Disappointing news that the introduction of the "New Tube for London", the new tube trains for, initially, the Piccadilly Line, and then other lines, with air conditioning and walk-through carriages, has been delayed.
Shame for London. Not a single tube train in Leeds lacks aircon.
Does Leeds have a metro system?
I think that is Morris's point. There will be scant sympathy from anyone from any other British city for Londoners complaining about public transport! I remember someone - Dom Joly, I think - posted recently a whinge of a photo that he was having to wait ten minutes until the next tube train. It didn't go down well.
Dom Joly has been sitting in for a few LBC shows recently- he's pretty good btw, with a fun streak of the absurd- but I think he lives in the West of England, so if it was him, I doubt he was being serious.
On topic, one thing I was planning on writing a piece is with Labour and the Tories being a bit buggered, particularly in Scotland that the Lib Dems become the de facto primary Unionist party as Farage scares the horses.
Disappointing news that the introduction of the "New Tube for London", the new tube trains for, initially, the Piccadilly Line, and then other lines, with air conditioning and walk-through carriages, has been delayed.
Shame for London. Not a single tube train in Leeds lacks aircon.
Does Leeds have a metro system?
Alas, no. Nor a tram. Under multiple parties, across decades, there have been a joyous frittering of millions on consultations and plans that led nowhere.
Edited extra bit: anyway, I need to go and melt elsewhere.
Alas that global cooling isn't what we ended up with.
The NGT, which many thought stood for New Generation Transport, turned out to mean Never Gets Transport
Still, kept my wife in well paid work for a number of years working on various economic cases and evidence for appeals an counter appeals etc. Ill wind etc... But what a massive waste of money, for nothing.
Ok, Mr Clever Cloggs, if transport is so easy - what are the requirements for the Feng Shui for the emergency control panel for the spare coffee machine in the unused waiting room?
Who could have predicted that the Chancellor dramatically increasing taxes in April on employment could cause a recession with declines in April and May?
Apart from anyone who understands anything about Economics that is.
Do you know anyone on here who understands anything about Economics? Maybe Robert, but I can't think of anyone else.
There are several. You haven't been paying attention
I discount anyone who believes the voodoo Laffer Curve works in a real world context. Only genuine economists need apply.
Your obsession with the Laffer Curve is weird.
All Economics is subject to debate on how it works in a real world context. Any economist worth their salt would always place caveats onw what they're saying.
The Laffer Curve is abused, but the theory is perfectly reasonable economics that does work in a real world context as well as any other theory.
There are countless examples retold here on a regular basis on how people change their behaviour at the cliff-edges especially. People who won't work more than 16 hours as if they do they'll lose benefits at such a rate they'll earn no extra money. People who won't earn beyond the 100k threshold as if they do they'll be worse off. Etc, etc, etc
What is that if not the Laffer Curve working on a real world context.
Anyone who says we should cut from 47% to 45% "because Laffer" doesn't have a clue what they're talking about. Anyone who says we should deal with the 100% cliff edges "because Laffer" does.
The general principle that tax can drive behaviour is perfectly sound. The nonsense is the "Curve" descriptor - which bestows a false sense of numerical certainty and precision to it.
Only if you're ignorant.
There is no numerical certainty or precision to economics, nor is there supposed to be, despite the many curves that we use.
Its not nonsense, it is a curve as opposed to a linear graph.
Tax at zero raises no tax because nobody pays any. Tax at 100 raises no tax because nobody bothers earning anything. So moving upwards from zero your tax take goes up, but at some point it has to peak and start coming down to land at zero again when we get to 100.
That's the insight. That's the "curve". It's essentially something that right wingers bandy about to add some faux-intellectual heft to an argument for tax cuts for the wealthy. Fine. That can't be helped. But me, I need a little more 'shape' on my curves. I did Maths, not economics, maybe this is why. Plus I'm not a right winger, I'm a left winger. There's by and large more rigor on the left.
Its not about tax cuts for the wealthy, its about higher tax rates not always raising revenues.
Which is not as obvious as it should be, and the fact you associate it with the wealthy only is part of your and other people's ignorance.
Those on tax rates closest to 100% are not the wealthy, and yet people struggle to understand why we have economic problems.
Ok, let's assume we're talking to an ignoramus who erroneously thinks that tax rates can be raised ad infinitum and the total take will always go up.
What's the best way to disabuse such a (to be kinder) layperson of their misunderstanding - is it to start chuntering on about the Laffer Curve?
Clearly not. And we've already agreed it's not really a curve. So what exactly is the point of it other than what I said? - a tool for right wingers to argue for tax cuts and sound detached and academic.
It is really a curve. Its non-linear, anything non-linear is a curve, that's quite literally what the word means. 🤦♂️
On topic, I don't see the Lib Dems changing their approach and that's probably the right thing to do. The question for them is, what to do in the event of a hung parliament next time. That's what they ought to be thinking about.
They should be absolutely fine in the areas they won in 2024. Those results in Woking last night show how comfortable they are.
The only thing that could cause problems for them is if the economy and public finances go properly tits up. That's how the Tories become a threat again.
I agree, but we have to see where the rubble lies after the next GE, as we did in 2010.
Its very difficult to prop up a government that has just lost its majority, as clearly they have been rejected by the voters. There's obviously no way that LDs would support a Farage government.
So, if there is a majority government then LDs are on the opposition benches. If NOC we should stay there too, voting on a bill by bill basis on whatever minority government is formed.
That's an interesting point re Labour losing it's majority. Say the result was something like:
Would it not be acceptable for the Lib Dems to go into power with Labour? The result wouldn't be all that different to 2024.
If those are the scores on the doors, the Lib Dems breathe a sigh of relief. They can sit back and enjoy the show, whilst a minority Labour government staggers on.
The much harder scenarios are the following: Lab first, but less than Ref+Con (say Lab 225 Ref 150 LD 125 Con 100 Others 50) Ref first, but with Lib+Lab being a majority (say Ref 225 Lab 210 LD 125 Con 40 Others 50)
You need something like 30 to 40 Lib Dem gains from Labour for those figures to occur. Do you think that's likely?
I'd be surprised if there were that many.
I'd be less surprised by daisy-chains of results that had the same net effect.
Say, Con gain Aldershot from Lab but lose Hamble Valley to LD.
But mostly, I was mashing the numbers to make Liberal Democrats squirm. Is a chap to be denied all his pleasures?
Well, perhaps. I can see the LD route to 90-95 seats quite easily if the Conservatives continue to atrophy, stagnate, wither or just plain decline combined with the expected fall back in the Labour vote whether from buyers' remorse or other factors.
We also need to think about WHO will vote next time - assuming a similar turnout (60% ish), you could well see 2024 Labour voters abstaining and 2024 abstainers (mainly Conservative) voting but that doesn't mean all those who were Tory in 2019 and stayed at home in 2024 will rush back to the blue rosette.
Who could have predicted that the Chancellor dramatically increasing taxes in April on employment could cause a recession with declines in April and May?
Apart from anyone who understands anything about Economics that is.
Do you know anyone on here who understands anything about Economics? Maybe Robert, but I can't think of anyone else.
There are several. You haven't been paying attention
I discount anyone who believes the voodoo Laffer Curve works in a real world context. Only genuine economists need apply.
Your obsession with the Laffer Curve is weird.
All Economics is subject to debate on how it works in a real world context. Any economist worth their salt would always place caveats onw what they're saying.
The Laffer Curve is abused, but the theory is perfectly reasonable economics that does work in a real world context as well as any other theory.
There are countless examples retold here on a regular basis on how people change their behaviour at the cliff-edges especially. People who won't work more than 16 hours as if they do they'll lose benefits at such a rate they'll earn no extra money. People who won't earn beyond the 100k threshold as if they do they'll be worse off. Etc, etc, etc
What is that if not the Laffer Curve working on a real world context.
Anyone who says we should cut from 47% to 45% "because Laffer" doesn't have a clue what they're talking about. Anyone who says we should deal with the 100% cliff edges "because Laffer" does.
The general principle that tax can drive behaviour is perfectly sound. The nonsense is the "Curve" descriptor - which bestows a false sense of numerical certainty and precision to it.
Would you object to a 'Laffer correlation'? A 'Laffer vague trend'?
Ooh, Root 100. Hurray.
I find it a rather obvious and not massively useful insight. So I'd go for the Laffer Chestnut.
If its so obvious and not useful, why have we got so many awful cliff-edges in our tax system?
Why do so many get shocked that people don't want to work when facing an effective 100% tax rate?
Look, Bart, if you want to say it's the "Laffer Curve" that tells you having cliff-edges in the tax system is absurd and perverse, be my guest. I can't stop you doing that, and tbh it doesn't really matter.
Most of the arguments against the Laffer Curve are "Don't be mean to my idea to raise taxes"
If you change taxes, behaviour is altered. The function linking tax to behaviour is complex and probably discontinuous.
In many ways, this comes back to the instinct to try and control reality using linear functions. Despite reality being non-linear.
Might be an idea to ask people who model the interaction of coastal erosion and costal defences. And use this to plan things. Their shit works.
Indeed.
Curve means non-linear. That's all the word means...
In the farming world there was always a special pity for the "National Trust Tenant" farming for a landlord who was clueless as to how to manage its own property.
Not just clueless but clueless and unwilling to listen because their incorrect knowledge was correct no matter how many people tried to correct it
A friend is exiting the charitable sector - her career so far has been watching utterly clueless fools with 6 figure salaries playing with charities like 4 year olds with Big Lego. The people who get hurt often are those who the charities are supposed to help. And the actual workers in the charities.
I know a few people working for charities who have said very much the same thing. It can provide a very cushy job for those at the top.
The savage incompetence she describes is something else. It is a very incestuous world - she was literally told that she can't take the job of her departing boss, because she wasn't in the right social group.
It's not every charity, but I am also familiar with that sort of stuff.
That's a point about comfortable, cushy jobs - the lengths people will go to protect their positions, and make sure they don't introduce scrutiny, without necessity admitting to themselves what they're doing, can be quite extreme.
Some charities are pretty well run; some are anything but.
I was pretty startled that someone would actually say "You aren't part of the chumocracy. Fuck off." to someone's face.
Even the Household Cavalry doesn't do that anymore.
In the farming world there was always a special pity for the "National Trust Tenant" farming for a landlord who was clueless as to how to manage its own property.
Not just clueless but clueless and unwilling to listen because their incorrect knowledge was correct no matter how many people tried to correct it
A friend is exiting the charitable sector - her career so far has been watching utterly clueless fools with 6 figure salaries playing with charities like 4 year olds with Big Lego. The people who get hurt often are those who the charities are supposed to help. And the actual workers in the charities.
I know a few people working for charities who have said very much the same thing. It can provide a very cushy job for those at the top.
The savage incompetence she describes is something else. It is a very incestuous world - she was literally told that she can't take the job of her departing boss, because she wasn't in the right social group.
It's not every charity, but I am also familiar with that sort of stuff.
That's a point about comfortable, cushy jobs - the lengths people will go to protect their positions, and make sure they don't introduce scrutiny, without necessity admitting to themselves what they're doing, can be quite extreme.
Some charities are pretty well run; some are anything but.
I was pretty startled that someone would actually say "You aren't part of the chumocracy. Fuck off." to someone's face.
Even the Household Cavalry doesn't do that anymore.
Big Charity can be as self-serving, and contemptuous of those they are meant to be serving, as Big Business and Big Government.
Disappointing news that the introduction of the "New Tube for London", the new tube trains for, initially, the Piccadilly Line, and then other lines, with air conditioning and walk-through carriages, has been delayed.
Shame for London. Not a single tube train in Leeds lacks aircon.
Does Leeds have a metro system?
Alas, no. Nor a tram. Under multiple parties, across decades, there have been a joyous frittering of millions on consultations and plans that led nowhere.
Edited extra bit: anyway, I need to go and melt elsewhere.
Alas that global cooling isn't what we ended up with.
The NGT, which many thought stood for New Generation Transport, turned out to mean Never Gets Transport
Still, kept my wife in well paid work for a number of years working on various economic cases and evidence for appeals an counter appeals etc. Ill wind etc... But what a massive waste of money, for nothing.
Ok, Mr Clever Cloggs, if transport is so easy - what are the requirements for the Feng Shui for the emergency control panel for the spare coffee machine in the unused waiting room?
I shall have to refer that to my wife... Shall I enquire as to her hourly rate?
(As a lowly scientist, such real world concerns are beyond me)
In the farming world there was always a special pity for the "National Trust Tenant" farming for a landlord who was clueless as to how to manage its own property.
Not just clueless but clueless and unwilling to listen because their incorrect knowledge was correct no matter how many people tried to correct it
A friend is exiting the charitable sector - her career so far has been watching utterly clueless fools with 6 figure salaries playing with charities like 4 year olds with Big Lego. The people who get hurt often are those who the charities are supposed to help. And the actual workers in the charities.
I know a few people working for charities who have said very much the same thing. It can provide a very cushy job for those at the top.
Again have seen the same thing. 'Charity' is now just a tax-wrapper and frequently a method of bidding for governmental or ex-council services. So it (should) look like government employment numbers fall as services are outsourced but as soon as you outsource, the centre balloons again. There is likely no way of measuring it, but the numbers involved in providing statutory services (see Fostering) is likely to be much larger than stated.
During Covid, we were handing money out left, right and centre. Even being told to phone people or check if there was something else they could add to be paid as a grant. That was the madness that Boris/Sunak allowed to expand while they were in position. And the reason why the Conservatives are a long way from being the party of fiscal probity.
Disappointing news that the introduction of the "New Tube for London", the new tube trains for, initially, the Piccadilly Line, and then other lines, with air conditioning and walk-through carriages, has been delayed.
Shame for London. Not a single tube train in Leeds lacks aircon.
Does Leeds have a metro system?
Alas, no. Nor a tram. Under multiple parties, across decades, there have been a joyous frittering of millions on consultations and plans that led nowhere.
Edited extra bit: anyway, I need to go and melt elsewhere.
Alas that global cooling isn't what we ended up with.
The NGT, which many thought stood for New Generation Transport, turned out to mean Never Gets Transport
Still, kept my wife in well paid work for a number of years working on various economic cases and evidence for appeals an counter appeals etc. Ill wind etc... But what a massive waste of money, for nothing.
Ok, Mr Clever Cloggs, if transport is so easy - what are the requirements for the Feng Shui for the emergency control panel for the spare coffee machine in the unused waiting room?
I shall have to refer that to my wife... Shall I enquire as to her hourly rate?
(As a lowly scientist, such real world concerns are beyond me)
I assume it is 4 figures per hour, plus expenses, plus VAT, plus randomly named lines on the bill?
On topic, I don't see the Lib Dems changing their approach and that's probably the right thing to do. The question for them is, what to do in the event of a hung parliament next time. That's what they ought to be thinking about.
They should be absolutely fine in the areas they won in 2024. Those results in Woking last night show how comfortable they are.
The only thing that could cause problems for them is if the economy and public finances go properly tits up. That's how the Tories become a threat again.
I agree, but we have to see where the rubble lies after the next GE, as we did in 2010.
Its very difficult to prop up a government that has just lost its majority, as clearly they have been rejected by the voters. There's obviously no way that LDs would support a Farage government.
So, if there is a majority government then LDs are on the opposition benches. If NOC we should stay there too, voting on a bill by bill basis on whatever minority government is formed.
That's an interesting point re Labour losing it's majority. Say the result was something like:
Would it not be acceptable for the Lib Dems to go into power with Labour? The result wouldn't be all that different to 2024.
If those are the scores on the doors, the Lib Dems breathe a sigh of relief. They can sit back and enjoy the show, whilst a minority Labour government staggers on.
The much harder scenarios are the following: Lab first, but less than Ref+Con (say Lab 225 Ref 150 LD 125 Con 100 Others 50) Ref first, but with Lib+Lab being a majority (say Ref 225 Lab 210 LD 125 Con 40 Others 50)
You need something like 30 to 40 Lib Dem gains from Labour for those figures to occur. Do you think that's likely?
I'd be surprised if there were that many.
I'd be less surprised by daisy-chains of results that had the same net effect.
Say, Con gain Aldershot from Lab but lose Hamble Valley to LD.
But mostly, I was mashing the numbers to make Liberal Democrats squirm. Is a chap to be denied all his pleasures?
I think my scenario is worse for the Lib Dems. They can support Labour and keep Reform out for five years. Or there is another election in short order at which Reform could win.
In the farming world there was always a special pity for the "National Trust Tenant" farming for a landlord who was clueless as to how to manage its own property.
Not just clueless but clueless and unwilling to listen because their incorrect knowledge was correct no matter how many people tried to correct it
A friend is exiting the charitable sector - her career so far has been watching utterly clueless fools with 6 figure salaries playing with charities like 4 year olds with Big Lego. The people who get hurt often are those who the charities are supposed to help. And the actual workers in the charities.
I know a few people working for charities who have said very much the same thing. It can provide a very cushy job for those at the top.
The savage incompetence she describes is something else. It is a very incestuous world - she was literally told that she can't take the job of her departing boss, because she wasn't in the right social group.
It's not every charity, but I am also familiar with that sort of stuff.
That's a point about comfortable, cushy jobs - the lengths people will go to protect their positions, and make sure they don't introduce scrutiny, without necessity admitting to themselves what they're doing, can be quite extreme.
Some charities are pretty well run; some are anything but.
I was pretty startled that someone would actually say "You aren't part of the chumocracy. Fuck off." to someone's face.
Even the Household Cavalry doesn't do that anymore.
Was it in front of witnesses ?
No - but even in a one-to-one... To literally say that "You are not in the right social circle" - even the Royal Navy in 1850 appointed the odd tarpaulin.....
Disappointing news that the introduction of the "New Tube for London", the new tube trains for, initially, the Piccadilly Line, and then other lines, with air conditioning and walk-through carriages, has been delayed.
Disappointing news that the introduction of the "New Tube for London", the new tube trains for, initially, the Piccadilly Line, and then other lines, with air conditioning and walk-through carriages, has been delayed.
On topic, one thing I was planning on writing a piece is with Labour and the Tories being a bit buggered, particularly in Scotland that the Lib Dems become the de facto primary Unionist party as Farage scares the horses.
It's more likely that Reform become the default unionist party with the SNP, Plaid and Lib Dems soaking up the anti-British vote in Scotland, Wales and England respectively.
Disappointing news that the introduction of the "New Tube for London", the new tube trains for, initially, the Piccadilly Line, and then other lines, with air conditioning and walk-through carriages, has been delayed.
Disappointing news that the introduction of the "New Tube for London", the new tube trains for, initially, the Piccadilly Line, and then other lines, with air conditioning and walk-through carriages, has been delayed.
Ed Davey has proven to be a remarkably astute campaigner, with a keen sense of the political. He is also not afraid to take decisive action, as his punishment of Christine Jardine´s defiance of the whip has shown.
The new intake of Lib Dems MPs is also extremely impressive, and I certainly echo the comments about Helen Mcguire down thread. The fact that quite a few of these new MPs are ex- armed forces is also interesting, and Ed Davey has been pretty hawkish n subjects like Ukraine- that is something that could attract voters of a more Reform-y stripe. Firm on defence without being soft on Trump.
As for policies, well it does feel to me that the perennial Lib Dem policies of voting and constitutional reform are now ideas whose time has come. Voting reform, in particular is an increasingly popular idea.
Developing more technological investments in the economy is something that Ed has spoken about before.
Hawkish on defence, Trump critical, constitutional reforming and adding a touch of technology investment could add up to a very winning formula.
The LibDems should push their mainstream policies relentlessly. They have good form on increasing the Income Tax bands under the coalition that have now been frozen by Labour as a stealth tax. Pensioners with no other income are right on the verge of being caught by this. Being anti-Trump while Farage is his best mate should also be trumpeted as should reminding people of Farage's Brexit 'achievement'. People say that they don't know what the LibDems stand for. Getting these 3 points across would make a big difference and should help against their most important opponents, Labour and Reform.
Increase the Income Tax thresholds, taking the lowest paid out of taxation Are you better off after Nigel's Brexit? Do you trust him on the NHS? Do you like Nigel's friend Trump.
Somehow LibDem HQ has got to persuade the BBC (especially) to take their heads out of Farage's arse when looking for third party spokespersons.
Unrealistic. No-one is trying to read the runes of LD policy. They are not going to form a government. No-one is listening. It's not only BBC, its LBC, Times Radio, Sky, newspapers.
But everyone is interested in two questions: Can Reform make it to the top, and what will it be like if they get there. They are two of the top five UK politics issues right now, and will stay that way until something goes pop.
Do you struggle to navigate your way home, do you have difficulty driving on unfamiliar routes, do you have a serious laughing gas addiction, well you are eligible for Motability....
In the farming world there was always a special pity for the "National Trust Tenant" farming for a landlord who was clueless as to how to manage its own property.
Not just clueless but clueless and unwilling to listen because their incorrect knowledge was correct no matter how many people tried to correct it
A friend is exiting the charitable sector - her career so far has been watching utterly clueless fools with 6 figure salaries playing with charities like 4 year olds with Big Lego. The people who get hurt often are those who the charities are supposed to help. And the actual workers in the charities.
I know a few people working for charities who have said very much the same thing. It can provide a very cushy job for those at the top.
The savage incompetence she describes is something else. It is a very incestuous world - she was literally told that she can't take the job of her departing boss, because she wasn't in the right social group.
It's not every charity, but I am also familiar with that sort of stuff.
That's a point about comfortable, cushy jobs - the lengths people will go to protect their positions, and make sure they don't introduce scrutiny, without necessity admitting to themselves what they're doing, can be quite extreme.
Some charities are pretty well run; some are anything but.
I was pretty startled that someone would actually say "You aren't part of the chumocracy. Fuck off." to someone's face.
Even the Household Cavalry doesn't do that anymore.
Was it in front of witnesses ?
No - but even in a one-to-one... To literally say that "You are not in the right social circle" - even the Royal Navy in 1850 appointed the odd tarpaulin.....
Yes, that's pretty extreme. But not, I think, unique.
The only solution is some kind of robust, external whistleblowing system. But that would need a Cyclefree empowered by the relevant minister.
Who could have predicted that the Chancellor dramatically increasing taxes in April on employment could cause a recession with declines in April and May?
Apart from anyone who understands anything about Economics that is.
Do you know anyone on here who understands anything about Economics? Maybe Robert, but I can't think of anyone else.
There are several. You haven't been paying attention
I discount anyone who believes the voodoo Laffer Curve works in a real world context. Only genuine economists need apply.
Your obsession with the Laffer Curve is weird.
All Economics is subject to debate on how it works in a real world context. Any economist worth their salt would always place caveats onw what they're saying.
The Laffer Curve is abused, but the theory is perfectly reasonable economics that does work in a real world context as well as any other theory.
There are countless examples retold here on a regular basis on how people change their behaviour at the cliff-edges especially. People who won't work more than 16 hours as if they do they'll lose benefits at such a rate they'll earn no extra money. People who won't earn beyond the 100k threshold as if they do they'll be worse off. Etc, etc, etc
What is that if not the Laffer Curve working on a real world context.
Anyone who says we should cut from 47% to 45% "because Laffer" doesn't have a clue what they're talking about. Anyone who says we should deal with the 100% cliff edges "because Laffer" does.
The general principle that tax can drive behaviour is perfectly sound. The nonsense is the "Curve" descriptor - which bestows a false sense of numerical certainty and precision to it.
Would you object to a 'Laffer correlation'? A 'Laffer vague trend'?
Ooh, Root 100. Hurray.
I find it a rather obvious and not massively useful insight. So I'd go for the Laffer Chestnut.
If its so obvious and not useful, why have we got so many awful cliff-edges in our tax system?
Why do so many get shocked that people don't want to work when facing an effective 100% tax rate?
Look, Bart, if you want to say it's the "Laffer Curve" that tells you having cliff-edges in the tax system is absurd and perverse, be my guest. I can't stop you doing that, and tbh it doesn't really matter.
Most of the arguments against the Laffer Curve are "Don't be mean to my idea to raise taxes"
If you change taxes, behaviour is altered. The function linking tax to behaviour is complex and probably discontinuous.
In many ways, this comes back to the instinct to try and control reality using linear functions. Despite reality being non-linear.
Might be an idea to ask people who model the interaction of coastal erosion and costal defences. And use this to plan things. Their shit works.
Indeed.
Curve means non-linear. That's all the word means, a line that is not straight, not linear.
It can be a simple curve, like x^2 or complex with many bends. The only thing it can't be is straight, as if its a straight line then there's no curve.
@kinabalu saying its not a curve means he's saying its not non-linear. Which means he's saying it is linear, which is false.
It's the principle that is faulty in real life terms not necessarily the shape of the graph.
The principle that people change their behaviour based on tax rates so the graph is non-linear?
Who could have predicted that the Chancellor dramatically increasing taxes in April on employment could cause a recession with declines in April and May?
Apart from anyone who understands anything about Economics that is.
Do you know anyone on here who understands anything about Economics? Maybe Robert, but I can't think of anyone else.
There are several. You haven't been paying attention
I discount anyone who believes the voodoo Laffer Curve works in a real world context. Only genuine economists need apply.
Your obsession with the Laffer Curve is weird.
All Economics is subject to debate on how it works in a real world context. Any economist worth their salt would always place caveats onw what they're saying.
The Laffer Curve is abused, but the theory is perfectly reasonable economics that does work in a real world context as well as any other theory.
There are countless examples retold here on a regular basis on how people change their behaviour at the cliff-edges especially. People who won't work more than 16 hours as if they do they'll lose benefits at such a rate they'll earn no extra money. People who won't earn beyond the 100k threshold as if they do they'll be worse off. Etc, etc, etc
What is that if not the Laffer Curve working on a real world context.
Anyone who says we should cut from 47% to 45% "because Laffer" doesn't have a clue what they're talking about. Anyone who says we should deal with the 100% cliff edges "because Laffer" does.
The general principle that tax can drive behaviour is perfectly sound. The nonsense is the "Curve" descriptor - which bestows a false sense of numerical certainty and precision to it.
Only if you're ignorant.
There is no numerical certainty or precision to economics, nor is there supposed to be, despite the many curves that we use.
Its not nonsense, it is a curve as opposed to a linear graph.
Tax at zero raises no tax because nobody pays any. Tax at 100 raises no tax because nobody bothers earning anything. So moving upwards from zero your tax take goes up, but at some point it has to peak and start coming down to land at zero again when we get to 100.
That's the insight. That's the "curve". It's essentially something that right wingers bandy about to add some faux-intellectual heft to an argument for tax cuts for the wealthy. Fine. That can't be helped. But me, I need a little more 'shape' on my curves. I did Maths, not economics, maybe this is why. Plus I'm not a right winger, I'm a left winger. There's by and large more rigor on the left.
Its not about tax cuts for the wealthy, its about higher tax rates not always raising revenues.
Which is not as obvious as it should be, and the fact you associate it with the wealthy only is part of your and other people's ignorance.
Those on tax rates closest to 100% are not the wealthy, and yet people struggle to understand why we have economic problems.
Ok, let's assume we're talking to an ignoramus who erroneously thinks that tax rates can be raised ad infinitum and the total take will always go up.
What's the best way to disabuse such a (to be kinder) layperson of their misunderstanding - is it to start chuntering on about the Laffer Curve?
Clearly not. And we've already agreed it's not really a curve. So what exactly is the point of it other than what I said? - a tool for right wingers to argue for tax cuts and sound detached and academic.
It is really a curve. Its non-linear, anything non-linear is a curve, that's quite literally what the word means. 🤦♂️
Despite not attending many I can assure you it wouldn't pass muster in any self-respecting maths uni lecture. It'd get laffed out of theatre with its tail between its legs.
And that is the last word between the two of us on this matter. For once it's fallen to me.
In the farming world there was always a special pity for the "National Trust Tenant" farming for a landlord who was clueless as to how to manage its own property.
Not just clueless but clueless and unwilling to listen because their incorrect knowledge was correct no matter how many people tried to correct it
A friend is exiting the charitable sector - her career so far has been watching utterly clueless fools with 6 figure salaries playing with charities like 4 year olds with Big Lego. The people who get hurt often are those who the charities are supposed to help. And the actual workers in the charities.
I know a few people working for charities who have said very much the same thing. It can provide a very cushy job for those at the top.
The savage incompetence she describes is something else. It is a very incestuous world - she was literally told that she can't take the job of her departing boss, because she wasn't in the right social group.
It's not every charity, but I am also familiar with that sort of stuff.
That's a point about comfortable, cushy jobs - the lengths people will go to protect their positions, and make sure they don't introduce scrutiny, without necessity admitting to themselves what they're doing, can be quite extreme.
Some charities are pretty well run; some are anything but.
I was pretty startled that someone would actually say "You aren't part of the chumocracy. Fuck off." to someone's face.
Even the Household Cavalry doesn't do that anymore.
Was it in front of witnesses ?
No - but even in a one-to-one... To literally say that "You are not in the right social circle" - even the Royal Navy in 1850 appointed the odd tarpaulin.....
Yes, that's pretty extreme. But not, I think, unique.
The only solution is some kind of robust, external whistleblowing system. But that would need a Cyclefree empowered by the relevant minister.
(Also not dissimilar to the NU10k phenomenon.)
It sounded utterly NU10K
I did suggest to her that there was something really wrong going on, if they were explicitly restricting senior management position to Friends & Chums. As in - backup your email and watch out for strange financial stuff.
Disappointing news that the introduction of the "New Tube for London", the new tube trains for, initially, the Piccadilly Line, and then other lines, with air conditioning and walk-through carriages, has been delayed.
Disappointing news that the introduction of the "New Tube for London", the new tube trains for, initially, the Piccadilly Line, and then other lines, with air conditioning and walk-through carriages, has been delayed.
In the farming world there was always a special pity for the "National Trust Tenant" farming for a landlord who was clueless as to how to manage its own property.
Not just clueless but clueless and unwilling to listen because their incorrect knowledge was correct no matter how many people tried to correct it
A friend is exiting the charitable sector - her career so far has been watching utterly clueless fools with 6 figure salaries playing with charities like 4 year olds with Big Lego. The people who get hurt often are those who the charities are supposed to help. And the actual workers in the charities.
I know a few people working for charities who have said very much the same thing. It can provide a very cushy job for those at the top.
The savage incompetence she describes is something else. It is a very incestuous world - she was literally told that she can't take the job of her departing boss, because she wasn't in the right social group.
It's not every charity, but I am also familiar with that sort of stuff.
That's a point about comfortable, cushy jobs - the lengths people will go to protect their positions, and make sure they don't introduce scrutiny, without necessity admitting to themselves what they're doing, can be quite extreme.
Some charities are pretty well run; some are anything but.
I was pretty startled that someone would actually say "You aren't part of the chumocracy. Fuck off." to someone's face.
Even the Household Cavalry doesn't do that anymore.
Was it in front of witnesses ?
No - but even in a one-to-one... To literally say that "You are not in the right social circle" - even the Royal Navy in 1850 appointed the odd tarpaulin.....
Yes, that's pretty extreme. But not, I think, unique.
The only solution is some kind of robust, external whistleblowing system. But that would need a Cyclefree empowered by the relevant minister.
(Also not dissimilar to the NU10k phenomenon.)
It sounded utterly NU10K
I did suggest to her that thee was something really wrong going on, if they were explicitly restricting senior management position to Friends & Chums. As in - backup your email and watch out for strange financial stuff.
Yes, the only good advice in that situation (other than get out) is remain professional, and document all your interactions.
In the farming world there was always a special pity for the "National Trust Tenant" farming for a landlord who was clueless as to how to manage its own property.
Not just clueless but clueless and unwilling to listen because their incorrect knowledge was correct no matter how many people tried to correct it
A friend is exiting the charitable sector - her career so far has been watching utterly clueless fools with 6 figure salaries playing with charities like 4 year olds with Big Lego. The people who get hurt often are those who the charities are supposed to help. And the actual workers in the charities.
I know a few people working for charities who have said very much the same thing. It can provide a very cushy job for those at the top.
The savage incompetence she describes is something else. It is a very incestuous world - she was literally told that she can't take the job of her departing boss, because she wasn't in the right social group.
It's not every charity, but I am also familiar with that sort of stuff.
That's a point about comfortable, cushy jobs - the lengths people will go to protect their positions, and make sure they don't introduce scrutiny, without necessity admitting to themselves what they're doing, can be quite extreme.
Some charities are pretty well run; some are anything but.
I was pretty startled that someone would actually say "You aren't part of the chumocracy. Fuck off." to someone's face.
Even the Household Cavalry doesn't do that anymore.
Was it in front of witnesses ?
No - but even in a one-to-one... To literally say that "You are not in the right social circle" - even the Royal Navy in 1850 appointed the odd tarpaulin.....
Yes, that's pretty extreme. But not, I think, unique.
The only solution is some kind of robust, external whistleblowing system. But that would need a Cyclefree empowered by the relevant minister.
(Also not dissimilar to the NU10k phenomenon.)
It sounded utterly NU10K
I did suggest to her that thee was something really wrong going on, if they were explicitly restricting senior management position to Friends & Chums. As in - backup your email and watch out for strange financial stuff.
Yes, the only good advice in that situation (other than get out) is remain professional, and document all your interactions.
Definitely get out.
Best to get another job, before the arrests hit the front of the Daily Fail. Or the Grauniad.
Inhaling a balloon of Nitrous Oxide (laughing gas) and she had 8-9 giant canisters of the stuff. It gives you a short high but in that time you shouldn't be anywhere near a car. Repeated and prolonged use can lead to some nasty long term health conditions.
It is illegal to now do what she was doing, but it very difficult for the authorities to crack down on it as it can also be used for making whipped cream.
Stephen Miller: "Children will be taught to love America … As we close the Dept of Education and provide funding to states, we're going to make sure these funds are not being used to promote communist ideology." https://x.com/highbrow_nobrow/status/1943355238993293354
Stephen Miller: "Children will be taught to love America … As we close the Dept of Education and provide funding to states, we're going to make sure these funds are not being used to promote communist ideology." https://x.com/highbrow_nobrow/status/1943355238993293354
Forget that, though you are right.
I can't think of anything more likely to make children hate America than being taught to love America.
Stephen Miller: "Children will be taught to love America … As we close the Dept of Education and provide funding to states, we're going to make sure these funds are not being used to promote communist ideology." https://x.com/highbrow_nobrow/status/1943355238993293354
Why fash? All types of states teach children to respect the dominant ideology.
Stephen Miller: "Children will be taught to love America … As we close the Dept of Education and provide funding to states, we're going to make sure these funds are not being used to promote communist ideology." https://x.com/highbrow_nobrow/status/1943355238993293354
Stephen Miller: "Children will be taught to love America … As we close the Dept of Education and provide funding to states, we're going to make sure these funds are not being used to promote communist ideology." https://x.com/highbrow_nobrow/status/1943355238993293354
Forget that, though you are right.
I can't think of anything more likely to make children hate America than being taught to love America.
It used to be fairly uncontroversial. To pledge your allegiance to the flag every day at school etc.
Stephen Miller: "Children will be taught to love America … As we close the Dept of Education and provide funding to states, we're going to make sure these funds are not being used to promote communist ideology." https://x.com/highbrow_nobrow/status/1943355238993293354
Forget that, though you are right.
I can't think of anything more likely to make children hate America than being taught to love America.
I don't suppose they'll be teaching the constitution too carefully though.
Stephen Miller: "Children will be taught to love America … As we close the Dept of Education and provide funding to states, we're going to make sure these funds are not being used to promote communist ideology." https://x.com/highbrow_nobrow/status/1943355238993293354
Forget that, though you are right.
I can't think of anything more likely to make children hate America than being taught to love America.
It used to be fairly uncontroversial. To pledge your allegiance to the flag every day at school etc.
Allegiance, yes. Respect, quite probably.
Love? That's creepy. Especially with a government that is blurring the boundaries between nation, state, government and President.
Stephen Miller: "Children will be taught to love America … As we close the Dept of Education and provide funding to states, we're going to make sure these funds are not being used to promote communist ideology." https://x.com/highbrow_nobrow/status/1943355238993293354
Why fash? All types of states teach children to respect the dominant ideology.
We’re closing the Dept of Education and sending funding directly to the states, as long as they use it in the way we the Federal government want.
Stephen Miller: "Children will be taught to love America … As we close the Dept of Education and provide funding to states, we're going to make sure these funds are not being used to promote communist ideology." https://x.com/highbrow_nobrow/status/1943355238993293354
Forget that, though you are right.
I can't think of anything more likely to make children hate America than being taught to love America.
It used to be fairly uncontroversial. To pledge your allegiance to the flag every day at school etc.
Allegiance, yes. Respect, quite probably.
Love? That's creepy. Especially with a government that is blurring the boundaries between nation, state, government and President.
Trump always takes care to be inclusive and to be a president for all, "even the haters and losers".
Stephen Miller: "Children will be taught to love America … As we close the Dept of Education and provide funding to states, we're going to make sure these funds are not being used to promote communist ideology." https://x.com/highbrow_nobrow/status/1943355238993293354
Forget that, though you are right.
I can't think of anything more likely to make children hate America than being taught to love America.
It used to be fairly uncontroversial. To pledge your allegiance to the flag every day at school etc.
Allegiance, yes. Respect, quite probably.
Love? That's creepy. Especially with a government that is blurring the boundaries between nation, state, government and President.
They used to have things like the "Manual of patriotism", for use in the public schools, that was love the flag, love your country, love god.
Until fairly recently US kids always got this kind of pump of propaganda. Pledge allegiance, sing the national anthem at the dropping of a hat, God's country, etc.
Mrs U did the summer camps in the US back in the day and it was this sort of thing all the time.
"Wimbledon faces calls to close court roofs amid heatwave Tournament urged to break protocol after several fans have medical emergencies due to the rising temperatures" (£)
"Wimbledon faces calls to close court roofs amid heatwave Tournament urged to break protocol after several fans have medical emergencies due to the rising temperatures" (£)
"Wimbledon faces calls to close court roofs amid heatwave Tournament urged to break protocol after several fans have medical emergencies due to the rising temperatures" (£)
"Wimbledon faces calls to close court roofs amid heatwave Tournament urged to break protocol after several fans have medical emergencies due to the rising temperatures" (£)
"Wimbledon faces calls to close court roofs amid heatwave Tournament urged to break protocol after several fans have medical emergencies due to the rising temperatures" (£)
Mrs C and I were given Centre Court tickets one year and it was VERY hot. And, worse, airless.
I was there once on a very hot day but luckily we were seated right at the back of the stand in the shade the whole time. We didn't mind the less-than-perfect view.
"Also not dissimilar to the NU10k phenomenon" and "It sounded utterly NU10K"
Please could someone explain that for me? I tried googling it, and I was referred to a PB thread from January!
Its the idea that everything is society is ruled by an closed shop of the Upper Ten Thousand.
More that the Original Upper Ten Thousand (relatives of the aristocracy) have been replaced by an allegedly meritocratic version. The New Upper Ten Thousand protect each other, are universally incompetent and believe in their divine right to rule.
Stephen Miller: "Children will be taught to love America … As we close the Dept of Education and provide funding to states, we're going to make sure these funds are not being used to promote communist ideology." https://x.com/highbrow_nobrow/status/1943355238993293354
Forget that, though you are right.
I can't think of anything more likely to make children hate America than being taught to love America.
I don't suppose they'll be teaching the constitution too carefully though.
Rubbish. They will be teaching it very, very carefully.
Just like the version of Christianity they taught to black people, pre-1865, in Alabama
Stephen Miller: "Children will be taught to love America … As we close the Dept of Education and provide funding to states, we're going to make sure these funds are not being used to promote communist ideology." https://x.com/highbrow_nobrow/status/1943355238993293354
Forget that, though you are right.
I can't think of anything more likely to make children hate America than being taught to love America.
I don't suppose they'll be teaching the constitution too carefully though.
Rubbish. They will be teaching it very, very carefully.
Just like the version of Christianity they taught to black people, pre-1865, in Alabama
It's odd isn't it. There's strong evidence now that Europeans are descended from an intermingling of two humanoid species, H. sapiens and H. neanderthalis. Whereas West Africans are probably pure H. sapiens so could have a 'better' claim to be 'human' than Europeans.
"Wimbledon faces calls to close court roofs amid heatwave Tournament urged to break protocol after several fans have medical emergencies due to the rising temperatures" (£)
Pic of the day from the White House - without comment
Wait until Trump finds out Superman is an illegal alien taking the job of hardworking Americans.
Surely Trump should aspire to be Batman, an all American guy who has no superpowers but uses his wealth.
Fun fact, Sir Keir Starmer is more like Batman Bananaman, he fought for justice whilst wearing a cape*
*DavidL will say it is a gown but we all know it is a cape.
Corrected for you...
Bananaman is genial and charismatic. I'm extremely insulted on his behalf that he should be compared to Keir Starmer. The closest character on the series to Sir would be that mole character.
Comments
We also need to think about WHO will vote next time - assuming a similar turnout (60% ish), you could well see 2024 Labour voters abstaining and 2024 abstainers (mainly Conservative) voting but that doesn't mean all those who were Tory in 2019 and stayed at home in 2024 will rush back to the blue rosette.
(As a lowly scientist, such real world concerns are beyond me)
During Covid, we were handing money out left, right and centre. Even being told to phone people or check if there was something else they could add to be paid as a grant. That was the madness that Boris/Sunak allowed to expand while they were in position. And the reason why the Conservatives are a long way from being the party of fiscal probity.
A nostalgic haze of the 1970's abundance of them hangs over the grass, here.
Did somebody get their cm and inches mixed up?
We are not amused. We are however, quite well sauna'd.
https://x.com/UB1UB2/status/1943359708552925304
But everyone is interested in two questions: Can Reform make it to the top, and what will it be like if they get there. They are two of the top five UK politics issues right now, and will stay that way until something goes pop.
But not, I think, unique.
The only solution is some kind of robust, external whistleblowing system. But that would need a Cyclefree empowered by the relevant minister.
(Also not dissimilar to the NU10k phenomenon.)
No, there's nothing faulty with that principle.
Hopefully soul crushing for India.
I did suggest to her that there was something really wrong going on, if they were explicitly restricting senior management position to Friends & Chums. As in - backup your email and watch out for strange financial stuff.
Good runs when it mattered for both Smith and Carse
Best to get another job, before the arrests hit the front of the Daily Fail. Or the Grauniad.
You don’t want that.
It is illegal to now do what she was doing, but it very difficult for the authorities to crack down on it as it can also be used for making whipped cream.
And from your reaction, has added a touch of deception ?
Please could someone explain that for me? I tried googling it, and I was referred to a PB thread from January!
Stephen Miller: "Children will be taught to love America … As we close the Dept of Education and provide funding to states, we're going to make sure these funds are not being used to promote communist ideology."
https://x.com/highbrow_nobrow/status/1943355238993293354
I can't think of anything more likely to make children hate America than being taught to love America.
By Jack Davey"
https://unherd.com/newsroom/german-state-bans-afd-members-from-civil-service/
Love? That's creepy. Especially with a government that is blurring the boundaries between nation, state, government and President.
Until fairly recently US kids always got this kind of pump of propaganda. Pledge allegiance, sing the national anthem at the dropping of a hat, God's country, etc.
Mrs U did the summer camps in the US back in the day and it was this sort of thing all the time.
Game keeps getting interrupted by pensioners fainting.
Tournament urged to break protocol after several fans have medical emergencies due to the rising temperatures" (£)
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/environment/article/weather-hosepipe-ban-met-office-3gjd6ltb9
Meet new boss. Just like old boss
Just like the version of Christianity they taught to black people, pre-1865, in Alabama
https://x.com/ClaireCoutinho/status/1943660950118175110
Let there be air con.
Energy policy should fit what Brits need, not the other way around.
Sign up to Britain Remade’s campaign to make Britain cool again. 🇬🇧
One has to wonder whether someone at the White House is secretly trolling him and testing how far they can go. Poe's law applies, I guess!
Surely Trump should aspire to be Batman, an all American guy who has no superpowers but uses his wealth.
Fun fact, Sir Keir Starmer is more like Batman, he fought for justice whilst wearing a cape*
*DavidL will say it is a gown but we all know it is a cape.
https://x.com/publicsenat/status/1943376352414998822
NEW THREAD
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curve