said:

    Vance won't win in 2028 whatever happens.

    If Trump tries to hang on, he can't run.

    If the Republicans are unpopular, he'll be tainted. That includes if he has become President, which is fairly likely given Trump's age and state of decay. This means either he will be primaried out, or he will lose.

    For me, the likelier Republican candidate is Ramaswamy. If they double down on whatever they're smoking, he's the obvious contender - younger, more plausible, more coherent and even more batshit than Trump and Musk.

    But what it really shows is how broken the American political system is if they can elect somebody to carry out policies that will blow up their lives, and then be surprised or disapproving about it.

    I still don't understand why we can't back the likely 2028 winner on Betfair. If people think he won't run or be allowed to stand they can just lay him bigly.
    Are Betfair refusing to list Trump? They've listed numerous celebs, though, as far as I can tell, no one ineligible such as Musk or Schwarzenegger. Is that why Trump isn't listed, currently ineligible?
    BTW Ramaswamy is at 100 with £10 available.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 14,948
    Nigelb said:

    Historians dispute Bayeux tapestry penis tally after lengthy debate
    Two Bayeux scholars at loggerheads over whether dangling shape depicts dagger or the embroidery’s 94th phallus
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/apr/25/bayeux-tapestry-historian-genitalia-dispute

    Don’t tell me even the mediaeval historians are going on about trans.

    At least they weren’t erect.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 23,427
    edited April 25

    Trump 45's numbers were bad too yet here is 47.

    Because we are in a Hokey Cokey period of politics.

    People are grumpy and willing to vote against the incumbents to shake it all about. After they do though the new incumbents are the ones they're grumpy with, hence the in, out, in, out effect.

    We've been through periods like this before. EG the late 60s to 1979 with Wilson doing the Hokey Cokey from Downing Street.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 26,670
    edited April 25
    Eabhal said:

    MattW said:

    Thank-you for the header, and good morning everyone.

    Morning Matt. Quite astonishing cycling figures from the City of London yesterday - they've blown through their 2030 target of a 50% increase by achieving 70% six years early.

    I've enjoyed roasters pivoting from "we're not like the Dutch" to "we're not like Londoners".
    That's interesting, thanks. I've been seeing a lot more * around here in Ashfield - but I've also been getting quite serious about rebuilding my fitness and I'm averaging 10k steps per day over the last week or so - walking. We also have a couple of modest improvements to our cycling network (and a few barriers gone), which are providing doable but not good quality routes between real places. And it is also the Easter holidays and sunny.

    We are in sight of a route around the outskirts of town *if* there was a vision.

    * Here this means that if I go for a 3-4 mile varied walk I might see a couple of dozen people on cycles if I am in the right part of town. Nothing happening on the roads and the staggered pedestrian crossings of course.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 73,567

    The next President? Depends on whether King Donald falls out with his chosen heirs. So often the successor to the tyrant is not the expected one, so I agree that it's unlikely to be Vance.

    Trump is moaning about the Supreme Court blocking him. HIS judges. They have already got around the court once, surely it seems likely that the next move will be to simply bypass it.

    Remember folks - they are already laying the ground for this. Activist judges, woke liberal lawyers, traitors of the American people - the abuse is already lined up. To sue the US government you need lawyers - and the government are busy smashing them. To stop the US government you need a legislature willing to speak out. Trump got impeached twice and wasn't stopped. And congress as currently elected is submissive. To stop the US government you need an independent media willing to speak truth to power. That has gone.

    I'm very serious when I float questions about midterms and future elections. Trump is rapidly moving to squash the constitution and all opposition. He can sit there in the Oval Office with chinese-made MAGA hats on his desk signing endless executive orders and nobody is going to stop him.

    The only question is how far will he go?

    Well, he's already broken one promise. He said he'd only act as a dictator on day 1.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 20,177
    Tbf @RochdalePioneers I think the MAGA hats are made in America
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,920
    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    Trump's approval rating is now near identical to what it was at this stage of his first term and only slightly below. In 2020 Trump of course was only narrowly beaten by Biden for re election. So all is not completely lost for Vance even if the Democrats should now be favourites for the midterms and next presidential election. Especially given the poor approval numbers for Trump's handling of the economy, tariffs and foreign policy even if his immigration policy still gets reasonable approval ratings

    It was not narrow, Hyufd. It was an absolute thumping. Biden won by 4.5% and got over 50% of the vote, despite the shall we say, creative behaviour of certain Republican officials. That translated to over 300 EC votes. By contrast, although Trump also got over 300 EC votes in 2024, he won by just 1.5% of the popular vote.
    Funny how some people think Biden just scraped home in 2020 whereas Trump's 1.5-point lead in 2024 was a landslide.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 62,355
    Nigelb said:

    Historians dispute Bayeux tapestry penis tally after lengthy debate
    Two Bayeux scholars at loggerheads over whether dangling shape depicts dagger or the embroidery’s 94th phallus
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/apr/25/bayeux-tapestry-historian-genitalia-dispute

    But which privy did they use?
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 20,177
    edited April 25
    Chris said:

    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    Trump's approval rating is now near identical to what it was at this stage of his first term and only slightly below. In 2020 Trump of course was only narrowly beaten by Biden for re election. So all is not completely lost for Vance even if the Democrats should now be favourites for the midterms and next presidential election. Especially given the poor approval numbers for Trump's handling of the economy, tariffs and foreign policy even if his immigration policy still gets reasonable approval ratings

    It was not narrow, Hyufd. It was an absolute thumping. Biden won by 4.5% and got over 50% of the vote, despite the shall we say, creative behaviour of certain Republican officials. That translated to over 300 EC votes. By contrast, although Trump also got over 300 EC votes in 2024, he won by just 1.5% of the popular vote.
    Funny how some people think Biden just scraped home in 2020 whereas Trump's 1.5-point lead in 2024 was a landslide.
    Well the same way a Reform majority on 28% of the vote is a historic backlash against woke but a Labour majority on 32% of the vote is castle built on sand
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 62,355
    On topic, I'm not laying anything four years away, unless at amazing odds.

    Anything could happen and he has a fanatical base. Plus, we don't know if the Dems will continue sticking their fingers in their ears or start listening.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 76,769
    Robert Jenrick rules out Tory pact with Reform UK
    Shadow minister dismisses alliance with Nigel Farage’s party and asks critics of Kemi Badenoch to ‘give her a break’
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/apr/25/robert-jenrick-rules-out-tory-pact-with-reform-uk-nigel-farage
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,095

    On topic, I'm not laying anything four years away, unless at amazing odds.

    Anything could happen and he has a fanatical base. Plus, we don't know if the Dems will continue sticking their fingers in their ears or start listening.

    If Trump's approval rating is 45% or less in 2028 the Dems could even nominate AOC and still win
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 38,136
    @NewYorker

    At a conference on Tuesday, Jamie Dimon, the C.E.O. of JPMorgan Chase, said that a recession was now all but guaranteed, and called Donald Trump’s reciprocal tariffs plan “stupid.”

    https://x.com/NewYorker/status/1915575466846495218

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,095
    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    Trump's approval rating is now near identical to what it was at this stage of his first term and only slightly below. In 2020 Trump of course was only narrowly beaten by Biden for re election. So all is not completely lost for Vance even if the Democrats should now be favourites for the midterms and next presidential election. Especially given the poor approval numbers for Trump's handling of the economy, tariffs and foreign policy even if his immigration policy still gets reasonable approval ratings

    It was not narrow, Hyufd. It was an absolute thumping. Biden won by 4.5% and got over 50% of the vote, despite the shall we say, creative behaviour of certain Republican officials. That translated to over 300 EC votes. By contrast, although Trump also got over 300 EC votes in 2024, he won by just 1.5% of the popular vote.
    Trump got 47% in 2020, Harris 48% in 2024 little difference
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 76,769
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 20,177
    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    Trump's approval rating is now near identical to what it was at this stage of his first term and only slightly below. In 2020 Trump of course was only narrowly beaten by Biden for re election. So all is not completely lost for Vance even if the Democrats should now be favourites for the midterms and next presidential election. Especially given the poor approval numbers for Trump's handling of the economy, tariffs and foreign policy even if his immigration policy still gets reasonable approval ratings

    It was not narrow, Hyufd. It was an absolute thumping. Biden won by 4.5% and got over 50% of the vote, despite the shall we say, creative behaviour of certain Republican officials. That translated to over 300 EC votes. By contrast, although Trump also got over 300 EC votes in 2024, he won by just 1.5% of the popular vote.
    Trump got 47% in 2020, Harris 48% in 2024 little difference
    4.5% is bigger than 1.5%.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 31,327
    ydoethur said:

    Vance won't win in 2028 whatever happens.

    If Trump tries to hang on, he can't run.

    If the Republicans are unpopular, he'll be tainted. That includes if he has become President, which is fairly likely given Trump's age and state of decay. This means either he will be primaried out, or he will lose.

    For me, the likelier Republican candidate is Ramaswamy. If they double down on whatever they're smoking, he's the obvious contender - younger, more plausible, more coherent and even more batshit than Trump and Musk.

    But what it really shows is how broken the American political system is if they can elect somebody to carry out policies that will blow up their lives, and then be surprised or disapproving about it.

    Ramaswamy in MAGAland! Really? Are you not applying normalcy to insanity?

    What makes you think the USA will even need another Presidential Election? The Constitution has been binned, Congress is MAGA, the Supreme Court despite last week's 7 to 2 ruling is owned by Trump. There is government by Executive Order only. Next!
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,530
    Fishing said:

    MattW said:

    Battlebus said:

    So one year on the horizon and no sign of 1.5 million new houses

    You should see the rate they are going up on the South Coast. There's a lot going on - except where the local council has got into the building game (2-3 years late)
    We build abour 200,000 houses in a normal year, but were not building 400,000 houses which is what we need.
    We have quite major developments starting here in Ashfield, including a continuation of building more Council Houses that have been a thing for several years. They are trying to build on several areas of open land on older housing estates, where dogwalkers go etc, which is getting some blowback.

    Looking at the numbers, they are massively lumpy, and come out 4 months behind - so 2024 Q4 is due out in the next week. Starts by quarter from 2022 Q1 look weirdly lumpy as Covid worked out - no conclusions are possible. But this is one, like NHS waiting lists, where the Govt have to deliver significant improvement towards their 1.5 million: target

    Housing Starts - UK

    2022 Q1 - No data
    2022 Q2 - 65,200
    2022 Q3 - 56,180
    2022 Q4 - 39,350
    2023 Q1 - 44,850
    2023 Q2 - 79,710
    2023 Q3 - 28,750
    2023 Q4 - 23,940
    2024 Q1 - 30,010
    2024 Q2 - 33,390
    2024 Q3 - 37,030
    2024 Q1 - soon

    I can only put it down to marketing shenanigans that the Cons indulged in before the Election to stroke Nimbies as they were circling the drain - eg the abolition of Housing Targets by Council, which they had never touched before.

    But that is just my surmise.

    Source of data: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/housing/datasets/ukhousebuildingpermanentdwellingsstartedandcompleted
    My surmise would be that the number of housing starts fell as the economy slowed from the roaring economic boom of 2021-2 and as the pent up approvals from the pandemic ran out.

    Whatever, it's a dismal record, especially as most if not all will be tiny, shoddy new builds a third of the size of their American counterparts, rather than the large family homes we need if our birthrate is to rise.

    We need 8 million new houses to match France, which has a similar population. Allowing for population increase and demolition that's at least 500,000/year for 20 years. It really is the challenge of our generation, one that we're failing totally and spectacularly, and they need to be in exactly the kind of places that don't want them. The Economist highlighted recently that booming Oxford has built fewer new homes than shitheap Doncaster. Mad.
    Given that Doncaster is far bigger, far more rural and has far more brownfield sites why is that remotely surprising ?
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 31,327
    Nigelb said:

    Robert Jenrick rules out Tory pact with Reform UK
    Shadow minister dismisses alliance with Nigel Farage’s party and asks critics of Kemi Badenoch to ‘give her a break’
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/apr/25/robert-jenrick-rules-out-tory-pact-with-reform-uk-nigel-farage

    Et tu Brute?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 65,556
    Workless youths who are “on the internet 24-hours a day” won’t get out of bed for less than £40,000, Lords have been told.

    Graham Cowley, who works with young people who are not in employment, education or training (Neets) in Blackpool, said a colleague this week told him there were “kids on the internet 24-hours a day, and they don’t want to work for anything less than 40 grand”.

    Some on the Lords’ social mobility policy committee gasped in response, prompting Mr Crowley to say: “I know, I had that reaction. You may laugh, but that is the reality.”

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/04/25/workless-youths-wont-get-out-of-bed-for-less-than-40k/
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 20,177

    Fishing said:

    MattW said:

    Battlebus said:

    So one year on the horizon and no sign of 1.5 million new houses

    You should see the rate they are going up on the South Coast. There's a lot going on - except where the local council has got into the building game (2-3 years late)
    We build abour 200,000 houses in a normal year, but were not building 400,000 houses which is what we need.
    We have quite major developments starting here in Ashfield, including a continuation of building more Council Houses that have been a thing for several years. They are trying to build on several areas of open land on older housing estates, where dogwalkers go etc, which is getting some blowback.

    Looking at the numbers, they are massively lumpy, and come out 4 months behind - so 2024 Q4 is due out in the next week. Starts by quarter from 2022 Q1 look weirdly lumpy as Covid worked out - no conclusions are possible. But this is one, like NHS waiting lists, where the Govt have to deliver significant improvement towards their 1.5 million: target

    Housing Starts - UK

    2022 Q1 - No data
    2022 Q2 - 65,200
    2022 Q3 - 56,180
    2022 Q4 - 39,350
    2023 Q1 - 44,850
    2023 Q2 - 79,710
    2023 Q3 - 28,750
    2023 Q4 - 23,940
    2024 Q1 - 30,010
    2024 Q2 - 33,390
    2024 Q3 - 37,030
    2024 Q1 - soon

    I can only put it down to marketing shenanigans that the Cons indulged in before the Election to stroke Nimbies as they were circling the drain - eg the abolition of Housing Targets by Council, which they had never touched before.

    But that is just my surmise.

    Source of data: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/housing/datasets/ukhousebuildingpermanentdwellingsstartedandcompleted
    My surmise would be that the number of housing starts fell as the economy slowed from the roaring economic boom of 2021-2 and as the pent up approvals from the pandemic ran out.

    Whatever, it's a dismal record, especially as most if not all will be tiny, shoddy new builds a third of the size of their American counterparts, rather than the large family homes we need if our birthrate is to rise.

    We need 8 million new houses to match France, which has a similar population. Allowing for population increase and demolition that's at least 500,000/year for 20 years. It really is the challenge of our generation, one that we're failing totally and spectacularly, and they need to be in exactly the kind of places that don't want them. The Economist highlighted recently that booming Oxford has built fewer new homes than shitheap Doncaster. Mad.
    Given that Doncaster is far bigger, far more rural and has far more brownfield sites why is that remotely surprising ?
    Pretty sure Oxford is just a motorway services
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 20,177

    Workless youths who are “on the internet 24-hours a day” won’t get out of bed for less than £40,000, Lords have been told.

    Graham Cowley, who works with young people who are not in employment, education or training (Neets) in Blackpool, said a colleague this week told him there were “kids on the internet 24-hours a day, and they don’t want to work for anything less than 40 grand”.

    Some on the Lords’ social mobility policy committee gasped in response, prompting Mr Crowley to say: “I know, I had that reaction. You may laugh, but that is the reality.”

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/04/25/workless-youths-wont-get-out-of-bed-for-less-than-40k/

    In London and the South East I can believe that
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,095

    Workless youths who are “on the internet 24-hours a day” won’t get out of bed for less than £40,000, Lords have been told.

    Graham Cowley, who works with young people who are not in employment, education or training (Neets) in Blackpool, said a colleague this week told him there were “kids on the internet 24-hours a day, and they don’t want to work for anything less than 40 grand”.

    Some on the Lords’ social mobility policy committee gasped in response, prompting Mr Crowley to say: “I know, I had that reaction. You may laugh, but that is the reality.”

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/04/25/workless-youths-wont-get-out-of-bed-for-less-than-40k/

    Well they still have to apply for jobs and attend interviews or they are sanctioned and lose their benefits
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 43,344
    edited April 25
    Nigelb said:
    Maher is just another self regarding media twat who'll bend the knee to whomsoever is calling the shots. Much more insulting to 6 million dead Jews to connect their plight to him getting the piss ripped out of him.

    No doubt Maher will recover a facsimile of a conscience as Trump's ratings fall even further.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 13,724
    Every day, so much Republican Party corruption…

    https://apnews.com/article/trump-pardon-michele-fiore-nevada-fraud-cf56ef8b302b8111e47cf52d5a606d19

    LAS VEGAS (AP) — President Donald Trump has pardoned a Nevada Republican politician who was awaiting sentencing on federal charges that she used money meant for a statue honoring a slain police officer for personal costs, including plastic surgery.
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 6,609

    Nigelb said:

    Historians dispute Bayeux tapestry penis tally after lengthy debate
    Two Bayeux scholars at loggerheads over whether dangling shape depicts dagger or the embroidery’s 94th phallus
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/apr/25/bayeux-tapestry-historian-genitalia-dispute

    But which privy did they use?
    I'm fairly sure it's a scabbard, it appears to be on his left hand side, which is where a scabbard would nornally be. And white people don't have black penes.

    It would be better if it looked more like a key of course...
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 65,556
    Scott_xP said:

    @NewYorker

    At a conference on Tuesday, Jamie Dimon, the C.E.O. of JPMorgan Chase, said that a recession was now all but guaranteed, and called Donald Trump’s reciprocal tariffs plan “stupid.”

    https://x.com/NewYorker/status/1915575466846495218

    60% of Walmart stock comes from China.

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 76,769

    Nigelb said:
    Maher is just another self regarding media twat who'll bend the knee to whomsoever is calling the shots. Much more insulting to 6 million dead Jews to connect their plight to him getting the piss ripped out of him.

    No doubt Maher will recover a facsimile of a conscience as Trump's rating fall even further.
    David is, of course, Jewish.
    His piece is quite funny, and nails Maher's self regard pretty well, IMO.
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 3,427

    The next President? Depends on whether King Donald falls out with his chosen heirs. So often the successor to the tyrant is not the expected one, so I agree that it's unlikely to be Vance.

    Trump is moaning about the Supreme Court blocking him. HIS judges. They have already got around the court once, surely it seems likely that the next move will be to simply bypass it.

    Remember folks - they are already laying the ground for this. Activist judges, woke liberal lawyers, traitors of the American people - the abuse is already lined up. To sue the US government you need lawyers - and the government are busy smashing them. To stop the US government you need a legislature willing to speak out. Trump got impeached twice and wasn't stopped. And congress as currently elected is submissive. To stop the US government you need an independent media willing to speak truth to power. That has gone.

    I'm very serious when I float questions about midterms and future elections. Trump is rapidly moving to squash the constitution and all opposition. He can sit there in the Oval Office with chinese-made MAGA hats on his desk signing endless executive orders and nobody is going to stop him.

    The only question is how far will he go?

    A few days ago I read somewhere online that sales of copies of the American Constitution have shot up. People doing their research maybe.

    Good morning, everyone.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 76,769
    @TSE ?

    I'm sorry, but "Vladimir, STOP!" is just absolutely a line from porn
    https://x.com/Noahpinion/status/1915451167485952376
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,594
    edited April 25

    MattW said:

    OT.
    @TSE dethreaded me. Bah.

    Battlebus said:

    So one year on the horizon and no sign of 1.5 million new houses

    You should see the rate they are going up on the South Coast. There's a lot going on - except where the local council has got into the building game (2-3 years late)
    We build abour 200,000 houses in a normal year, but were not building 400,000 houses which is what we need.
    We have quite major developments starting here in Ashfield, including a continuation of building more Council Houses that have been a thing for several years. They are trying to build on several areas of open land on older housing estates, where dogwalkers go etc, which is getting some blowback.

    Looking at the numbers, they are massively lumpy, and come out 4 months behind - so 2024 Q4 is due out in the next week. Starts by quarter from 2022 Q1 look weirdly lumpy as Covid worked out - no conclusions are possible. But this is one, like NHS waiting lists, where the Govt have to deliver significant improvement towards their 1.5 million: target

    Housing Starts - UK

    2022 Q1 - No data
    2022 Q2 - 65,200
    2022 Q3 - 56,180
    2022 Q4 - 39,350
    2023 Q1 - 44,850
    2023 Q2 - 79,710
    2023 Q3 - 28,750
    2023 Q4 - 23,940
    2024 Q1 - 30,010
    2024 Q2 - 33,390
    2024 Q3 - 37,030
    2024 Q1 - soon

    I can only put it down to marketing shenanigans that the Cons indulged in before the Election to stroke Nimbies as they were circling the drain - eg the abolition of Housing Targets by Council, which they had never touched before.

    But that is just my surmise.

    Source of data: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/housing/datasets/ukhousebuildingpermanentdwellingsstartedandcompleted

    (Now I will read the header.)
    Labour has no chance of hitting its target, theyre as useless as the Conservatives. LDs are not much better nationally they proclaim the need for housing and then locally oppose everything.
    Supporting the 'right houses in the right place' which all parties say, is one of those things which is technically reasonable in isolation but in practice used as cover to say no to everything.

    People object to building in the open countryside, on the edges of towns, and also in the centre of towns, they object to building on green belt, green fields, but also brownfield. They'll fight to preserve high quality agricultural land, useless scrubland, and derelict buildings and former car parks. They'll complain the infrastructure is not built first then object if infrastructure is built first. They'll bemoan they and their children cannot afford to live where they grew up but object to any affordable housing being built there.

    It never ends and its infuriating. The system we have is at war with itself as it incentivises pandering to Nimbys whilst also having little teeth on developers. I do believe the government is now trying, but it may need more and look how they act in their own back yards.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,530

    Workless youths who are “on the internet 24-hours a day” won’t get out of bed for less than £40,000, Lords have been told.

    Graham Cowley, who works with young people who are not in employment, education or training (Neets) in Blackpool, said a colleague this week told him there were “kids on the internet 24-hours a day, and they don’t want to work for anything less than 40 grand”.

    Some on the Lords’ social mobility policy committee gasped in response, prompting Mr Crowley to say: “I know, I had that reaction. You may laugh, but that is the reality.”

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/04/25/workless-youths-wont-get-out-of-bed-for-less-than-40k/

    They don't want to work for £40k they want to be employed for £40k.

    No employer would be able to get them to put down their mobiles in the few weeks before they were sacked.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 30,205
    Nigelb said:
    A Guardian story about what some American said on a YouTube chat show about something written by an American celebrity in the New York Times about something the first American said on an American programme even though the first American had not actually seen the second American say it. Is that right?

    What next, Guardian? This is the sort of media incest non-story they'd sneer at the Mail or Express writing from TwiX comments about ITV soaps, except the Guardian story is classy because it is about Americans so appeals to the sort of rich intellectuals who bored us all about Seinfeld in the 1990s.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 18,366
    HYUFD said:

    Workless youths who are “on the internet 24-hours a day” won’t get out of bed for less than £40,000, Lords have been told.

    Graham Cowley, who works with young people who are not in employment, education or training (Neets) in Blackpool, said a colleague this week told him there were “kids on the internet 24-hours a day, and they don’t want to work for anything less than 40 grand”.

    Some on the Lords’ social mobility policy committee gasped in response, prompting Mr Crowley to say: “I know, I had that reaction. You may laugh, but that is the reality.”

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/04/25/workless-youths-wont-get-out-of-bed-for-less-than-40k/

    Well they still have to apply for jobs and attend interviews or they are sanctioned and lose their benefits
    Probably pretty easy not to appoint such candidates.

    And, grumpy middle-aged cynic that I am, the Bank and Landlord of Mum and Dad probably have something to do with making this sort of lifestyle viable.

    As with absurdly early retirees, it's not an easy problem to fix, and at an individual level, it's arguable that we can't and shouldn't try.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,823
    I thought I'd heard it all but still get surprised sometimes. Was looking through some maga parts of the internet and one of the leading theories is that Z is bombing Kyiv himself in order to get Trump to separate from Putin and their number one priority is to get Trump to see this and punish Z for the duplicity by withdrawing from Ukraine.

    I suspect it was russian trolls who initiated the idea but it's catching on, I wouldn't be surprised if some maga cabinet members start parroting this theory soon.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 43,344
    edited April 25
    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:
    Maher is just another self regarding media twat who'll bend the knee to whomsoever is calling the shots. Much more insulting to 6 million dead Jews to connect their plight to him getting the piss ripped out of him.

    No doubt Maher will recover a facsimile of a conscience as Trump's rating fall even further.
    David is, of course, Jewish.
    His piece is quite funny, and nails Maher's self regard pretty well, IMO.
    Yep, it made me smile a lot if not actually lol. The efficiency of the nailing presumably caused Maher's disproportionate whine.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,483
    edited April 25
    Good morning, everyone.

    Oblivion remake looks pretty good and it seems they've improved the godawful levelling system, which was my only major gripe about the original (still got it).

    Might pick up the new version when it's on sale. And I have a thousand hours.



    F1: probably because I posted it earlier, last podcast slightly fell off a cliff so in case anyone missed it, here are the links:

    Podbean: https://undercutters.podbean.com/e/f1-2025-saudi-arabian-grand-prix-review/

    Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/f1-2025-saudi-arabian-grand-prix-review/id1786574257?i=1000704410551

    Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/episode/1xxxu5PeXCJvkNSieGr70V

    Amazon: https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/bcfe213b-55fb-408a-a823-dc6693ee9f78/episodes/6f22639b-8655-4bcd-9400-c3972b1a4994/undercutters---f1-podcast-f1-2025-saudi-arabian-grand-prix-review

    Transcript: https://morrisf1.blogspot.com/2025/04/f1-2025-saudi-arabian-grand-prix-review.html

    Next one will be up on Tuesday, including some interesting engine news. Some info is here:
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/articles/cgqvk9vyly1o

    Essentially, it could be winter for Ferrari and Red Bull next season. Prospects for Aston Martin and Williams seem set to improve, with McLaren/Mercedes staying at the sharp end in what is being widely dubbed an 'engine formula'. Questions over the electrical power being so high, though.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 65,556

    HYUFD said:

    Workless youths who are “on the internet 24-hours a day” won’t get out of bed for less than £40,000, Lords have been told.

    Graham Cowley, who works with young people who are not in employment, education or training (Neets) in Blackpool, said a colleague this week told him there were “kids on the internet 24-hours a day, and they don’t want to work for anything less than 40 grand”.

    Some on the Lords’ social mobility policy committee gasped in response, prompting Mr Crowley to say: “I know, I had that reaction. You may laugh, but that is the reality.”

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/04/25/workless-youths-wont-get-out-of-bed-for-less-than-40k/

    Well they still have to apply for jobs and attend interviews or they are sanctioned and lose their benefits
    Probably pretty easy not to appoint such candidates.

    And, grumpy middle-aged cynic that I am, the Bank and Landlord of Mum and Dad probably have something to do with making this sort of lifestyle viable.

    As with absurdly early retirees, it's not an easy problem to fix, and at an individual level, it's arguable that we can't and shouldn't try.
    I doubt the bank of mum and dad stretches to much in Blackpool which is where the comment came from originally.

    Most deprived seat in country pretty much.
  • (1/5)

    We need to stop housing being rejected by the planning system. Frankly, there are very few reasons why anything should be rejected.
  • StereodogStereodog Posts: 857

    Good morning, everyone.

    Oblivion remake looks pretty good and it seems they've improved the godawful levelling system, which was my only major gripe about the original (still got it).

    Might pick up the new version when it's on sale. And I have a thousand hours.



    F1: probably because I posted it earlier, last podcast slightly fell off a cliff so in case anyone missed it, here are the links:

    Podbean: https://undercutters.podbean.com/e/f1-2025-saudi-arabian-grand-prix-review/

    Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/f1-2025-saudi-arabian-grand-prix-review/id1786574257?i=1000704410551

    Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/episode/1xxxu5PeXCJvkNSieGr70V

    Amazon: https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/bcfe213b-55fb-408a-a823-dc6693ee9f78/episodes/6f22639b-8655-4bcd-9400-c3972b1a4994/undercutters---f1-podcast-f1-2025-saudi-arabian-grand-prix-review

    Transcript: https://morrisf1.blogspot.com/2025/04/f1-2025-saudi-arabian-grand-prix-review.html

    Next one will be up on Tuesday, including some interesting engine news. Some info is here:
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/articles/cgqvk9vyly1o

    Essentially, it could be winter for Ferrari and Red Bull next season. Prospects for Aston Martin and Williams seem set to improve, with McLaren/Mercedes staying at the sharp end in what is being widely dubbed an 'engine formula'. Questions over the electrical power being so high, though.

    I'm desperate to play the Oblivion remake. I played the original during my University exams (yeah bad timing) and adored it. I'm not keen to pay full price for a digital only title though I'll probably succumb.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 43,344
    edited April 25
    SNP obliteration update.

    The National
    @ScotNational
    NEW: The SNP have won a council by-election, holding the seat with more than double the Labour vote 👇

    https://x.com/ScotNational/status/1915670770040111158


    SCons must be bricking it (again).

    Britain Elects
    @BritainElects
    ✅ SNP HOLD

    Glenrothes Central and Thornton (Fife) council by-election result:

    SNP: 47.6% (-1.1)
    LAB: 21.5% (-6.4)
    REF: 17.9% (+17.9)
    LDEM: 6.9% (+2.9)
    CON: 6.1% (-5.9)

    No Grn (-3.7) as prev.

    +/- 2022
  • HYUFD said:

    Workless youths who are “on the internet 24-hours a day” won’t get out of bed for less than £40,000, Lords have been told.

    Graham Cowley, who works with young people who are not in employment, education or training (Neets) in Blackpool, said a colleague this week told him there were “kids on the internet 24-hours a day, and they don’t want to work for anything less than 40 grand”.

    Some on the Lords’ social mobility policy committee gasped in response, prompting Mr Crowley to say: “I know, I had that reaction. You may laugh, but that is the reality.”

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/04/25/workless-youths-wont-get-out-of-bed-for-less-than-40k/

    Well they still have to apply for jobs and attend interviews or they are sanctioned and lose their benefits
    Probably pretty easy not to appoint such candidates.

    And, grumpy middle-aged cynic that I am, the Bank and Landlord of Mum and Dad probably have something to do with making this sort of lifestyle viable.

    As with absurdly early retirees, it's not an easy problem to fix, and at an individual level, it's arguable that we can't and shouldn't try.
    I think our tax and benefit system has a far greater effect.

    Why bother working when if you do, you'll lose your benefits and be taxed and be no better off?

    I've been banging the drum on this for years, but the real marginal tax rate can be as high as 80-100% on work for those on low incomes so many people think why bother working? And that's not an irrational thought, even if its not a good one.

    Fix the system, let people keep more of their own money they work for - and by that I mean prioritising those on low incomes caught in the poverty trap, but deal with other cliff edges too.
  • DopermeanDopermean Posts: 943

    HYUFD said:

    Workless youths who are “on the internet 24-hours a day” won’t get out of bed for less than £40,000, Lords have been told.

    Graham Cowley, who works with young people who are not in employment, education or training (Neets) in Blackpool, said a colleague this week told him there were “kids on the internet 24-hours a day, and they don’t want to work for anything less than 40 grand”.

    Some on the Lords’ social mobility policy committee gasped in response, prompting Mr Crowley to say: “I know, I had that reaction. You may laugh, but that is the reality.”

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/04/25/workless-youths-wont-get-out-of-bed-for-less-than-40k/

    Well they still have to apply for jobs and attend interviews or they are sanctioned and lose their benefits
    Probably pretty easy not to appoint such candidates.

    And, grumpy middle-aged cynic that I am, the Bank and Landlord of Mum and Dad probably have something to do with making this sort of lifestyle viable.

    As with absurdly early retirees, it's not an easy problem to fix, and at an individual level, it's arguable that we can't and shouldn't try.
    I doubt the bank of mum and dad stretches to much in Blackpool which is where the comment came from originally.

    Most deprived seat in country pretty much.
    If the quality of the evidence to the social mobility policy committee is "Barry down the pub told me..." then it's no surprise the issue isn't progressing.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 54,230

    Scott_xP said:

    @NewYorker

    At a conference on Tuesday, Jamie Dimon, the C.E.O. of JPMorgan Chase, said that a recession was now all but guaranteed, and called Donald Trump’s reciprocal tariffs plan “stupid.”

    https://x.com/NewYorker/status/1915575466846495218

    60% of Walmart stock comes from China.

    I presume the other 40% comes from Vietnam
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 30,205

    Workless youths who are “on the internet 24-hours a day” won’t get out of bed for less than £40,000, Lords have been told.

    Graham Cowley, who works with young people who are not in employment, education or training (Neets) in Blackpool, said a colleague this week told him there were “kids on the internet 24-hours a day, and they don’t want to work for anything less than 40 grand”.

    Some on the Lords’ social mobility policy committee gasped in response, prompting Mr Crowley to say: “I know, I had that reaction. You may laugh, but that is the reality.”

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/04/25/workless-youths-wont-get-out-of-bed-for-less-than-40k/

    They don't want to work for £40k they want to be employed for £40k.

    No employer would be able to get them to put down their mobiles in the few weeks before they were sacked.
    What mortgage can you get on £40,000 a year? What about the minimum wage of £20,000 a year? As one of Leon's mates pointed out some years back, in London, even quite ordinary homes originally built for single-income, working class households now fetch around £1 million. Even in the frozen north or a left-behind seaside town like Clacton, you'd be looking at £200,000 which brings us back to a mortgage of 5 times £40k.
  • StereodogStereodog Posts: 857
    Has anyone been watching the US version of Have I Got News For You? The second season is my early morning watch and it's brilliant. It is ferociously partisan and right on but it has so much bite and wit that it makes the tired UK version look even more embarrassing.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 10,160
    edited April 25
    Stereodog said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    Oblivion remake looks pretty good and it seems they've improved the godawful levelling system, which was my only major gripe about the original (still got it).

    Might pick up the new version when it's on sale. And I have a thousand hours.



    F1: probably because I posted it earlier, last podcast slightly fell off a cliff so in case anyone missed it, here are the links:

    Podbean: https://undercutters.podbean.com/e/f1-2025-saudi-arabian-grand-prix-review/

    Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/f1-2025-saudi-arabian-grand-prix-review/id1786574257?i=1000704410551

    Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/episode/1xxxu5PeXCJvkNSieGr70V

    Amazon: https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/bcfe213b-55fb-408a-a823-dc6693ee9f78/episodes/6f22639b-8655-4bcd-9400-c3972b1a4994/undercutters---f1-podcast-f1-2025-saudi-arabian-grand-prix-review

    Transcript: https://morrisf1.blogspot.com/2025/04/f1-2025-saudi-arabian-grand-prix-review.html

    Next one will be up on Tuesday, including some interesting engine news. Some info is here:
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/articles/cgqvk9vyly1o

    Essentially, it could be winter for Ferrari and Red Bull next season. Prospects for Aston Martin and Williams seem set to improve, with McLaren/Mercedes staying at the sharp end in what is being widely dubbed an 'engine formula'. Questions over the electrical power being so high, though.

    I'm desperate to play the Oblivion remake. I played the original during my University exams (yeah bad timing) and adored it. I'm not keen to pay full price for a digital only title though I'll probably succumb.
    I've played 6 hours so far. It's gorgeous. Still got that clunky vibe and deeply inappropriate dialogue (even more so now I'm an adult and it's 2025). A brilliant remake and Elder Scrolls VI could be astonishing based on this evidence.

    However, frames are all over the place. I'm playing on High and it alternates between 140+ inside cities and low 20s outside in the wilderness. I had to update my drivers to play it but it still crashes all the time, usually on leaving a building.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 10,160
    edited April 25

    HYUFD said:

    Workless youths who are “on the internet 24-hours a day” won’t get out of bed for less than £40,000, Lords have been told.

    Graham Cowley, who works with young people who are not in employment, education or training (Neets) in Blackpool, said a colleague this week told him there were “kids on the internet 24-hours a day, and they don’t want to work for anything less than 40 grand”.

    Some on the Lords’ social mobility policy committee gasped in response, prompting Mr Crowley to say: “I know, I had that reaction. You may laugh, but that is the reality.”

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/04/25/workless-youths-wont-get-out-of-bed-for-less-than-40k/

    Well they still have to apply for jobs and attend interviews or they are sanctioned and lose their benefits
    Probably pretty easy not to appoint such candidates.

    And, grumpy middle-aged cynic that I am, the Bank and Landlord of Mum and Dad probably have something to do with making this sort of lifestyle viable.

    As with absurdly early retirees, it's not an easy problem to fix, and at an individual level, it's arguable that we can't and shouldn't try.
    I think our tax and benefit system has a far greater effect.

    Why bother working when if you do, you'll lose your benefits and be taxed and be no better off?

    I've been banging the drum on this for years, but the real marginal tax rate can be as high as 80-100% on work for those on low incomes so many people think why bother working? And that's not an irrational thought, even if its not a good one.

    Fix the system, let people keep more of their own money they work for - and by that I mean prioritising those on low incomes caught in the poverty trap, but deal with other cliff edges too.
    It can be. You're right for a small minority of cases, but for the vast majority of people those insane marginal tax rates do not apply.

    A cursory glance at income distributions, average hours worked and so on finds the benefit system simply isn't that big a disincentive overall - there is no discernible spike/dip at 16 hours, for example. It's frustrating because quite a lot of think tanks focus on these edge cases, it gets picked up in the press, and then we miss the broader picture.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,530

    Workless youths who are “on the internet 24-hours a day” won’t get out of bed for less than £40,000, Lords have been told.

    Graham Cowley, who works with young people who are not in employment, education or training (Neets) in Blackpool, said a colleague this week told him there were “kids on the internet 24-hours a day, and they don’t want to work for anything less than 40 grand”.

    Some on the Lords’ social mobility policy committee gasped in response, prompting Mr Crowley to say: “I know, I had that reaction. You may laugh, but that is the reality.”

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/04/25/workless-youths-wont-get-out-of-bed-for-less-than-40k/

    They don't want to work for £40k they want to be employed for £40k.

    No employer would be able to get them to put down their mobiles in the few weeks before they were sacked.
    What mortgage can you get on £40,000 a year? What about the minimum wage of £20,000 a year? As one of Leon's mates pointed out some years back, in London, even quite ordinary homes originally built for single-income, working class households now fetch around £1 million. Even in the frozen north or a left-behind seaside town like Clacton, you'd be looking at £200,000 which brings us back to a mortgage of 5 times £40k.
    Here's a four bed semi in Blackpool for £150k:

    https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/149832044#/?channel=RES_BUY

    Plenty of others available:

    https://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/find.html?maxPrice=150000&index=0&sortType=2&channel=BUY&transactionType=BUY&locationIdentifier=REGION^168&displayLocationIdentifier=Blackpool.html

    Or 3 bed terraces for £80k:

    https://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/find.html?maxPrice=80000&index=0&sortType=2&channel=BUY&transactionType=BUY&locationIdentifier=REGION^168&displayLocationIdentifier=Blackpool.html
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 54,230
    s
    Eabhal said:

    HYUFD said:

    Workless youths who are “on the internet 24-hours a day” won’t get out of bed for less than £40,000, Lords have been told.

    Graham Cowley, who works with young people who are not in employment, education or training (Neets) in Blackpool, said a colleague this week told him there were “kids on the internet 24-hours a day, and they don’t want to work for anything less than 40 grand”.

    Some on the Lords’ social mobility policy committee gasped in response, prompting Mr Crowley to say: “I know, I had that reaction. You may laugh, but that is the reality.”

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/04/25/workless-youths-wont-get-out-of-bed-for-less-than-40k/

    Well they still have to apply for jobs and attend interviews or they are sanctioned and lose their benefits
    Probably pretty easy not to appoint such candidates.

    And, grumpy middle-aged cynic that I am, the Bank and Landlord of Mum and Dad probably have something to do with making this sort of lifestyle viable.

    As with absurdly early retirees, it's not an easy problem to fix, and at an individual level, it's arguable that we can't and shouldn't try.
    I think our tax and benefit system has a far greater effect.

    Why bother working when if you do, you'll lose your benefits and be taxed and be no better off?

    I've been banging the drum on this for years, but the real marginal tax rate can be as high as 80-100% on work for those on low incomes so many people think why bother working? And that's not an irrational thought, even if its not a good one.

    Fix the system, let people keep more of their own money they work for - and by that I mean prioritising those on low incomes caught in the poverty trap, but deal with other cliff edges too.
    It can be. You're right for a small minority of cases, but for the vast majority of people those insane marginal tax rates do not apply.

    A cursory glance at income distributions, average hours worked and so on finds the benefit system simply isn't that big a disincentive overall - there is no discernible spike/dip at 16 hours, for example. It's frustrating because quite a lot of think tanks focus on these edge cases, it gets picked up in the press, and then we miss the broader picture.
    And yet I’ve sat across the table from people who are terrified of going over 16 hours. And other benefit traps.

    They are, universally, extremely fearful of being “docked” - judged to have been given too much money and having it clawed back by reducing their benefits over a long period of time.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 24,280

    Workless youths who are “on the internet 24-hours a day” won’t get out of bed for less than £40,000, Lords have been told.

    Graham Cowley, who works with young people who are not in employment, education or training (Neets) in Blackpool, said a colleague this week told him there were “kids on the internet 24-hours a day, and they don’t want to work for anything less than 40 grand”.

    Some on the Lords’ social mobility policy committee gasped in response, prompting Mr Crowley to say: “I know, I had that reaction. You may laugh, but that is the reality.”

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/04/25/workless-youths-wont-get-out-of-bed-for-less-than-40k/

    They don't want to work for £40k they want to be employed for £40k.

    No employer would be able to get them to put down their mobiles in the few weeks before they were sacked.
    What mortgage can you get on £40,000 a year? What about the minimum wage of £20,000 a year? As one of Leon's mates pointed out some years back, in London, even quite ordinary homes originally built for single-income, working class households now fetch around £1 million. Even in the frozen north or a left-behind seaside town like Clacton, you'd be looking at £200,000 which brings us back to a mortgage of 5 times £40k.
    Min wage, 40hrs a week is £25k. In my twenties most people worked more than that.

    I am a fan of the minimum wage but not sure we can keep increasing it at the current pace without creating a different set of problems for the next tier of jobs above.
  • LennonLennon Posts: 1,797
    Eabhal said:

    HYUFD said:

    Workless youths who are “on the internet 24-hours a day” won’t get out of bed for less than £40,000, Lords have been told.

    Graham Cowley, who works with young people who are not in employment, education or training (Neets) in Blackpool, said a colleague this week told him there were “kids on the internet 24-hours a day, and they don’t want to work for anything less than 40 grand”.

    Some on the Lords’ social mobility policy committee gasped in response, prompting Mr Crowley to say: “I know, I had that reaction. You may laugh, but that is the reality.”

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/04/25/workless-youths-wont-get-out-of-bed-for-less-than-40k/

    Well they still have to apply for jobs and attend interviews or they are sanctioned and lose their benefits
    Probably pretty easy not to appoint such candidates.

    And, grumpy middle-aged cynic that I am, the Bank and Landlord of Mum and Dad probably have something to do with making this sort of lifestyle viable.

    As with absurdly early retirees, it's not an easy problem to fix, and at an individual level, it's arguable that we can't and shouldn't try.
    I think our tax and benefit system has a far greater effect.

    Why bother working when if you do, you'll lose your benefits and be taxed and be no better off?

    I've been banging the drum on this for years, but the real marginal tax rate can be as high as 80-100% on work for those on low incomes so many people think why bother working? And that's not an irrational thought, even if its not a good one.

    Fix the system, let people keep more of their own money they work for - and by that I mean prioritising those on low incomes caught in the poverty trap, but deal with other cliff edges too.
    It can be. You're right for a small minority of cases, but for the vast majority of people those insane marginal tax rates do not apply.

    A cursory glance at income distributions, average hours worked and so on finds the benefit system simply isn't that big a disincentive overall - there is no discernible spike/dip at 16 hours, for example. It's frustrating because quite a lot of think tanks focus on these edge cases, it gets picked up in the press, and then we miss the broader picture.
    Appreciate that it's not quite the same thing - but there was a piece that Fraser Nelson did on the benefits system (think for Ch 4?) which highlighted the *perception* or *fear* of 'losing benefits' and/or fear that you wouldn't be able to get them back if you subsequently lost the job. It highlighted (and it might just be those he talked to, anecdote isn't data etc) the 'conservative / risk avoidant' approach many in that situation will take by default. (Which kinda makes sense - if you're just scraping by then a certain small amount is much more appealing than an uncertain potentially larger amount)
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 18,366

    Workless youths who are “on the internet 24-hours a day” won’t get out of bed for less than £40,000, Lords have been told.

    Graham Cowley, who works with young people who are not in employment, education or training (Neets) in Blackpool, said a colleague this week told him there were “kids on the internet 24-hours a day, and they don’t want to work for anything less than 40 grand”.

    Some on the Lords’ social mobility policy committee gasped in response, prompting Mr Crowley to say: “I know, I had that reaction. You may laugh, but that is the reality.”

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/04/25/workless-youths-wont-get-out-of-bed-for-less-than-40k/

    They don't want to work for £40k they want to be employed for £40k.

    No employer would be able to get them to put down their mobiles in the few weeks before they were sacked.
    What mortgage can you get on £40,000 a year? What about the minimum wage of £20,000 a year? As one of Leon's mates pointed out some years back, in London, even quite ordinary homes originally built for single-income, working class households now fetch around £1 million. Even in the frozen north or a left-behind seaside town like Clacton, you'd be looking at £200,000 which brings us back to a mortgage of 5 times £40k.
    One of the awkward realities of now.

    If your housing costs are zero, for whatever reason, life is really quite easy. The pressure to work to survive isn't really there, and not doing a minimum wage job is pretty rational from the point of view of homo economicus. You would have to be paid a blooming fortune to generate enough happiness.

    If you are paying current market rents, life is a flipping nightmare. Hence the tales of young barristers in a flatshare in Watford.

    One of the mysteries of the last decade has been the homeowners in depressed areas. They have been key to the success of Farage and Johnson. Objectively, they are comfortably off, but it's in a house price so it's not visible. And yet the areas around them are dismal. On one hand, that mismatch explains the appeal of national populism, but it doesn't make it a better idea.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,235
    edited April 25

    (1/5)

    We need to stop housing being rejected by the planning system. Frankly, there are very few reasons why anything should be rejected.

    My (district) council has their housing plans laid out here:

    https://www.bassetlaw.gov.uk/media/gn1kjm1b/adopted-bassetlaw-local-plan-2020-2038.pdf plans for 11,195 dwellings between 2020 and 2038 /
    2020 population 118,300 so plenty I think given birth rate trajectory and likely migration to the district. (Est needed is 9,720)

    Surely every council should have something like this.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 24,280
    Stereodog said:

    Has anyone been watching the US version of Have I Got News For You? The second season is my early morning watch and it's brilliant. It is ferociously partisan and right on but it has so much bite and wit that it makes the tired UK version look even more embarrassing.

    Nah, I've been watching this new interactive US political drama. It's a bit too far fetched but some great comedic actors, and they fall into the usual trap of cramming all the action into too short a space of time to make it believable. Best of all they have made it immersive so you can catch it on any of your favourite news channels or print media, 24 hrs a day.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 10,160
    edited April 25

    s

    Eabhal said:

    HYUFD said:

    Workless youths who are “on the internet 24-hours a day” won’t get out of bed for less than £40,000, Lords have been told.

    Graham Cowley, who works with young people who are not in employment, education or training (Neets) in Blackpool, said a colleague this week told him there were “kids on the internet 24-hours a day, and they don’t want to work for anything less than 40 grand”.

    Some on the Lords’ social mobility policy committee gasped in response, prompting Mr Crowley to say: “I know, I had that reaction. You may laugh, but that is the reality.”

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/04/25/workless-youths-wont-get-out-of-bed-for-less-than-40k/

    Well they still have to apply for jobs and attend interviews or they are sanctioned and lose their benefits
    Probably pretty easy not to appoint such candidates.

    And, grumpy middle-aged cynic that I am, the Bank and Landlord of Mum and Dad probably have something to do with making this sort of lifestyle viable.

    As with absurdly early retirees, it's not an easy problem to fix, and at an individual level, it's arguable that we can't and shouldn't try.
    I think our tax and benefit system has a far greater effect.

    Why bother working when if you do, you'll lose your benefits and be taxed and be no better off?

    I've been banging the drum on this for years, but the real marginal tax rate can be as high as 80-100% on work for those on low incomes so many people think why bother working? And that's not an irrational thought, even if its not a good one.

    Fix the system, let people keep more of their own money they work for - and by that I mean prioritising those on low incomes caught in the poverty trap, but deal with other cliff edges too.
    It can be. You're right for a small minority of cases, but for the vast majority of people those insane marginal tax rates do not apply.

    A cursory glance at income distributions, average hours worked and so on finds the benefit system simply isn't that big a disincentive overall - there is no discernible spike/dip at 16 hours, for example. It's frustrating because quite a lot of think tanks focus on these edge cases, it gets picked up in the press, and then we miss the broader picture.
    And yet I’ve sat across the table from people who are terrified of going over 16 hours. And other benefit traps.

    They are, universally, extremely fearful of being “docked” - judged to have been given too much money and having it clawed back by reducing their benefits over a long period of time.
    I don't doubt it applies in some cases. I just get frustrated with people who think that resolving it would have a material impact on the labour supply/benefits bill. The conditions set on UC claimants are so onerous that just looking at the calculations simply does not capture the conditions claimants live under.

    One easy win would be to roll more benefits into the UC taper (which is highly effective), including things like council tax reduction. That would knock METR (marginal effective tax rate) down significantly for some households. But the bigger issue is keeping it below 50% for all households would require such a large cut to the taper rate that it would massively increase the overall benefit bill.
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 4,924

    Fishing said:

    MattW said:

    Battlebus said:

    So one year on the horizon and no sign of 1.5 million new houses

    You should see the rate they are going up on the South Coast. There's a lot going on - except where the local council has got into the building game (2-3 years late)
    We build abour 200,000 houses in a normal year, but were not building 400,000 houses which is what we need.
    We have quite major developments starting here in Ashfield, including a continuation of building more Council Houses that have been a thing for several years. They are trying to build on several areas of open land on older housing estates, where dogwalkers go etc, which is getting some blowback.

    Looking at the numbers, they are massively lumpy, and come out 4 months behind - so 2024 Q4 is due out in the next week. Starts by quarter from 2022 Q1 look weirdly lumpy as Covid worked out - no conclusions are possible. But this is one, like NHS waiting lists, where the Govt have to deliver significant improvement towards their 1.5 million: target

    Housing Starts - UK

    2022 Q1 - No data
    2022 Q2 - 65,200
    2022 Q3 - 56,180
    2022 Q4 - 39,350
    2023 Q1 - 44,850
    2023 Q2 - 79,710
    2023 Q3 - 28,750
    2023 Q4 - 23,940
    2024 Q1 - 30,010
    2024 Q2 - 33,390
    2024 Q3 - 37,030
    2024 Q1 - soon

    I can only put it down to marketing shenanigans that the Cons indulged in before the Election to stroke Nimbies as they were circling the drain - eg the abolition of Housing Targets by Council, which they had never touched before.

    But that is just my surmise.

    Source of data: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/housing/datasets/ukhousebuildingpermanentdwellingsstartedandcompleted
    My surmise would be that the number of housing starts fell as the economy slowed from the roaring economic boom of 2021-2 and as the pent up approvals from the pandemic ran out.

    Whatever, it's a dismal record, especially as most if not all will be tiny, shoddy new builds a third of the size of their American counterparts, rather than the large family homes we need if our birthrate is to rise.

    We need 8 million new houses to match France, which has a similar population. Allowing for population increase and demolition that's at least 500,000/year for 20 years. It really is the challenge of our generation, one that we're failing totally and spectacularly, and they need to be in exactly the kind of places that don't want them. The Economist highlighted recently that booming Oxford has built fewer new homes than shitheap Doncaster. Mad.
    Given that Doncaster is far bigger, far more rural and has far more brownfield sites why is that remotely surprising ?
    Most of the building is not on brownfield sites - although there are a couple of projects on old colliery heaps. A lot is on greenfield to the east of the "city" where there is no greenbelt - in fill on the M18 link road.

    Also, Doncaster isn't entirely a shitheap. And Oxford isn't entirely dreaming spires, either, is it?

  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 30,205

    Workless youths who are “on the internet 24-hours a day” won’t get out of bed for less than £40,000, Lords have been told.

    Graham Cowley, who works with young people who are not in employment, education or training (Neets) in Blackpool, said a colleague this week told him there were “kids on the internet 24-hours a day, and they don’t want to work for anything less than 40 grand”.

    Some on the Lords’ social mobility policy committee gasped in response, prompting Mr Crowley to say: “I know, I had that reaction. You may laugh, but that is the reality.”

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/04/25/workless-youths-wont-get-out-of-bed-for-less-than-40k/

    They don't want to work for £40k they want to be employed for £40k.

    No employer would be able to get them to put down their mobiles in the few weeks before they were sacked.
    What mortgage can you get on £40,000 a year? What about the minimum wage of £20,000 a year? As one of Leon's mates pointed out some years back, in London, even quite ordinary homes originally built for single-income, working class households now fetch around £1 million. Even in the frozen north or a left-behind seaside town like Clacton, you'd be looking at £200,000 which brings us back to a mortgage of 5 times £40k.
    Here's a four bed semi in Blackpool for £150k:

    https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/149832044#/?channel=RES_BUY

    Plenty of others available:

    https://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/find.html?maxPrice=150000&index=0&sortType=2&channel=BUY&transactionType=BUY&locationIdentifier=REGION^168&displayLocationIdentifier=Blackpool.html

    Or 3 bed terraces for £80k:

    https://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/find.html?maxPrice=80000&index=0&sortType=2&channel=BUY&transactionType=BUY&locationIdentifier=REGION^168&displayLocationIdentifier=Blackpool.html
    Another run-down seaside resort. Are there many well-paid, non-seasonal jobs there?
  • Pulpstar said:

    (1/5)

    We need to stop housing being rejected by the planning system. Frankly, there are very few reasons why anything should be rejected.

    My (district) council has their housing plans laid out here:

    https://www.bassetlaw.gov.uk/media/gn1kjm1b/adopted-bassetlaw-local-plan-2020-2038.pdf plans for 11,195 dwellings between 2020 and 2038 /
    2020 population 118,300 so plenty I think given birth rate trajectory and likely migration to the district. (Est needed is 9,720)

    Surely every council should have something like this.
    What a pathetically small figure and that's the problem. The "needed" calculations are ridiculous across the country, we need about 8 million homes extra today even without any population growth and nowhere is providing anything like enough.

    Just let people build whatever they want, wherever they want it, and the need will be met. Free market liberalism works.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 45,397

    (1/5)

    We need to stop housing being rejected by the planning system. Frankly, there are very few reasons why anything should be rejected.

    Annyingly, HS2 is being delayed, and costs increased again, due to a council's refusal of planning to upgrade a farm track.

    https://www.constructionnews.co.uk/civils/hs2/hs2-faces-multimillion-pound-hit-after-planning-permission-rejection-23-04-2025/
  • Eabhal said:

    s

    Eabhal said:

    HYUFD said:

    Workless youths who are “on the internet 24-hours a day” won’t get out of bed for less than £40,000, Lords have been told.

    Graham Cowley, who works with young people who are not in employment, education or training (Neets) in Blackpool, said a colleague this week told him there were “kids on the internet 24-hours a day, and they don’t want to work for anything less than 40 grand”.

    Some on the Lords’ social mobility policy committee gasped in response, prompting Mr Crowley to say: “I know, I had that reaction. You may laugh, but that is the reality.”

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/04/25/workless-youths-wont-get-out-of-bed-for-less-than-40k/

    Well they still have to apply for jobs and attend interviews or they are sanctioned and lose their benefits
    Probably pretty easy not to appoint such candidates.

    And, grumpy middle-aged cynic that I am, the Bank and Landlord of Mum and Dad probably have something to do with making this sort of lifestyle viable.

    As with absurdly early retirees, it's not an easy problem to fix, and at an individual level, it's arguable that we can't and shouldn't try.
    I think our tax and benefit system has a far greater effect.

    Why bother working when if you do, you'll lose your benefits and be taxed and be no better off?

    I've been banging the drum on this for years, but the real marginal tax rate can be as high as 80-100% on work for those on low incomes so many people think why bother working? And that's not an irrational thought, even if its not a good one.

    Fix the system, let people keep more of their own money they work for - and by that I mean prioritising those on low incomes caught in the poverty trap, but deal with other cliff edges too.
    It can be. You're right for a small minority of cases, but for the vast majority of people those insane marginal tax rates do not apply.

    A cursory glance at income distributions, average hours worked and so on finds the benefit system simply isn't that big a disincentive overall - there is no discernible spike/dip at 16 hours, for example. It's frustrating because quite a lot of think tanks focus on these edge cases, it gets picked up in the press, and then we miss the broader picture.
    And yet I’ve sat across the table from people who are terrified of going over 16 hours. And other benefit traps.

    They are, universally, extremely fearful of being “docked” - judged to have been given too much money and having it clawed back by reducing their benefits over a long period of time.
    I don't doubt it applies in some cases. I just get frustrated with people who think that resolving it would have a material impact on the labour supply/benefits bill. The conditions set on UC claimants are so onerous that just looking at the calculations simply does not capture the conditions claimants live under.

    One easy win would be to roll more benefits into the UC taper (which is highly effective), including things like council tax reduction. That would knock METR (marginal effective tax rate) down significantly for some households. But the bigger issue is keeping it below 50% for all households would require such a large cut to the taper rate that it would massively increase the overall benefit bill.
    I wouldn't cut the taper rate, I'd abolish it.

    Merge NI, UC and Income Tax into a single system and have one tax rate applicable to all.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 14,485
    kle4 said:

    MattW said:

    OT.
    @TSE dethreaded me. Bah.

    Battlebus said:

    So one year on the horizon and no sign of 1.5 million new houses

    You should see the rate they are going up on the South Coast. There's a lot going on - except where the local council has got into the building game (2-3 years late)
    We build abour 200,000 houses in a normal year, but were not building 400,000 houses which is what we need.
    We have quite major developments starting here in Ashfield, including a continuation of building more Council Houses that have been a thing for several years. They are trying to build on several areas of open land on older housing estates, where dogwalkers go etc, which is getting some blowback.

    Looking at the numbers, they are massively lumpy, and come out 4 months behind - so 2024 Q4 is due out in the next week. Starts by quarter from 2022 Q1 look weirdly lumpy as Covid worked out - no conclusions are possible. But this is one, like NHS waiting lists, where the Govt have to deliver significant improvement towards their 1.5 million: target

    Housing Starts - UK

    2022 Q1 - No data
    2022 Q2 - 65,200
    2022 Q3 - 56,180
    2022 Q4 - 39,350
    2023 Q1 - 44,850
    2023 Q2 - 79,710
    2023 Q3 - 28,750
    2023 Q4 - 23,940
    2024 Q1 - 30,010
    2024 Q2 - 33,390
    2024 Q3 - 37,030
    2024 Q1 - soon

    I can only put it down to marketing shenanigans that the Cons indulged in before the Election to stroke Nimbies as they were circling the drain - eg the abolition of Housing Targets by Council, which they had never touched before.

    But that is just my surmise.

    Source of data: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/housing/datasets/ukhousebuildingpermanentdwellingsstartedandcompleted

    (Now I will read the header.)
    Labour has no chance of hitting its target, theyre as useless as the Conservatives. LDs are not much better nationally they proclaim the need for housing and then locally oppose everything.
    Supporting the 'right houses in the right place' which all parties say, is one of those things which is technically reasonable in isolation but in practice used as cover to say no to everything.

    People object to building in the open countryside, on the edges of towns, and also in the centre of towns, they object to building on green belt, green fields, but also brownfield. They'll fight to preserve high quality agricultural land, useless scrubland, and derelict buildings and former car parks. They'll complain the infrastructure is not built first then object if infrastructure is built first. They'll bemoan they and their children cannot afford to live where they grew up but object to any affordable housing being built there.

    It never ends and its infuriating. The system we have is at war with itself as it incentivises pandering to Nimbys whilst also having little teeth on developers. I do believe the government is now trying, but it may need more and look how they act in their own back yards.
    You and I both know that's not how it really works.

    There are local plans which define what kind of residential or industrial development can take place (in terms of density or height) and where it can take place.

    Developers can see from these plans what they would be allowed to build and where but some (not all) try to challenge these pre-existing and locally agreed plans with over-dense or over-height developments or with flats where the local authority wants houses and they do this, let's be fair, to maximise their profit on the land.

    More sensible developers engage with the local community in advance often using third party communications companies. They hold public meetings, engage with the locals and work to achieve a compromise application which is acceptable to all. That's submitted and often gets approved.

    Yes, there are those who don't want any development on a site but they are usually a minority and only become a majority when an insensitive developer puts up an application without local engagement and reference to the local plan which is completely unsuitable for the site. That's when you get public galleries full of angry people at planning sub-committee meetings and that's when you get councillors refusing applications.

    The developer can seek to get that overturned but that takes time and costs money and the thoughtful developer recognises for a little bit of pre-application consultation, a lot of that stress can be removed.

    That's how the process works - consultation, engagement, offering a little something to the local community whether out of the Section 106 payment or as part of the plan itself and usually that oiling of the wheels gets the application removed and the development underway and makes the public consultation (a legal requirement currently) a tick box exercise.

    The actual problem is or are the chokepoints in the development process - availability of materials, of specialist sub contractors and trades at key points in the process. There's also the question of pricing - there's what the developer would like for each property and what the local market will stand and that's before the issue of affordable housing rears its head. In East London, a lot of developments have either part ownership or, more often, a big proportion is for rental.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 30,205

    Pulpstar said:

    (1/5)

    We need to stop housing being rejected by the planning system. Frankly, there are very few reasons why anything should be rejected.

    My (district) council has their housing plans laid out here:

    https://www.bassetlaw.gov.uk/media/gn1kjm1b/adopted-bassetlaw-local-plan-2020-2038.pdf plans for 11,195 dwellings between 2020 and 2038 /
    2020 population 118,300 so plenty I think given birth rate trajectory and likely migration to the district. (Est needed is 9,720)

    Surely every council should have something like this.
    What a pathetically small figure and that's the problem. The "needed" calculations are ridiculous across the country, we need about 8 million homes extra today even without any population growth and nowhere is providing anything like enough.

    Just let people build whatever they want, wherever they want it, and the need will be met. Free market liberalism works.
    No it doesn't.

    What we need is to build new towns with proper infrastructure, not cramming more and more into already overheated corners. Like we did between the wars and after the war.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,695

    Workless youths who are “on the internet 24-hours a day” won’t get out of bed for less than £40,000, Lords have been told.

    Graham Cowley, who works with young people who are not in employment, education or training (Neets) in Blackpool, said a colleague this week told him there were “kids on the internet 24-hours a day, and they don’t want to work for anything less than 40 grand”.

    Some on the Lords’ social mobility policy committee gasped in response, prompting Mr Crowley to say: “I know, I had that reaction. You may laugh, but that is the reality.”

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/04/25/workless-youths-wont-get-out-of-bed-for-less-than-40k/

    They don't want to work for £40k they want to be employed for £40k.

    No employer would be able to get them to put down their mobiles in the few weeks before they were sacked.
    What mortgage can you get on £40,000 a year? What about the minimum wage of £20,000 a year? As one of Leon's mates pointed out some years back, in London, even quite ordinary homes originally built for single-income, working class households now fetch around £1 million. Even in the frozen north or a left-behind seaside town like Clacton, you'd be looking at £200,000 which brings us back to a mortgage of 5 times £40k.
    Here's a four bed semi in Blackpool for £150k:

    https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/149832044#/?channel=RES_BUY

    Plenty of others available:

    https://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/find.html?maxPrice=150000&index=0&sortType=2&channel=BUY&transactionType=BUY&locationIdentifier=REGION^168&displayLocationIdentifier=Blackpool.html

    Or 3 bed terraces for £80k:

    https://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/find.html?maxPrice=80000&index=0&sortType=2&channel=BUY&transactionType=BUY&locationIdentifier=REGION^168&displayLocationIdentifier=Blackpool.html
    Another run-down seaside resort. Are there many well-paid, non-seasonal jobs there?
    There are trains to Manchester and Liverpool. And WFH.

    Way, way back, the well-healed businessmen (and they were all men) commuting from Blackpool to Manchester had their own "club train" where the select few could travel in comfort and figure out the best way to exploit the proletariat.

    One of the club carriages is preserved at the Keighley & Worth Valley Railway, and you can sometimes take a ride in it.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,530

    Fishing said:

    MattW said:

    Battlebus said:

    So one year on the horizon and no sign of 1.5 million new houses

    You should see the rate they are going up on the South Coast. There's a lot going on - except where the local council has got into the building game (2-3 years late)
    We build abour 200,000 houses in a normal year, but were not building 400,000 houses which is what we need.
    We have quite major developments starting here in Ashfield, including a continuation of building more Council Houses that have been a thing for several years. They are trying to build on several areas of open land on older housing estates, where dogwalkers go etc, which is getting some blowback.

    Looking at the numbers, they are massively lumpy, and come out 4 months behind - so 2024 Q4 is due out in the next week. Starts by quarter from 2022 Q1 look weirdly lumpy as Covid worked out - no conclusions are possible. But this is one, like NHS waiting lists, where the Govt have to deliver significant improvement towards their 1.5 million: target

    Housing Starts - UK

    2022 Q1 - No data
    2022 Q2 - 65,200
    2022 Q3 - 56,180
    2022 Q4 - 39,350
    2023 Q1 - 44,850
    2023 Q2 - 79,710
    2023 Q3 - 28,750
    2023 Q4 - 23,940
    2024 Q1 - 30,010
    2024 Q2 - 33,390
    2024 Q3 - 37,030
    2024 Q1 - soon

    I can only put it down to marketing shenanigans that the Cons indulged in before the Election to stroke Nimbies as they were circling the drain - eg the abolition of Housing Targets by Council, which they had never touched before.

    But that is just my surmise.

    Source of data: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/housing/datasets/ukhousebuildingpermanentdwellingsstartedandcompleted
    My surmise would be that the number of housing starts fell as the economy slowed from the roaring economic boom of 2021-2 and as the pent up approvals from the pandemic ran out.

    Whatever, it's a dismal record, especially as most if not all will be tiny, shoddy new builds a third of the size of their American counterparts, rather than the large family homes we need if our birthrate is to rise.

    We need 8 million new houses to match France, which has a similar population. Allowing for population increase and demolition that's at least 500,000/year for 20 years. It really is the challenge of our generation, one that we're failing totally and spectacularly, and they need to be in exactly the kind of places that don't want them. The Economist highlighted recently that booming Oxford has built fewer new homes than shitheap Doncaster. Mad.
    Given that Doncaster is far bigger, far more rural and has far more brownfield sites why is that remotely surprising ?
    Most of the building is not on brownfield sites - although there are a couple of projects on old colliery heaps. A lot is on greenfield to the east of the "city" where there is no greenbelt - in fill on the M18 link road.

    Also, Doncaster isn't entirely a shitheap. And Oxford isn't entirely dreaming spires, either, is it?

    Most of the new housing, including entire new suburbs such as Lakeside and Woodfield, in Doncaster over the last generation has been on empty land - abandoned mining land, abandoned railway land, abandoned military land, abandoned agricultural land.

    Empty land along communication routes is an attractive prospect for developers.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 30,205
    A 12-YEAR-OLD girl has been rushed to hospital after a reported slashing at a Scots school.
    https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/14689377/aberdeen-schoolgirl-knife-attack/

    Those screenings of Adolescence can't come fast enough.
  • Pulpstar said:

    (1/5)

    We need to stop housing being rejected by the planning system. Frankly, there are very few reasons why anything should be rejected.

    My (district) council has their housing plans laid out here:

    https://www.bassetlaw.gov.uk/media/gn1kjm1b/adopted-bassetlaw-local-plan-2020-2038.pdf plans for 11,195 dwellings between 2020 and 2038 /
    2020 population 118,300 so plenty I think given birth rate trajectory and likely migration to the district. (Est needed is 9,720)

    Surely every council should have something like this.
    What a pathetically small figure and that's the problem. The "needed" calculations are ridiculous across the country, we need about 8 million homes extra today even without any population growth and nowhere is providing anything like enough.

    Just let people build whatever they want, wherever they want it, and the need will be met. Free market liberalism works.
    No it doesn't.

    What we need is to build new towns with proper infrastructure, not cramming more and more into already overheated corners. Like we did between the wars and after the war.
    What we did between the wars is precisely what I advocate. Return to the planning system that existed in the 1930s.

    We've never built as many houses after the war, as we did before it, despite the fact that after the war we had to rebuild bombed out homes and had the baby boom etc - the 1948 planning act was such an unmitigated disaster we've never seen levels of housebuilding we took for granted pre-war.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 43,344

    Stereodog said:

    Has anyone been watching the US version of Have I Got News For You? The second season is my early morning watch and it's brilliant. It is ferociously partisan and right on but it has so much bite and wit that it makes the tired UK version look even more embarrassing.

    Nah, I've been watching this new interactive US political drama. It's a bit too far fetched but some great comedic actors, and they fall into the usual trap of cramming all the action into too short a space of time to make it believable. Best of all they have made it immersive so you can catch it on any of your favourite news channels or print media, 24 hrs a day.
    *gravelly bass voice*
    Previously on Trumpland: Chaos
    Next time on Trumpland: Chaos
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 34,576
    edited April 25
    Stereodog said:

    Has anyone been watching the US version of Have I Got News For You? The second season is my early morning watch and it's brilliant. It is ferociously partisan and right on but it has so much bite and wit that it makes the tired UK version look even more embarrassing.

    Must try and find it. I agree the UK version is tired; needs either scrapping* entirely or two new 'team leaders'.

    And Good Morning one and all. Cloudy here, but should brighten up. An East wind, which is always chilly at this time of the year, too.


    *Edit at 3min. Autocorrect somehow had 'scanning' for 'scrapping'. Don't know what silly mistake I'd made to get that!
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,530

    Workless youths who are “on the internet 24-hours a day” won’t get out of bed for less than £40,000, Lords have been told.

    Graham Cowley, who works with young people who are not in employment, education or training (Neets) in Blackpool, said a colleague this week told him there were “kids on the internet 24-hours a day, and they don’t want to work for anything less than 40 grand”.

    Some on the Lords’ social mobility policy committee gasped in response, prompting Mr Crowley to say: “I know, I had that reaction. You may laugh, but that is the reality.”

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/04/25/workless-youths-wont-get-out-of-bed-for-less-than-40k/

    They don't want to work for £40k they want to be employed for £40k.

    No employer would be able to get them to put down their mobiles in the few weeks before they were sacked.
    What mortgage can you get on £40,000 a year? What about the minimum wage of £20,000 a year? As one of Leon's mates pointed out some years back, in London, even quite ordinary homes originally built for single-income, working class households now fetch around £1 million. Even in the frozen north or a left-behind seaside town like Clacton, you'd be looking at £200,000 which brings us back to a mortgage of 5 times £40k.
    Here's a four bed semi in Blackpool for £150k:

    https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/149832044#/?channel=RES_BUY

    Plenty of others available:

    https://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/find.html?maxPrice=150000&index=0&sortType=2&channel=BUY&transactionType=BUY&locationIdentifier=REGION^168&displayLocationIdentifier=Blackpool.html

    Or 3 bed terraces for £80k:

    https://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/find.html?maxPrice=80000&index=0&sortType=2&channel=BUY&transactionType=BUY&locationIdentifier=REGION^168&displayLocationIdentifier=Blackpool.html
    Another run-down seaside resort. Are there many well-paid, non-seasonal jobs there?
    That depends on what you consider well paid.

    But generally pay is linked to skillsets.

    Those who want more opportunities for better pay need to improve their skillsets.

    Something which isn't going to be done by spending time in bed and on tiktok.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 34,576

    Workless youths who are “on the internet 24-hours a day” won’t get out of bed for less than £40,000, Lords have been told.

    Graham Cowley, who works with young people who are not in employment, education or training (Neets) in Blackpool, said a colleague this week told him there were “kids on the internet 24-hours a day, and they don’t want to work for anything less than 40 grand”.

    Some on the Lords’ social mobility policy committee gasped in response, prompting Mr Crowley to say: “I know, I had that reaction. You may laugh, but that is the reality.”

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/04/25/workless-youths-wont-get-out-of-bed-for-less-than-40k/

    They don't want to work for £40k they want to be employed for £40k.

    No employer would be able to get them to put down their mobiles in the few weeks before they were sacked.
    What mortgage can you get on £40,000 a year? What about the minimum wage of £20,000 a year? As one of Leon's mates pointed out some years back, in London, even quite ordinary homes originally built for single-income, working class households now fetch around £1 million. Even in the frozen north or a left-behind seaside town like Clacton, you'd be looking at £200,000 which brings us back to a mortgage of 5 times £40k.
    Here's a four bed semi in Blackpool for £150k:

    https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/149832044#/?channel=RES_BUY

    Plenty of others available:

    https://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/find.html?maxPrice=150000&index=0&sortType=2&channel=BUY&transactionType=BUY&locationIdentifier=REGION^168&displayLocationIdentifier=Blackpool.html

    Or 3 bed terraces for £80k:

    https://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/find.html?maxPrice=80000&index=0&sortType=2&channel=BUY&transactionType=BUY&locationIdentifier=REGION^168&displayLocationIdentifier=Blackpool.html
    Another run-down seaside resort. Are there many well-paid, non-seasonal jobs there?
    That depends on what you consider well paid.

    But generally pay is linked to skillsets.

    Those who want more opportunities for better pay need to improve their skillsets.

    Something which isn't going to be done by spending time in bed and on tiktok.
    Bro-in-law, before retirement, worked on one of the industrial estates just outside Blackpool. IIRC he was head-hunted there from Manchester, so it must have reasonable money.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 24,280

    Workless youths who are “on the internet 24-hours a day” won’t get out of bed for less than £40,000, Lords have been told.

    Graham Cowley, who works with young people who are not in employment, education or training (Neets) in Blackpool, said a colleague this week told him there were “kids on the internet 24-hours a day, and they don’t want to work for anything less than 40 grand”.

    Some on the Lords’ social mobility policy committee gasped in response, prompting Mr Crowley to say: “I know, I had that reaction. You may laugh, but that is the reality.”

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/04/25/workless-youths-wont-get-out-of-bed-for-less-than-40k/

    They don't want to work for £40k they want to be employed for £40k.

    No employer would be able to get them to put down their mobiles in the few weeks before they were sacked.
    What mortgage can you get on £40,000 a year? What about the minimum wage of £20,000 a year? As one of Leon's mates pointed out some years back, in London, even quite ordinary homes originally built for single-income, working class households now fetch around £1 million. Even in the frozen north or a left-behind seaside town like Clacton, you'd be looking at £200,000 which brings us back to a mortgage of 5 times £40k.
    Here's a four bed semi in Blackpool for £150k:

    https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/149832044#/?channel=RES_BUY

    Plenty of others available:

    https://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/find.html?maxPrice=150000&index=0&sortType=2&channel=BUY&transactionType=BUY&locationIdentifier=REGION^168&displayLocationIdentifier=Blackpool.html

    Or 3 bed terraces for £80k:

    https://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/find.html?maxPrice=80000&index=0&sortType=2&channel=BUY&transactionType=BUY&locationIdentifier=REGION^168&displayLocationIdentifier=Blackpool.html
    Another run-down seaside resort. Are there many well-paid, non-seasonal jobs there?
    That depends on what you consider well paid.

    But generally pay is linked to skillsets.

    Those who want more opportunities for better pay need to improve their skillsets.

    Something which isn't going to be done by spending time in bed and on tiktok.
    Some onlyfans creators may disagree.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 26,670

    (1/5)

    We need to stop housing being rejected by the planning system. Frankly, there are very few reasons why anything should be rejected.

    Annyingly, HS2 is being delayed, and costs increased again, due to a council's refusal of planning to upgrade a farm track.

    https://www.constructionnews.co.uk/civils/hs2/hs2-faces-multimillion-pound-hit-after-planning-permission-rejection-23-04-2025/
    That looks like a political no.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 53,683

    Stereodog said:

    Has anyone been watching the US version of Have I Got News For You? The second season is my early morning watch and it's brilliant. It is ferociously partisan and right on but it has so much bite and wit that it makes the tired UK version look even more embarrassing.

    Nah, I've been watching this new interactive US political drama. It's a bit too far fetched but some great comedic actors, and they fall into the usual trap of cramming all the action into too short a space of time to make it believable. Best of all they have made it immersive so you can catch it on any of your favourite news channels or print media, 24 hrs a day.
    *gravelly bass voice*
    Previously on Trumpland: Chaos
    Next time on Trumpland: Chaos
    Gravelly bass voice has a name, you know:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redd_Pepper
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 51,272
    HYUFD said:

    Workless youths who are “on the internet 24-hours a day” won’t get out of bed for less than £40,000, Lords have been told.

    Graham Cowley, who works with young people who are not in employment, education or training (Neets) in Blackpool, said a colleague this week told him there were “kids on the internet 24-hours a day, and they don’t want to work for anything less than 40 grand”.

    Some on the Lords’ social mobility policy committee gasped in response, prompting Mr Crowley to say: “I know, I had that reaction. You may laugh, but that is the reality.”

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/04/25/workless-youths-wont-get-out-of-bed-for-less-than-40k/

    Well they still have to apply for jobs and attend interviews or they are sanctioned and lose their benefits
    Not a new phenomenon, take Spuds interview from Trainspotting.

    https://youtu.be/CVp9rKF3hag?si=s0ih0HbjPQqYn3WZ
Sign In or Register to comment.