My new mega millionaire friend just sent me this tweet - not by him - to illustrate his thesis that Britain is fiscally fucked and a crash is coming soon
“The UK spent £16.4bn in debt interest (not repayment) in June
That’s £438.50 for each taxpayer- for one month. £5,260 per taxpayer per year
The UK avg salary is £37,000. On that they’ll pay £4,884 of income tax
This is top tier “I’m 13 and this is deep” material.
No, I think it’s just called “maths”
Perhaps you struggle with it
I thought his post was quite accurate. You often come out with statements that are reminiscent of what we used to think when we were teenagers (eg we are all in some game).
Does it not cross your mind that the Economics and Maths is just a smidgen more complicated than what you described. That was maths for 10 year olds (I wouldn't insult a 13 year old).
You just didn’t understand it. As is often the case
I have a degree in Mathematics and some professional qualifications covering Economics.
Would you like to tell us your qualifications in the matter just to gauge who is more likely to understand your oh so simplistic mathematical and economic grasp of what you stated?
The fact you barely understand anything is, for me, a fairly reliable indicator as to the relative utility of your comments
Perhaps you could write an article on it ?
A properly researched piece on UK debt might actually be interesting to your readers. You could hook them in with the factoid you quoted, and then explain the rest.
Why do you keep advising me what to write? It’s odd
My new mega millionaire friend just sent me this tweet - not by him - to illustrate his thesis that Britain is fiscally fucked and a crash is coming soon
“The UK spent £16.4bn in debt interest (not repayment) in June
That’s £438.50 for each taxpayer- for one month. £5,260 per taxpayer per year
The UK avg salary is £37,000. On that they’ll pay £4,884 of income tax
This is top tier “I’m 13 and this is deep” material.
No, I think it’s just called “maths”
Perhaps you struggle with it
I thought his post was quite accurate. You often come out with statements that are reminiscent of what we used to think when we were teenagers (eg we are all in some game).
Does it not cross your mind that the Economics and Maths is just a smidgen more complicated than what you described. That was maths for 10 year olds (I wouldn't insult a 13 year old).
You just didn’t understand it. As is often the case
I have a degree in Mathematics and some professional qualifications covering Economics.
Would you like to tell us your qualifications in the matter just to gauge who is more likely to understand your oh so simplistic mathematical and economic grasp of what you stated?
The fact you barely understand anything is, for me, a fairly reliable indicator as to the relative utility of your comments
Perhaps you could write an article on it ?
A properly researched piece on UK debt might actually be interesting to your readers. You could hook them in with the factoid you quoted, and then explain the rest.
Why do you keep advising me what to write? It’s odd
He thinks father figure is an effective cloak for pomposity.
Interesting walk through the Kent countryside yesterday. Signs saying no to new homes and solar farms. More and more acreage put over to vines.
Do we have a shortage of the latter and surpluses of the former? Strange
I still think it's ecologically dumb to take fields out of producing food before we've put solar panels on every single roof in the country.
I can understand why farmers do it - it makes excellent financial sense for them - but it's still a policy failure at a national level.
It seems that, fundamentally, civil servants and policymakers in London object to farmers actually farming.
Or teachers teaching, or businesses making money...
(Although, that said, solar farms do make money.)
They do object to the farming. Which is why the solar farming is such an attractive option. Especially when you combine it with renting the land for sheep. Which combined certain advantages of being “in agriculture” with not actually doing much farming.
The actual percentage of land used for solar farms vs food is tiny, by the way.
And there are two reasons that solar panels make far more sense on the ground.
1) Working at height is expensive. It is the lost expensive thing about a solar install, domestically. 2) Covering a roof gets you a limited amount of power. Mine covers the aircon and a bit over. Covering a few fields and your into serious watts. Because of scaling of the power electronics vs the panels, the comics say you get cheaper power with lots of panels per installation.
We should require new builds to have solar panels and farmland should be mainly for food production and crops
Rare PB agreement - not sure about requiring but surely it should just be the norm. Just make the south facing rooves out of them - almost as cheap as tiles now Shirley.
Only if the solar panels are not rent-a-roof which, I am sure, will happen and in a few years time if they are then there will be howls from people unable to sell due to the onerous contracts from solar rent a roof companies.
The problem with putting solar panels on houses is that the payback is a long, long time. The solar cells are about as expensive as plywood. The issue is the power electronics and the rest of the install - which will come to thousands.
Basically - most home installations are too small to make sense. Mine is more of a technology interest, plus runs the aircon in summer.
Stuff that does make sense is building a canopy over an outdoor carpark, or covering a factory/warehouse roof. You need scale for the economics to work.
I went to a local shopping centre recently and noticed the car park there now has a portion where there are solar panels.
I’d personally not buy any property, new or otherwise, with rent a roof panels.
Labour is mandating all new build have them. I’m not sure how efficient that will be. Some new build round here already has them.
They are pug ugly and ruin the look of a house.
The Mother in Laws neighbour has them.
They are about as attractive as having a large heat pump in the back garden.
My new mega millionaire friend just sent me this tweet - not by him - to illustrate his thesis that Britain is fiscally fucked and a crash is coming soon
“The UK spent £16.4bn in debt interest (not repayment) in June
That’s £438.50 for each taxpayer- for one month. £5,260 per taxpayer per year
The UK avg salary is £37,000. On that they’ll pay £4,884 of income tax
Does your new mega millionaire friend think that income tax is the only source of tax? Still nice for you to make new friends with a similar IQ level to your own.
The maths is essentially correct, although it doesn't take into account national insurance for a £37k taxpayer.
Income tax accounts for about 28-30% of government revenue. What this underlines is that debt interest alone is gobbling up over half of it on present trends and that it's higher rate taxpayers and other forms of taxation that are generating the revenue for everything else whilst our debt pile continues to accrue.
This is a neat way of showing that the debt interest per head exceeds the income tax paid by an average taxpayer, which should be a cause for concern.
Yes. Exactly. Inter alia it shows how utterly reliant we are on higher rate taxpayers. The ones that labour is desperate to chase away
Incidentally I’ve been predicting a horrible correction in London house prices for a while. @foxy tried to claim it’s all ok coz the Americans are buying everything
Saw this a couple of days ago
“House price horror stalking London revealed: Prices slashed by 35pc, estate agents in despair... and the brutal truth about what it means for us all”
Higher rate tax payers are utterly reliant on the rest of the country.
I'm not suggesting it would be a good thing in the slightest if they weren't here. However, if one did disappear, it would be easier for someone to step up into their position, than it would be for them to step down and do the jobs of all the people who contributed to their wealth.
Unfortunately it’s not just one, is it?
Also, you have a very weird idea of how people get very rich, if they are self made
They tend to have unique skills which cannot be replaced. That’s why we aren’t all multi millionaires
My new mega millionaire friend just sent me this tweet - not by him - to illustrate his thesis that Britain is fiscally fucked and a crash is coming soon
“The UK spent £16.4bn in debt interest (not repayment) in June
That’s £438.50 for each taxpayer- for one month. £5,260 per taxpayer per year
The UK avg salary is £37,000. On that they’ll pay £4,884 of income tax
This is top tier “I’m 13 and this is deep” material.
No, I think it’s just called “maths”
Perhaps you struggle with it
I thought his post was quite accurate. You often come out with statements that are reminiscent of what we used to think when we were teenagers (eg we are all in some game).
Does it not cross your mind that the Economics and Maths is just a smidgen more complicated than what you described. That was maths for 10 year olds (I wouldn't insult a 13 year old).
You just didn’t understand it. As is often the case
I have a degree in Mathematics and some professional qualifications covering Economics.
Would you like to tell us your qualifications in the matter just to gauge who is more likely to understand your oh so simplistic mathematical and economic grasp of what you stated?
The fact you barely understand anything is, for me, a fairly reliable indicator as to the relative utility of your comments
Perhaps you could write an article on it ?
A properly researched piece on UK debt might actually be interesting to your readers. You could hook them in with the factoid you quoted, and then explain the rest.
Why do you keep advising me what to write? It’s odd
He thinks father figure is an effective cloak for pomposity.
Given it hit over 50°C in Turkey last week, and much of Europe is now boiling in the Summer - including ours being about 5-6°C warmer and drier than it used to be - you'd think they'd be more interested in the green stuff.
But for these misguided folk it's a social and political religious movement, and they don't understand the science, technology and engineering that'd actually be required to achieve it.
In fact, they reject it all.
They're communists.
On a very tenuously-related note, Danny Kruger made a speech (a while ago, but I'm only just aware) about Christianity and the new woke religion that was brilliant and worth a watch.
All that matters is getting to a new energy source that doesn't chuck shit into the atmosphere, just as we moved from wood to coal to oil in the past - we move on again.
That's all that matters, and absorbing some of the excess carbon that's already up there. I couldn't care less what it is. It's a simple scientific problem with a technological answer.
The trouble is we have very few people in our society now who understand science and engineering, like Margaret Thatcher did.
You cannot eat solar panels though
Michel Lotito would have given it a good go. If he could eat a plane, a solar panel should be fairly straight forward.
My new mega millionaire friend just sent me this tweet - not by him - to illustrate his thesis that Britain is fiscally fucked and a crash is coming soon
“The UK spent £16.4bn in debt interest (not repayment) in June
That’s £438.50 for each taxpayer- for one month. £5,260 per taxpayer per year
The UK avg salary is £37,000. On that they’ll pay £4,884 of income tax
Does your new mega millionaire friend think that income tax is the only source of tax? Still nice for you to make new friends with a similar IQ level to your own.
The maths is essentially correct, although it doesn't take into account national insurance for a £37k taxpayer.
Income tax accounts for about 28-30% of government revenue. What this underlines is that debt interest alone is gobbling up over half of it on present trends and that it's higher rate taxpayers and other forms of taxation that are generating the revenue for everything else whilst our debt pile continues to accrue.
This is a neat way of showing that the debt interest per head exceeds the income tax paid by an average taxpayer, which should be a cause for concern.
Yes. Exactly. Inter alia it shows how utterly reliant we are on higher rate taxpayers. The ones that labour is desperate to chase away
Incidentally I’ve been predicting a horrible correction in London house prices for a while. @foxy tried to claim it’s all ok coz the Americans are buying everything
Saw this a couple of days ago
“House price horror stalking London revealed: Prices slashed by 35pc, estate agents in despair... and the brutal truth about what it means for us all”
I wouldn't panic just yet. Looking at the indices they are down month-on-month but up year-on-year. If this is a house price crash you'd need sustained drops over several months
My new mega millionaire friend just sent me this tweet - not by him - to illustrate his thesis that Britain is fiscally fucked and a crash is coming soon
“The UK spent £16.4bn in debt interest (not repayment) in June
That’s £438.50 for each taxpayer- for one month. £5,260 per taxpayer per year
The UK avg salary is £37,000. On that they’ll pay £4,884 of income tax
My new mega millionaire friend just sent me this tweet - not by him - to illustrate his thesis that Britain is fiscally fucked and a crash is coming soon
“The UK spent £16.4bn in debt interest (not repayment) in June
That’s £438.50 for each taxpayer- for one month. £5,260 per taxpayer per year
The UK avg salary is £37,000. On that they’ll pay £4,884 of income tax
This is top tier “I’m 13 and this is deep” material.
No, I think it’s just called “maths”
Perhaps you struggle with it
I thought his post was quite accurate. You often come out with statements that are reminiscent of what we used to think when we were teenagers (eg we are all in some game).
Does it not cross your mind that the Economics and Maths is just a smidgen more complicated than what you described. That was maths for 10 year olds (I wouldn't insult a 13 year old).
You just didn’t understand it. As is often the case
I have a degree in Mathematics and some professional qualifications covering Economics.
Would you like to tell us your qualifications in the matter just to gauge who is more likely to understand your oh so simplistic mathematical and economic grasp of what you stated?
The fact you barely understand anything is, for me, a fairly reliable indicator as to the relative utility of your comments
Perhaps you could write an article on it ?
A properly researched piece on UK debt might actually be interesting to your readers. You could hook them in with the factoid you quoted, and then explain the rest.
Why do you keep advising me what to write? It’s odd
You're welcome.
It's tedious and irritating, and you're already quite often tedious and irritating, so stop it
Unfortunately, the charge of "racism" is so powerful -- in some circles -- that it is used inappropriately more often than not. It should be obvious, for example, that neither Christians nor Muslims are races.
Don’t know about the USA but in Europe the charge of “racism” is fast losing its impact, partly because it has been hurled so often and with such incaution it feels meaningless
I’ve noticed that the Guardian has almost stopped doing those “such and such is racist” articles (eg maths, gardening, rain, your nan, a dildo, music)
I sense several reasons. They ran out of targets, they get so repetitive people stopped reading them - or caring, they began to sound mad
When they do them now they are much more muted, less strident, lacking vigour and confidence. Good
The Guardian literally did a jeans advert is racist the other day.
They did but it was lacking in self-confidence and it swiftly disappeared
My new mega millionaire friend just sent me this tweet - not by him - to illustrate his thesis that Britain is fiscally fucked and a crash is coming soon
“The UK spent £16.4bn in debt interest (not repayment) in June
That’s £438.50 for each taxpayer- for one month. £5,260 per taxpayer per year
The UK avg salary is £37,000. On that they’ll pay £4,884 of income tax
Does your new mega millionaire friend think that income tax is the only source of tax? Still nice for you to make new friends with a similar IQ level to your own.
The maths is essentially correct, although it doesn't take into account national insurance for a £37k taxpayer.
Income tax accounts for about 28-30% of government revenue. What this underlines is that debt interest alone is gobbling up over half of it on present trends and that it's higher rate taxpayers and other forms of taxation that are generating the revenue for everything else whilst our debt pile continues to accrue.
This is a neat way of showing that the debt interest per head exceeds the income tax paid by an average taxpayer, which should be a cause for concern.
Yes. Exactly. Inter alia it shows how utterly reliant we are on higher rate taxpayers. The ones that labour is desperate to chase away
Incidentally I’ve been predicting a horrible correction in London house prices for a while. @foxy tried to claim it’s all ok coz the Americans are buying everything
Saw this a couple of days ago
“House price horror stalking London revealed: Prices slashed by 35pc, estate agents in despair... and the brutal truth about what it means for us all”
I wouldn't panic just yet. Looking at the indices they are down month-on-month but up year-on-year. If this is a house price crash you'd need sustained drops over several months
Note that they are all a bit laggy, with the Rightmove one the least laggy and the UK House Price Index the most laggy.
From a simplistic fiscal point point of view, it doesn't really matter much because we don't have a substantial property value tax and primary residences are exempt from CGT and IHT (to an extent).
There's a systemic issue if it plunges people into negative equity though. Not sure how to do deal with that - otherwise, it's great news for renters and dreadful news for minted outright owners. The mortgage class is a shrinking proportion and the mainstream parties need to grow and defend that class if they are to win elections.
My new mega millionaire friend just sent me this tweet - not by him - to illustrate his thesis that Britain is fiscally fucked and a crash is coming soon
“The UK spent £16.4bn in debt interest (not repayment) in June
That’s £438.50 for each taxpayer- for one month. £5,260 per taxpayer per year
The UK avg salary is £37,000. On that they’ll pay £4,884 of income tax
This is top tier “I’m 13 and this is deep” material.
No, I think it’s just called “maths”
Perhaps you struggle with it
I thought his post was quite accurate. You often come out with statements that are reminiscent of what we used to think when we were teenagers (eg we are all in some game).
Does it not cross your mind that the Economics and Maths is just a smidgen more complicated than what you described. That was maths for 10 year olds (I wouldn't insult a 13 year old).
You just didn’t understand it. As is often the case
I have a degree in Mathematics and some professional qualifications covering Economics.
Would you like to tell us your qualifications in the matter just to gauge who is more likely to understand your oh so simplistic mathematical and economic grasp of what you stated?
The fact you barely understand anything is, for me, a fairly reliable indicator as to the relative utility of your comments
Perhaps you could write an article on it ?
A properly researched piece on UK debt might actually be interesting to your readers. You could hook them in with the factoid you quoted, and then explain the rest.
Why do you keep advising me what to write? It’s odd
You're welcome.
It's tedious and irritating, and you're already quite often tedious and irritating, so stop it
Even more tedious and irritating than the cricket?
My new mega millionaire friend just sent me this tweet - not by him - to illustrate his thesis that Britain is fiscally fucked and a crash is coming soon
“The UK spent £16.4bn in debt interest (not repayment) in June
That’s £438.50 for each taxpayer- for one month. £5,260 per taxpayer per year
The UK avg salary is £37,000. On that they’ll pay £4,884 of income tax
Does your new mega millionaire friend think that income tax is the only source of tax? Still nice for you to make new friends with a similar IQ level to your own.
Of course not you notoriously smelly thicko. It’s illustrative of the insane scale of our debt - that on this metric our biggest source of tax - income tax (60% of HMRC revenues) - does not even cover our interest payments on debt. Let alone our spending
UK income tax receipts alone cover our interest bills more than twice over.
All of this is a short Internet search away. Next time when people tell you that you’re wrong, maybe consider that you might actually be wrong instead of hurling insults? Especially on something as easily checkable as this.
I would expect you to be embarrassed, but you’ll probably try and style it out with another withering insult. I look forward to being on the receiving end of your best work...
Is the monthly net borrowing figures over the last few years. June is typically amongst the worst months, with July and January the best, because this is when non PAYE earners pay their income tax.
Incidentally government receipts in tax work out at about £40 000 per UK household according to the OBR, so no need to panic.
I think where @Leon is being a doofus is in taking an outlier month, and annualising it without .. er .. looking at any context.
A quick check reveals that June is where more annual payments become due - afaics relating to index-linked debt components.
He's missing a Maths A level, and some logic, perhaps?
Anyway, he's always saying how highly intelligent he is. Highly intelligent people get lots of easy things wrong all the time.
Did Liz Truss not go to Oxford?
This. It's classic Dunning Kruger. Anyone with a properly enquiring mind, like say a proper journalist, would ask why the original tweet chose to focus on one particular month, before launching into some comparison with annual income tax liability.
My new mega millionaire friend just sent me this tweet - not by him - to illustrate his thesis that Britain is fiscally fucked and a crash is coming soon
“The UK spent £16.4bn in debt interest (not repayment) in June
That’s £438.50 for each taxpayer- for one month. £5,260 per taxpayer per year
The UK avg salary is £37,000. On that they’ll pay £4,884 of income tax
Does your new mega millionaire friend think that income tax is the only source of tax? Still nice for you to make new friends with a similar IQ level to your own.
Of course not you notoriously smelly thicko. It’s illustrative of the insane scale of our debt - that on this metric our biggest source of tax - income tax (60% of HMRC revenues) - does not even cover our interest payments on debt. Let alone our spending
UK income tax receipts alone cover our interest bills more than twice over.
All of this is a short Internet search away. Next time when people tell you that you’re wrong, maybe consider that you might actually be wrong instead of hurling insults? Especially on something as easily checkable as this.
I would expect you to be embarrassed, but you’ll probably try and style it out with another withering insult. I look forward to being on the receiving end of your best work...
Is the monthly net borrowing figures over the last few years. June is typically amongst the worst months, with July and January the best, because this is when non PAYE earners pay their income tax.
Incidentally government receipts in tax work out at about £40 000 per UK household according to the OBR, so no need to panic.
I think where @Leon is being a doofus is in taking an outlier month, and annualising it without .. er .. looking at any context.
A quick check reveals that June is where more annual payments become due - afaics relating to index-linked debt components.
He's missing a Maths A level, and some logic, perhaps?
Anyway, he's always saying how highly intelligent he is. Highly intelligent people get lots of easy things wrong all the time.
Did Liz Truss not go to Oxford?
This. It's classic Dunning Kruger. Anyone with a properly enquiring mind, like say a proper journalist, would ask why the original tweet chose to focus on one particular month, before launching into some comparison with annual income tax liability.
My new mega millionaire friend just sent me this tweet - not by him - to illustrate his thesis that Britain is fiscally fucked and a crash is coming soon
“The UK spent £16.4bn in debt interest (not repayment) in June
That’s £438.50 for each taxpayer- for one month. £5,260 per taxpayer per year
The UK avg salary is £37,000. On that they’ll pay £4,884 of income tax
Does your new mega millionaire friend think that income tax is the only source of tax? Still nice for you to make new friends with a similar IQ level to your own.
The maths is essentially correct, although it doesn't take into account national insurance for a £37k taxpayer.
Income tax accounts for about 28-30% of government revenue. What this underlines is that debt interest alone is gobbling up over half of it on present trends and that it's higher rate taxpayers and other forms of taxation that are generating the revenue for everything else whilst our debt pile continues to accrue.
This is a neat way of showing that the debt interest per head exceeds the income tax paid by an average taxpayer, which should be a cause for concern.
Yes. Exactly. Inter alia it shows how utterly reliant we are on higher rate taxpayers. The ones that labour is desperate to chase away
Incidentally I’ve been predicting a horrible correction in London house prices for a while. @foxy tried to claim it’s all ok coz the Americans are buying everything
Saw this a couple of days ago
“House price horror stalking London revealed: Prices slashed by 35pc, estate agents in despair... and the brutal truth about what it means for us all”
Higher rate tax payers are utterly reliant on the rest of the country.
I'm not suggesting it would be a good thing in the slightest if they weren't here. However, if one did disappear, it would be easier for someone to step up into their position, than it would be for them to step down and do the jobs of all the people who contributed to their wealth.
Unfortunately it’s not just one, is it?
Also, you have a very weird idea of how people get very rich, if they are self made
They tend to have unique skills which cannot be replaced. That’s why we aren’t all multi millionaires
I think you're reading a hell of a lot that isn't there, into my comment.
No matter how irreplaceable some people are, they're not generating their wealth in a vacuum.
My new mega millionaire friend just sent me this tweet - not by him - to illustrate his thesis that Britain is fiscally fucked and a crash is coming soon
“The UK spent £16.4bn in debt interest (not repayment) in June
That’s £438.50 for each taxpayer- for one month. £5,260 per taxpayer per year
The UK avg salary is £37,000. On that they’ll pay £4,884 of income tax
This is top tier “I’m 13 and this is deep” material.
No, I think it’s just called “maths”
Perhaps you struggle with it
I thought his post was quite accurate. You often come out with statements that are reminiscent of what we used to think when we were teenagers (eg we are all in some game).
Does it not cross your mind that the Economics and Maths is just a smidgen more complicated than what you described. That was maths for 10 year olds (I wouldn't insult a 13 year old).
You just didn’t understand it. As is often the case
I have a degree in Mathematics and some professional qualifications covering Economics.
Would you like to tell us your qualifications in the matter just to gauge who is more likely to understand your oh so simplistic mathematical and economic grasp of what you stated?
The fact you barely understand anything is, for me, a fairly reliable indicator as to the relative utility of your comments
Perhaps you could write an article on it ?
A properly researched piece on UK debt might actually be interesting to your readers. You could hook them in with the factoid you quoted, and then explain the rest.
Why do you keep advising me what to write? It’s odd
You're welcome.
It's tedious and irritating, and you're already quite often tedious and irritating, so stop it
I think you missed the point. I think he was suggesting that you would be incapable of doing so. You probably don't realise it and would produce a piece that sounded plausible to a young teenager, but to anyone with a modicum of knowledge it would look silly.
My new mega millionaire friend just sent me this tweet - not by him - to illustrate his thesis that Britain is fiscally fucked and a crash is coming soon
“The UK spent £16.4bn in debt interest (not repayment) in June
That’s £438.50 for each taxpayer- for one month. £5,260 per taxpayer per year
The UK avg salary is £37,000. On that they’ll pay £4,884 of income tax
My new mega millionaire friend just sent me this tweet - not by him - to illustrate his thesis that Britain is fiscally fucked and a crash is coming soon
“The UK spent £16.4bn in debt interest (not repayment) in June
That’s £438.50 for each taxpayer- for one month. £5,260 per taxpayer per year
The UK avg salary is £37,000. On that they’ll pay £4,884 of income tax
This is top tier “I’m 13 and this is deep” material.
No, I think it’s just called “maths”
Perhaps you struggle with it
I thought his post was quite accurate. You often come out with statements that are reminiscent of what we used to think when we were teenagers (eg we are all in some game).
Does it not cross your mind that the Economics and Maths is just a smidgen more complicated than what you described. That was maths for 10 year olds (I wouldn't insult a 13 year old).
You just didn’t understand it. As is often the case
I have a degree in Mathematics and some professional qualifications covering Economics.
Would you like to tell us your qualifications in the matter just to gauge who is more likely to understand your oh so simplistic mathematical and economic grasp of what you stated?
The fact you barely understand anything is, for me, a fairly reliable indicator as to the relative utility of your comments
Perhaps you could write an article on it ?
A properly researched piece on UK debt might actually be interesting to your readers. You could hook them in with the factoid you quoted, and then explain the rest.
Why do you keep advising me what to write? It’s odd
You're welcome.
It's tedious and irritating, and you're already quite often tedious and irritating, so stop it
My new mega millionaire friend just sent me this tweet - not by him - to illustrate his thesis that Britain is fiscally fucked and a crash is coming soon
“The UK spent £16.4bn in debt interest (not repayment) in June
That’s £438.50 for each taxpayer- for one month. £5,260 per taxpayer per year
The UK avg salary is £37,000. On that they’ll pay £4,884 of income tax
This is top tier “I’m 13 and this is deep” material.
No, I think it’s just called “maths”
Perhaps you struggle with it
I thought his post was quite accurate. You often come out with statements that are reminiscent of what we used to think when we were teenagers (eg we are all in some game).
Does it not cross your mind that the Economics and Maths is just a smidgen more complicated than what you described. That was maths for 10 year olds (I wouldn't insult a 13 year old).
You just didn’t understand it. As is often the case
I have a degree in Mathematics and some professional qualifications covering Economics.
Would you like to tell us your qualifications in the matter just to gauge who is more likely to understand your oh so simplistic mathematical and economic grasp of what you stated?
The fact you barely understand anything is, for me, a fairly reliable indicator as to the relative utility of your comments
Perhaps you could write an article on it ?
A properly researched piece on UK debt might actually be interesting to your readers. You could hook them in with the factoid you quoted, and then explain the rest.
Why do you keep advising me what to write? It’s odd
You're welcome.
It's tedious and irritating, and you're already quite often tedious and irritating, so stop it
Frankly, FU.
It was a bit of intentional snark, which pales against your regular stream invective.
If you're irritated, and can't deal with that, then that's on you.
My new mega millionaire friend just sent me this tweet - not by him - to illustrate his thesis that Britain is fiscally fucked and a crash is coming soon
“The UK spent £16.4bn in debt interest (not repayment) in June
That’s £438.50 for each taxpayer- for one month. £5,260 per taxpayer per year
The UK avg salary is £37,000. On that they’ll pay £4,884 of income tax
Does your new mega millionaire friend think that income tax is the only source of tax? Still nice for you to make new friends with a similar IQ level to your own.
Of course not you notoriously smelly thicko. It’s illustrative of the insane scale of our debt - that on this metric our biggest source of tax - income tax (60% of HMRC revenues) - does not even cover our interest payments on debt. Let alone our spending
UK income tax receipts alone cover our interest bills more than twice over.
All of this is a short Internet search away. Next time when people tell you that you’re wrong, maybe consider that you might actually be wrong instead of hurling insults? Especially on something as easily checkable as this.
I would expect you to be embarrassed, but you’ll probably try and style it out with another withering insult. I look forward to being on the receiving end of your best work...
Is the monthly net borrowing figures over the last few years. June is typically amongst the worst months, with July and January the best, because this is when non PAYE earners pay their income tax.
Incidentally government receipts in tax work out at about £40 000 per UK household according to the OBR, so no need to panic.
I think where @Leon is being a doofus is in taking an outlier month, and annualising it without .. er .. looking at any context.
A quick check reveals that June is where more annual payments become due - afaics relating to index-linked debt components.
He's missing a Maths A level, and some logic, perhaps?
Anyway, he's always saying how highly intelligent he is. Highly intelligent people get lots of easy things wrong all the time.
Did Liz Truss not go to Oxford?
This. It's classic Dunning Kruger. Anyone with a properly enquiring mind, like say a proper journalist, would ask why the original tweet chose to focus on one particular month, before launching into some comparison with annual income tax liability.
Interesting that is 2 of us who have cited Dunning-Kruger. @leon does seem to be the classic example with a huge number of his posts (I exclude those where he clearly has significant knowledge).
PB is not a good place to post under these circumstances (I can think of another poster of the same ilk). PBs population is not made up of the average joe. It has a wide spread of deep knowledge on so many subjects.
Britain’s MPs charge VPNs to expenses as minister urges caution
MPs with subscriptions include Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds, who expensed a two-year subscription for NordVPN in April 2024 — and Labour MP Sarah Champion, who in 2022 urged the then-Conservative government to examine if widespread VPN usage among teenagers could undermine the protections afforded by age checks.
My new mega millionaire friend just sent me this tweet - not by him - to illustrate his thesis that Britain is fiscally fucked and a crash is coming soon
“The UK spent £16.4bn in debt interest (not repayment) in June
That’s £438.50 for each taxpayer- for one month. £5,260 per taxpayer per year
The UK avg salary is £37,000. On that they’ll pay £4,884 of income tax
Does your new mega millionaire friend think that income tax is the only source of tax? Still nice for you to make new friends with a similar IQ level to your own.
Of course not you notoriously smelly thicko. It’s illustrative of the insane scale of our debt - that on this metric our biggest source of tax - income tax (60% of HMRC revenues) - does not even cover our interest payments on debt. Let alone our spending
UK income tax receipts alone cover our interest bills more than twice over.
All of this is a short Internet search away. Next time when people tell you that you’re wrong, maybe consider that you might actually be wrong instead of hurling insults? Especially on something as easily checkable as this.
I would expect you to be embarrassed, but you’ll probably try and style it out with another withering insult. I look forward to being on the receiving end of your best work...
Is the monthly net borrowing figures over the last few years. June is typically amongst the worst months, with July and January the best, because this is when non PAYE earners pay their income tax.
Incidentally government receipts in tax work out at about £40 000 per UK household according to the OBR, so no need to panic.
I think where @Leon is being a doofus is in taking an outlier month, and annualising it without .. er .. looking at any context.
A quick check reveals that June is where more annual payments become due - afaics relating to index-linked debt components.
He's missing a Maths A level, and some logic, perhaps?
Anyway, he's always saying how highly intelligent he is. Highly intelligent people get lots of easy things wrong all the time.
Did Liz Truss not go to Oxford?
This. It's classic Dunning Kruger. Anyone with a properly enquiring mind, like say a proper journalist, would ask why the original tweet chose to focus on one particular month, before launching into some comparison with annual income tax liability.
Interesting that is 2 of us who have cited Dunning-Kruger. @leon does seem to be the classic example with a huge number of his posts (I exclude those where he clearly has significant knowledge).
PB is not a good place to post under these circumstances (I can think of another poster of the same ilk). PBs population is not made up of the average joe. It has a wide spread of deep knowledge on so many subjects.
PS I just realised this is also a confidence thing. I couldn't be a journalist (well obviously because I can't write), but in addition to that I know that no matter how much I know about something, thousands out there will know more than me. I don't have the confidence to do that. That of course is the other side of the DK effect (although in my case true - I know on any subject there is an awful lot I don't know)
This was posted in the early hours and shares the suspicion previously posted here that China's much publicised build-up against Taiwan is really a cover for taking back their half of Siberia.
My new mega millionaire friend just sent me this tweet - not by him - to illustrate his thesis that Britain is fiscally fucked and a crash is coming soon
“The UK spent £16.4bn in debt interest (not repayment) in June
That’s £438.50 for each taxpayer- for one month. £5,260 per taxpayer per year
The UK avg salary is £37,000. On that they’ll pay £4,884 of income tax
Does your new mega millionaire friend think that income tax is the only source of tax? Still nice for you to make new friends with a similar IQ level to your own.
Of course not you notoriously smelly thicko. It’s illustrative of the insane scale of our debt - that on this metric our biggest source of tax - income tax (60% of HMRC revenues) - does not even cover our interest payments on debt. Let alone our spending
UK income tax receipts alone cover our interest bills more than twice over.
All of this is a short Internet search away. Next time when people tell you that you’re wrong, maybe consider that you might actually be wrong instead of hurling insults? Especially on something as easily checkable as this.
I would expect you to be embarrassed, but you’ll probably try and style it out with another withering insult. I look forward to being on the receiving end of your best work...
Is the monthly net borrowing figures over the last few years. June is typically amongst the worst months, with July and January the best, because this is when non PAYE earners pay their income tax.
Incidentally government receipts in tax work out at about £40 000 per UK household according to the OBR, so no need to panic.
I think where @Leon is being a doofus is in taking an outlier month, and annualising it without .. er .. looking at any context.
A quick check reveals that June is where more annual payments become due - afaics relating to index-linked debt components.
He's missing a Maths A level, and some logic, perhaps?
Anyway, he's always saying how highly intelligent he is. Highly intelligent people get lots of easy things wrong all the time.
Did Liz Truss not go to Oxford?
This. It's classic Dunning Kruger. Anyone with a properly enquiring mind, like say a proper journalist, would ask why the original tweet chose to focus on one particular month, before launching into some comparison with annual income tax liability.
Interesting that is 2 of us who have cited Dunning-Kruger. @leon does seem to be the classic example with a huge number of his posts (I exclude those where he clearly has significant knowledge).
PB is not a good place to post under these circumstances (I can think of another poster of the same ilk). PBs population is not made up of the average joe. It has a wide spread of deep knowledge on so many subjects.
PS I just realised this is also a confidence thing. I couldn't be a journalist (well obviously because I can't write), but in addition to that I know that no matter how much I know about something, thousands out there will know more than me. I don't have the confidence to do that. That of course is the other side of the DK effect (although in my case true - I know on any subject there is an awful lot I don't know)
I suppose that the great journalistic skill: you write enough so that it appears there's a huge amount of knowledge where that came from, without writing too much so that becomes apparent that there's not a huge amount of knowledge where that came from.
Part 1: He delves into the history of the chamber, esp the original use of the chamber as St Stephen's Chapel.
Part 2: He says that there is yearning in Britain for meaning. He points out that secular states cannot provide this and it can go horribly wrong.
Part 3: The intercedent (name?) points out that the multifaith society we have is made possible by Britain being a Christian state as it provides the framework for secular/non-Christian spaces
Part 4: he points out that two religions are moving in: Islam and Woke. He skips over Islam but attacks Woke as a power hostile to family, communities and nations, and belives with some force that it should be destroyed and it should be a function of Parliament to destroy it
Part 5: He says that the strong gods are back, that worship of the Christian god is necessary to underpin rights and the nation
Part 6: A religious revival is necessary and that the state should be explicitly based on Christian teaching.
My first response is
Part 1: I disagree that the Church of England is the religion of "the country", as every Scot can attest. I'm not sure that England was the first Christian nation. He elides Britain and England.
Part 2: I agree that there is a yearning in Britain for meaning. I'm not sure that a secular state cannot provide this. I agree it can go horribly wrong.
Part 3: I was interested in this. It's plausible, but I don't know if it's true
Part 4: I disagree that Woke should be destroyed. I disagree that it should be a function of the state to destroy it.
Part 5: If pressed, I'd disagree with this
Part 6: I'd disagree with this. Give Caesar that which is Caesar's, give God that which is God's
Overall: Christian Nationalism in Britain, with Islam taking the place of Judaism as "tolerated ally" in the American version.
The speech deserves a longer response which I may not be in a position to give. Normally I would consider an article but RSS Conference is in September and I have no headspace. In the meantime I refer you to @Hyufd and @MattW's comments below[1][2]
Having listened (I wasn't expecting it to be Parliament, and I wasn't expecting just 11 minutes), he's trying to argue for a "Christian basis" (in his terms) to our society as the "big table" on which all the different parts of the jigsaw come together.
That's a contrast to eg the National Secular Society, who want a French style laicite, and religion to be personal, and in the closet where homosexuality used to be.
In one sense it's an attempt to leap backwards 100 years and dodge roudn everything that has happened since, to an earlier understanding, even within his own viewpoint. There's no engagement with modernism, or a post-Christian society. That is perhaps his greatest weakness, because society evolves - it does not go backwards.
He has weaknesses in his imagining of history, a lot of glosses, and it's also quite an old argument in some respects. For a comparator I'd reach for the establishment Victorian justifications of how society worked, or perhaps for the case made by reactions to the atheistic movement that arose in the 1930s, or from philosophical challenges in the 1960s. Robinson's Honest to God was a contrasting response.
It might be interesting to compare to CS Lewis's writings on British society, since he was an atheist who converted to Christianity in the 1930s, and did interesting but non-academic style writing about many questions.
Archbishop William Tempe may also be interesting background.
I think the stuff about "invading religions" is an insertion of contemporary politics.
Thanks @Viewcode for that summary, which is impressive but less than accurate in parts. Kruger does not argue that woke should be destroyed, he urges that it should be removed from the public sphere - those are two very different concepts. The freedom of belief that he argues for within a Christian country would naturally include a freedom to believe in wokism, but he wants it to become a minority sect - using the example of druidism.
How does one achieve this without demanding that people change their beliefs and values, which would be anti-freedom? Simply remove taxpayer funding and state backing. A country should not, and in the long term cannot, fund and nurture that which seeks its destruction. To every challenge this country now faces - economic, fiscal, migration, crime, social disintegration, 'woke' is the opposite of the answer. Yet every piece of research or cultural initiative that seeks a Government grant must prove that it advances the cause of DEI, not that it advances the cause of the country that funds it. That's a sample of what Kruger quite understandably wishes to eliminate.
Summer riots could happen again, says police watchdog HM Chief Inspector of Constabulary warns factors which fuelled the violence, such as community tensions and online misinformation, persist
The authorities keep pushing this narrative to the media. I find it quite odd. The UK rarely does rioting, certainly not on large scale for extended periods.
An interesting take from Luke Tryl on the Coinbase ad
‘ More I think about this ad the more I think it reflects a rubicon moment. Not because loads of Brits are going to suddenly invest in crypto. But because a US based company felt comfortable/able to market itself to Brits themselves on the basis of things in the UK being rubbish!’
A senior nurse at Lucy Letby’s hospital warned she was facing her “worst nightmare” after deadly bacteria was found on several taps in the “over-capacity” baby unit, leaked emails show.
Eirian Powell, the manager of the neonatal unit at the Countess of Chester Hospital, argued the department was “taking too many risks” and “compromising patient safety”.
The email was sent to senior managers in December 2015, the middle of the period in which there was a spike of baby deaths at the unit, for which Letby was convicted of murder.
Former Estates Management staff at the hospital also told The Telegraph that nappy pads were placed in the ceiling of the unit to prevent sewage leaking through.
As I have said, I don't know very much about the details of the Letby case, but it does seems like the place was a shit show....literally.
Tomorrow might (Sunday at 10.20pm), ITV have the first big "was she guilty" doc since the mood changed towards a potential miscarriage of justice.
Panorama are about a week behind, and I think Channel 4 have one in production.
Will be interesting to see what difference they make.
Someone upthread posted that deaths had stopped when Letby was taken off duty. I doubt that's entirely true..... tiny prem babies do have an increased death risk ...... but, and this important, in the absence of other changes, did the death rate drop significantly when Letby was removed from duty? Or were there too many other changes to permit a comparison to be made?
Of curse the other question to be asked is whether there was a rising death rate before she became involved?
The death rate on the ward doubled compared to the year before Letby started. When Letby was moved from night shifts to day shifts, there stopped being lots of deaths at night and started being lots in the day. Staff spent months trying to explain this all as having some other cause.
Go read the Coffey and Moritz book "Unmasking Lucy Letby". The whole case is fascinating and rather different from how some Letby truthers present it.
Summer riots could happen again, says police watchdog HM Chief Inspector of Constabulary warns factors which fuelled the violence, such as community tensions and online misinformation, persist
The authorities keep pushing this narrative to the media. I find it quite odd. The UK rarely does rioting, certainly not on large scale for extended periods.
last year we had the farage riots, it would be remiss of the authorities not to push this message giving how much traction he and is party is getting, and the misinformation he was pushing over the events in Epping last week.
Summer riots could happen again, says police watchdog HM Chief Inspector of Constabulary warns factors which fuelled the violence, such as community tensions and online misinformation, persist
The authorities keep pushing this narrative to the media. I find it quite odd. The UK rarely does rioting, certainly not on large scale for extended periods.
Discussing illegal immigration shouldn't count as misinformation of course.
A senior nurse at Lucy Letby’s hospital warned she was facing her “worst nightmare” after deadly bacteria was found on several taps in the “over-capacity” baby unit, leaked emails show.
Eirian Powell, the manager of the neonatal unit at the Countess of Chester Hospital, argued the department was “taking too many risks” and “compromising patient safety”.
The email was sent to senior managers in December 2015, the middle of the period in which there was a spike of baby deaths at the unit, for which Letby was convicted of murder.
Former Estates Management staff at the hospital also told The Telegraph that nappy pads were placed in the ceiling of the unit to prevent sewage leaking through.
As I have said, I don't know very much about the details of the Letby case, but it does seems like the place was a shit show....literally.
Tomorrow might (Sunday at 10.20pm), ITV have the first big "was she guilty" doc since the mood changed towards a potential miscarriage of justice.
Panorama are about a week behind, and I think Channel 4 have one in production.
Will be interesting to see what difference they make.
Someone upthread posted that deaths had stopped when Letby was taken off duty. I doubt that's entirely true..... tiny prem babies do have an increased death risk ...... but, and this important, in the absence of other changes, did the death rate drop significantly when Letby was removed from duty? Or were there too many other changes to permit a comparison to be made?
Of curse the other question to be asked is whether there was a rising death rate before she became involved?
They did drop. I think a lot of the docs will focus on this, as while she was there it was reported to be understaffed, under supervised, and had more of the most sick babies than it should have. Once she left, everyone involved was under the microscope, and I believe they made significant changes to the way the unit worked, and the babies that were being sent there.
I'm not convinced statistical innuendo should be acceptable evidence in a mass murder trial for either the prosecution or the defence.
The prosecution defence case did not rely on "statistical innuendo". There was no inferential statistics presented. The prosecution presented eyewitness testimony of her acting badly around babies, that she had tampered with records to hide when she was on the ward, that she had stolen records related to dead babies, that she had an unnatural interest in those cases, etc. The prosecution case took months to present. It was a record-breaking trial in its length.
Unfortunately, the charge of "racism" is so powerful -- in some circles -- that it is used inappropriately more often than not. It should be obvious, for example, that neither Christians nor Muslims are races.
Don’t know about the USA but in Europe the charge of “racism” is fast losing its impact, partly because it has been hurled so often and with such incaution it feels meaningless
I’ve noticed that the Guardian has almost stopped doing those “such and such is racist” articles (eg maths, gardening, rain, your nan, a dildo, music)
I sense several reasons. They ran out of targets, they get so repetitive people stopped reading them - or caring, they began to sound mad
When they do them now they are much more muted, less strident, lacking vigour and confidence. Good
The Guardian literally did a jeans advert is racist the other day.
They did but it was lacking in self-confidence and it swiftly disappeared
A senior nurse at Lucy Letby’s hospital warned she was facing her “worst nightmare” after deadly bacteria was found on several taps in the “over-capacity” baby unit, leaked emails show.
Eirian Powell, the manager of the neonatal unit at the Countess of Chester Hospital, argued the department was “taking too many risks” and “compromising patient safety”.
The email was sent to senior managers in December 2015, the middle of the period in which there was a spike of baby deaths at the unit, for which Letby was convicted of murder.
Former Estates Management staff at the hospital also told The Telegraph that nappy pads were placed in the ceiling of the unit to prevent sewage leaking through.
As I have said, I don't know very much about the details of the Letby case, but it does seems like the place was a shit show....literally.
Tomorrow might (Sunday at 10.20pm), ITV have the first big "was she guilty" doc since the mood changed towards a potential miscarriage of justice.
Panorama are about a week behind, and I think Channel 4 have one in production.
Will be interesting to see what difference they make.
Someone upthread posted that deaths had stopped when Letby was taken off duty. I doubt that's entirely true..... tiny prem babies do have an increased death risk ...... but, and this important, in the absence of other changes, did the death rate drop significantly when Letby was removed from duty? Or were there too many other changes to permit a comparison to be made?
Of curse the other question to be asked is whether there was a rising death rate before she became involved?
The death rate on the ward doubled compared to the year before Letby started. When Letby was moved from night shifts to day shifts, there stopped being lots of deaths at night and started being lots in the day. Staff spent months trying to explain this all as having some other cause.
Go read the Coffey and Moritz book "Unmasking Lucy Letby". The whole case is fascinating and rather different from how some Letby truthers present it.
My new mega millionaire friend just sent me this tweet - not by him - to illustrate his thesis that Britain is fiscally fucked and a crash is coming soon
“The UK spent £16.4bn in debt interest (not repayment) in June
That’s £438.50 for each taxpayer- for one month. £5,260 per taxpayer per year
The UK avg salary is £37,000. On that they’ll pay £4,884 of income tax
This is top tier “I’m 13 and this is deep” material.
No, I think it’s just called “maths”
Perhaps you struggle with it
I thought his post was quite accurate. You often come out with statements that are reminiscent of what we used to think when we were teenagers (eg we are all in some game).
Does it not cross your mind that the Economics and Maths is just a smidgen more complicated than what you described. That was maths for 10 year olds (I wouldn't insult a 13 year old).
You just didn’t understand it. As is often the case
I have a degree in Mathematics and some professional qualifications covering Economics.
Would you like to tell us your qualifications in the matter just to gauge who is more likely to understand your oh so simplistic mathematical and economic grasp of what you stated?
The fact you barely understand anything is, for me, a fairly reliable indicator as to the relative utility of your comments
Perhaps you could write an article on it ?
A properly researched piece on UK debt might actually be interesting to your readers. You could hook them in with the factoid you quoted, and then explain the rest.
Why do you keep advising me what to write? It’s odd
You're welcome.
It's tedious and irritating, and you're already quite often tedious and irritating, so stop it
Frankly, FU.
It was a bit of intentional snark, which pales against your regular stream invective.
If you're irritated, and can't deal with that, then that's on you.
Really, all these petty ad hom. Comments ruin the site. Get a life!
My new mega millionaire friend just sent me this tweet - not by him - to illustrate his thesis that Britain is fiscally fucked and a crash is coming soon
“The UK spent £16.4bn in debt interest (not repayment) in June
That’s £438.50 for each taxpayer- for one month. £5,260 per taxpayer per year
The UK avg salary is £37,000. On that they’ll pay £4,884 of income tax
This is top tier “I’m 13 and this is deep” material.
No, I think it’s just called “maths”
Perhaps you struggle with it
I thought his post was quite accurate. You often come out with statements that are reminiscent of what we used to think when we were teenagers (eg we are all in some game).
Does it not cross your mind that the Economics and Maths is just a smidgen more complicated than what you described. That was maths for 10 year olds (I wouldn't insult a 13 year old).
You just didn’t understand it. As is often the case
I have a degree in Mathematics and some professional qualifications covering Economics.
Would you like to tell us your qualifications in the matter just to gauge who is more likely to understand your oh so simplistic mathematical and economic grasp of what you stated?
The fact you barely understand anything is, for me, a fairly reliable indicator as to the relative utility of your comments
Perhaps you could write an article on it ?
A properly researched piece on UK debt might actually be interesting to your readers. You could hook them in with the factoid you quoted, and then explain the rest.
Why do you keep advising me what to write? It’s odd
You're welcome.
It's tedious and irritating, and you're already quite often tedious and irritating, so stop it
Frankly, FU.
It was a bit of intentional snark, which pales against your regular stream invective.
If you're irritated, and can't deal with that, then that's on you.
Really, all these petty ad hom. Comments ruin the site. Get a life!
It’s all getting a little cranky and it’s not yet booze o clock.
My new mega millionaire friend just sent me this tweet - not by him - to illustrate his thesis that Britain is fiscally fucked and a crash is coming soon
“The UK spent £16.4bn in debt interest (not repayment) in June
That’s £438.50 for each taxpayer- for one month. £5,260 per taxpayer per year
The UK avg salary is £37,000. On that they’ll pay £4,884 of income tax
This is top tier “I’m 13 and this is deep” material.
No, I think it’s just called “maths”
Perhaps you struggle with it
I thought his post was quite accurate. You often come out with statements that are reminiscent of what we used to think when we were teenagers (eg we are all in some game).
Does it not cross your mind that the Economics and Maths is just a smidgen more complicated than what you described. That was maths for 10 year olds (I wouldn't insult a 13 year old).
You just didn’t understand it. As is often the case
I have a degree in Mathematics and some professional qualifications covering Economics.
Would you like to tell us your qualifications in the matter just to gauge who is more likely to understand your oh so simplistic mathematical and economic grasp of what you stated?
The fact you barely understand anything is, for me, a fairly reliable indicator as to the relative utility of your comments
Perhaps you could write an article on it ?
A properly researched piece on UK debt might actually be interesting to your readers. You could hook them in with the factoid you quoted, and then explain the rest.
Why do you keep advising me what to write? It’s odd
You're welcome.
It's tedious and irritating, and you're already quite often tedious and irritating, so stop it
Frankly, FU.
It was a bit of intentional snark, which pales against your regular stream invective.
If you're irritated, and can't deal with that, then that's on you.
Really, all these petty ad hom. Comments ruin the site. Get a life!
Or, you get back in your basket!
This site doesn't need a Leon mini-me, and your idol makes more unpleasant personal comments than all the rest of us combined.
A senior nurse at Lucy Letby’s hospital warned she was facing her “worst nightmare” after deadly bacteria was found on several taps in the “over-capacity” baby unit, leaked emails show.
Eirian Powell, the manager of the neonatal unit at the Countess of Chester Hospital, argued the department was “taking too many risks” and “compromising patient safety”.
The email was sent to senior managers in December 2015, the middle of the period in which there was a spike of baby deaths at the unit, for which Letby was convicted of murder.
Former Estates Management staff at the hospital also told The Telegraph that nappy pads were placed in the ceiling of the unit to prevent sewage leaking through.
As I have said, I don't know very much about the details of the Letby case, but it does seems like the place was a shit show....literally.
Tomorrow might (Sunday at 10.20pm), ITV have the first big "was she guilty" doc since the mood changed towards a potential miscarriage of justice.
Panorama are about a week behind, and I think Channel 4 have one in production.
Will be interesting to see what difference they make.
Someone upthread posted that deaths had stopped when Letby was taken off duty. I doubt that's entirely true..... tiny prem babies do have an increased death risk ...... but, and this important, in the absence of other changes, did the death rate drop significantly when Letby was removed from duty? Or were there too many other changes to permit a comparison to be made?
Of curse the other question to be asked is whether there was a rising death rate before she became involved?
The death rate on the ward doubled compared to the year before Letby started. When Letby was moved from night shifts to day shifts, there stopped being lots of deaths at night and started being lots in the day. Staff spent months trying to explain this all as having some other cause.
Go read the Coffey and Moritz book "Unmasking Lucy Letby". The whole case is fascinating and rather different from how some Letby truthers present it.
Thanks. Not conclusive but compelling.
No single piece of evidence is conclusive. The whole trial was a jigsaw of evidence. There was the insulin overdoses, the notes she took, being caught alone in a room with a collapsed neonate just watching, not triggering alarms or attempting resuscitation, also don't forget the near misses that happened that were not fatal, albeit leaving some long term damage.
Their was a 9 month trial, with expensive lawyers on both sides, and intense media scrutiny before the guilty verdict. If the conviction is wrong (everything I have read suggests the verdict is correct) then can we trust any conviction?
My new mega millionaire friend just sent me this tweet - not by him - to illustrate his thesis that Britain is fiscally fucked and a crash is coming soon
“The UK spent £16.4bn in debt interest (not repayment) in June
That’s £438.50 for each taxpayer- for one month. £5,260 per taxpayer per year
The UK avg salary is £37,000. On that they’ll pay £4,884 of income tax
This is top tier “I’m 13 and this is deep” material.
No, I think it’s just called “maths”
Perhaps you struggle with it
I thought his post was quite accurate. You often come out with statements that are reminiscent of what we used to think when we were teenagers (eg we are all in some game).
Does it not cross your mind that the Economics and Maths is just a smidgen more complicated than what you described. That was maths for 10 year olds (I wouldn't insult a 13 year old).
You just didn’t understand it. As is often the case
I have a degree in Mathematics and some professional qualifications covering Economics.
Would you like to tell us your qualifications in the matter just to gauge who is more likely to understand your oh so simplistic mathematical and economic grasp of what you stated?
The fact you barely understand anything is, for me, a fairly reliable indicator as to the relative utility of your comments
Perhaps you could write an article on it ?
A properly researched piece on UK debt might actually be interesting to your readers. You could hook them in with the factoid you quoted, and then explain the rest.
Why do you keep advising me what to write? It’s odd
You're welcome.
It's tedious and irritating, and you're already quite often tedious and irritating, so stop it
Frankly, FU.
It was a bit of intentional snark, which pales against your regular stream invective.
If you're irritated, and can't deal with that, then that's on you.
Really, all these petty ad hom. Comments ruin the site. Get a life!
Or, you get back in your basket!
This site doesn't need a Leon mini-me, and your idol makes more unpleasant personal comments than all the rest of us combined.
I think you're talking about yourself there. You're very boring and I don't have idols, least of all on here.
A senior nurse at Lucy Letby’s hospital warned she was facing her “worst nightmare” after deadly bacteria was found on several taps in the “over-capacity” baby unit, leaked emails show.
Eirian Powell, the manager of the neonatal unit at the Countess of Chester Hospital, argued the department was “taking too many risks” and “compromising patient safety”.
The email was sent to senior managers in December 2015, the middle of the period in which there was a spike of baby deaths at the unit, for which Letby was convicted of murder.
Former Estates Management staff at the hospital also told The Telegraph that nappy pads were placed in the ceiling of the unit to prevent sewage leaking through.
As I have said, I don't know very much about the details of the Letby case, but it does seems like the place was a shit show....literally.
Tomorrow might (Sunday at 10.20pm), ITV have the first big "was she guilty" doc since the mood changed towards a potential miscarriage of justice.
Panorama are about a week behind, and I think Channel 4 have one in production.
Will be interesting to see what difference they make.
Someone upthread posted that deaths had stopped when Letby was taken off duty. I doubt that's entirely true..... tiny prem babies do have an increased death risk ...... but, and this important, in the absence of other changes, did the death rate drop significantly when Letby was removed from duty? Or were there too many other changes to permit a comparison to be made?
Of curse the other question to be asked is whether there was a rising death rate before she became involved?
The death rate on the ward doubled compared to the year before Letby started. When Letby was moved from night shifts to day shifts, there stopped being lots of deaths at night and started being lots in the day. Staff spent months trying to explain this all as having some other cause.
Go read the Coffey and Moritz book "Unmasking Lucy Letby". The whole case is fascinating and rather different from how some Letby truthers present it.
Thanks. Not conclusive but compelling.
No single piece of evidence is conclusive. The whole trial was a jigsaw of evidence. There was the insulin overdoses, the notes she took, being caught alone in a room with a collapsed neonate just watching, not triggering alarms or attempting resuscitation, also don't forget the near misses that happened that were not fatal, albeit leaving some long term damage.
Their was a 9 month trial, with expensive lawyers on both sides, and intense media scrutiny before the guilty verdict. If the conviction is wrong (everything I have read suggests the verdict is correct) then can we trust any conviction?
I’ve always found it astonishing that the hospital failed to install CCTV on the ward in response to the allegations by the consultants.
Perhaps they felt that would leave them accused of being responsible if there were further deaths?
A cryptocurrency company made an ad making fun of the mess Britain finds itself. The ad was banned by the ASA
Promoting a financial investment without highlighting the risks?
That would be illegal that would
Is it not just promoting the platform ?
No different to how investment platforms advertise ?
But investment platforms have the text at the end “investments can go up and down and you may not get all your money back, etc etc”
I have managed to accumulate a few hundred thousands in pensions. I am thinking about retiring in maybe 4 years once I get the old age pension. I am increasingly anxious about where to put this money over the next few years. Our economy is a mess and getting poorer by the day. It is hard to see much growth that is not generated (short term) by debt. Very few opportunities for growth.
The western economy as a whole is not in a good place. That moron is in the White House with his ridiculous tariffs, his attack on the statistics, his appalling Big Beautiful Bill which threatens even the US's stability and financial strength, the damage he is doing is incalculable. China is wildly overexposed to a debt bubble and in danger of a collapse. Safe havens are hard to find.
If my pension funds are worth more than they are today in 4 years time I will be pleasantly surprised. If the environment for pensions is as favourable then as it is today with a major tax free lump sum and generous contributions to my pension fund on payments I would be astonished. The numbers simply do not add up.
So how do I protect myself from the chaos and crisis that is coming? It keeps me awake at night.
My new mega millionaire friend just sent me this tweet - not by him - to illustrate his thesis that Britain is fiscally fucked and a crash is coming soon
“The UK spent £16.4bn in debt interest (not repayment) in June
That’s £438.50 for each taxpayer- for one month. £5,260 per taxpayer per year
The UK avg salary is £37,000. On that they’ll pay £4,884 of income tax
It's not as bad as that, the £16.4bn figure was high for a single month, the year will probably come in at £120bn in debt interest. If you'd been reading on the day plenty of us pointed out how unsustainable this is and that the government seems intent on increasing spend not cutting it which will make everything worse.
The Tories have to start telling the unpopular truth that the UK is no longer a rich country, we're a middle income country pretending to be rich and we need to start living in that reality if we're ever going to become a rich nation again.
My new mega millionaire friend just sent me this tweet - not by him - to illustrate his thesis that Britain is fiscally fucked and a crash is coming soon
“The UK spent £16.4bn in debt interest (not repayment) in June
That’s £438.50 for each taxpayer- for one month. £5,260 per taxpayer per year
The UK avg salary is £37,000. On that they’ll pay £4,884 of income tax
This is top tier “I’m 13 and this is deep” material.
No, I think it’s just called “maths”
Perhaps you struggle with it
I thought his post was quite accurate. You often come out with statements that are reminiscent of what we used to think when we were teenagers (eg we are all in some game).
Does it not cross your mind that the Economics and Maths is just a smidgen more complicated than what you described. That was maths for 10 year olds (I wouldn't insult a 13 year old).
You just didn’t understand it. As is often the case
I have a degree in Mathematics and some professional qualifications covering Economics.
Would you like to tell us your qualifications in the matter just to gauge who is more likely to understand your oh so simplistic mathematical and economic grasp of what you stated?
The fact you barely understand anything is, for me, a fairly reliable indicator as to the relative utility of your comments
Perhaps you could write an article on it ?
A properly researched piece on UK debt might actually be interesting to your readers. You could hook them in with the factoid you quoted, and then explain the rest.
Why do you keep advising me what to write? It’s odd
You're welcome.
It's tedious and irritating, and you're already quite often tedious and irritating, so stop it
Frankly, FU.
It was a bit of intentional snark, which pales against your regular stream invective.
If you're irritated, and can't deal with that, then that's on you.
Really, all these petty ad hom. Comments ruin the site. Get a life!
It’s all getting a little cranky and it’s not yet booze o clock.
Depends where the participants are on the globe. The sun could be not so much at the yardarm but well over and sinking behind the stern lantern for them.
Both of them look completely knackered to be honest. The risk of keeping them going with the old ball simply did not pay off. If England win this it will be a win for the ages.
Two hours later - during which time I've sunbathed, eaten a custard tart, done an hour's hard writing, emailed several friends, and checked the refurb of my flat - and basically all you've done is talk about me
As a narcissist, this pleases me
As an observer of human nature, I say FFS get a life you losers and stop wanking on about someone you've never even met. You're pitifully obsessed, especially @IanB2, @kjh and @occasionalranter
There is literally something wrong with you, and I mean that in a kind way
A senior nurse at Lucy Letby’s hospital warned she was facing her “worst nightmare” after deadly bacteria was found on several taps in the “over-capacity” baby unit, leaked emails show.
Eirian Powell, the manager of the neonatal unit at the Countess of Chester Hospital, argued the department was “taking too many risks” and “compromising patient safety”.
The email was sent to senior managers in December 2015, the middle of the period in which there was a spike of baby deaths at the unit, for which Letby was convicted of murder.
Former Estates Management staff at the hospital also told The Telegraph that nappy pads were placed in the ceiling of the unit to prevent sewage leaking through.
As I have said, I don't know very much about the details of the Letby case, but it does seems like the place was a shit show....literally.
Tomorrow might (Sunday at 10.20pm), ITV have the first big "was she guilty" doc since the mood changed towards a potential miscarriage of justice.
Panorama are about a week behind, and I think Channel 4 have one in production.
Will be interesting to see what difference they make.
Someone upthread posted that deaths had stopped when Letby was taken off duty. I doubt that's entirely true..... tiny prem babies do have an increased death risk ...... but, and this important, in the absence of other changes, did the death rate drop significantly when Letby was removed from duty? Or were there too many other changes to permit a comparison to be made?
Of curse the other question to be asked is whether there was a rising death rate before she became involved?
The death rate on the ward doubled compared to the year before Letby started. When Letby was moved from night shifts to day shifts, there stopped being lots of deaths at night and started being lots in the day. Staff spent months trying to explain this all as having some other cause.
Go read the Coffey and Moritz book "Unmasking Lucy Letby". The whole case is fascinating and rather different from how some Letby truthers present it.
Thanks. Not conclusive but compelling.
No single piece of evidence is conclusive. The whole trial was a jigsaw of evidence. There was the insulin overdoses, the notes she took, being caught alone in a room with a collapsed neonate just watching, not triggering alarms or attempting resuscitation, also don't forget the near misses that happened that were not fatal, albeit leaving some long term damage.
Their was a 9 month trial, with expensive lawyers on both sides, and intense media scrutiny before the guilty verdict. If the conviction is wrong (everything I have read suggests the verdict is correct) then can we trust any conviction?
I’ve always found it astonishing that the hospital failed to install CCTV on the ward in response to the allegations by the consultants.
Perhaps they felt that would leave them accused of being responsible if there were further deaths?
I have never found the implication that senior consultants framed an innocent nurse in order to take the spotlight off their high death rate a tenable one.
If it had led to an adverse CQC report* then it would have made waves locally but not even made the national news, but being famous for having a serial killer on their staff is now something that the Countess of Chester will be known for for decades. The damage to reputation is far worse with Lucy Letby than without.
* the CQC had indeed visited previos to this spate of deaths and given a fairly positive report, even praising the quality and openness of management. This may of course merely demonstrate how useless the CQC reports are, I couldn't possibly comment.
Both of them look completely knackered to be honest. The risk of keeping them going with the old ball simply did not pay off. If England win this it will be a win for the ages.
Duckett and Crawley to knock them off by tea tomorrow!
Both of them look completely knackered to be honest. The risk of keeping them going with the old ball simply did not pay off. If England win this it will be a win for the ages.
Absolutely shocking. The old problem with England, the inability to wrap up the tail
Unlikely to make much difference in the end, we were unlikely to get 340 let alone 380
A cryptocurrency company made an ad making fun of the mess Britain finds itself. The ad was banned by the ASA
Promoting a financial investment without highlighting the risks?
That would be illegal that would
Is it not just promoting the platform ?
No different to how investment platforms advertise ?
But investment platforms have the text at the end “investments can go up and down and you may not get all your money back, etc etc”
I have managed to accumulate a few hundred thousands in pensions. I am thinking about retiring in maybe 4 years once I get the old age pension. I am increasingly anxious about where to put this money over the next few years. Our economy is a mess and getting poorer by the day. It is hard to see much growth that is not generated (short term) by debt. Very few opportunities for growth.
The western economy as a whole is not in a good place. That moron is in the White House with his ridiculous tariffs, his attack on the statistics, his appalling Big Beautiful Bill which threatens even the US's stability and financial strength, the damage he is doing is incalculable. China is wildly overexposed to a debt bubble and in danger of a collapse. Safe havens are hard to find.
If my pension funds are worth more than they are today in 4 years time I will be pleasantly surprised. If the environment for pensions is as favourable then as it is today with a major tax free lump sum and generous contributions to my pension fund on payments I would be astonished. The numbers simply do not add up.
So how do I protect myself from the chaos and crisis that is coming? It keeps me awake at night.
I retired from F/t in the NHS twenty-two years ago; my lump sum seems to be doing OK; I did touch it when I looked like needing something but I didn't and I re-invested that which I'd taken out. I've got two large and several small-ish pensions and we're OK. We downsized, which made a significant difference. We didn't, at retiring,, have to worry about supporting our children financially. Which helps. Don't worry too much. Worry kills.
A senior nurse at Lucy Letby’s hospital warned she was facing her “worst nightmare” after deadly bacteria was found on several taps in the “over-capacity” baby unit, leaked emails show.
Eirian Powell, the manager of the neonatal unit at the Countess of Chester Hospital, argued the department was “taking too many risks” and “compromising patient safety”.
The email was sent to senior managers in December 2015, the middle of the period in which there was a spike of baby deaths at the unit, for which Letby was convicted of murder.
Former Estates Management staff at the hospital also told The Telegraph that nappy pads were placed in the ceiling of the unit to prevent sewage leaking through.
As I have said, I don't know very much about the details of the Letby case, but it does seems like the place was a shit show....literally.
Tomorrow might (Sunday at 10.20pm), ITV have the first big "was she guilty" doc since the mood changed towards a potential miscarriage of justice.
Panorama are about a week behind, and I think Channel 4 have one in production.
Will be interesting to see what difference they make.
Someone upthread posted that deaths had stopped when Letby was taken off duty. I doubt that's entirely true..... tiny prem babies do have an increased death risk ...... but, and this important, in the absence of other changes, did the death rate drop significantly when Letby was removed from duty? Or were there too many other changes to permit a comparison to be made?
Of curse the other question to be asked is whether there was a rising death rate before she became involved?
The death rate on the ward doubled compared to the year before Letby started. When Letby was moved from night shifts to day shifts, there stopped being lots of deaths at night and started being lots in the day. Staff spent months trying to explain this all as having some other cause.
Go read the Coffey and Moritz book "Unmasking Lucy Letby". The whole case is fascinating and rather different from how some Letby truthers present it.
Thanks. Not conclusive but compelling.
No single piece of evidence is conclusive. The whole trial was a jigsaw of evidence. There was the insulin overdoses, the notes she took, being caught alone in a room with a collapsed neonate just watching, not triggering alarms or attempting resuscitation, also don't forget the near misses that happened that were not fatal, albeit leaving some long term damage.
Their was a 9 month trial, with expensive lawyers on both sides, and intense media scrutiny before the guilty verdict. If the conviction is wrong (everything I have read suggests the verdict is correct) then can we trust any conviction?
I’ve always found it astonishing that the hospital failed to install CCTV on the ward in response to the allegations by the consultants.
Perhaps they felt that would leave them accused of being responsible if there were further deaths?
I have never found the implication that senior consultants framed an innocent nurse in order to take the spotlight off their high death rate a tenable one.
If it had led to an adverse CQC report* then it would have made waves locally but not even made the national news, but being famous for having a serial killer on their staff is now something that the Countess of Chester will be known for for decades. The damage to reputation is far worse with Lucy Letby than without.
Yep, that is irrational from every point of view. I think that there is no doubt at all that the consultants believed that they had a demented killer on that ward and they were being ignored. Whether they were right or not is the question. I think they were but it is not straightforward.
Part 1: He delves into the history of the chamber, esp the original use of the chamber as St Stephen's Chapel.
Part 2: He says that there is yearning in Britain for meaning. He points out that secular states cannot provide this and it can go horribly wrong.
Part 3: The intercedent (name?) points out that the multifaith society we have is made possible by Britain being a Christian state as it provides the framework for secular/non-Christian spaces
Part 4: he points out that two religions are moving in: Islam and Woke. He skips over Islam but attacks Woke as a power hostile to family, communities and nations, and belives with some force that it should be destroyed and it should be a function of Parliament to destroy it
Part 5: He says that the strong gods are back, that worship of the Christian god is necessary to underpin rights and the nation
Part 6: A religious revival is necessary and that the state should be explicitly based on Christian teaching.
My first response is
Part 1: I disagree that the Church of England is the religion of "the country", as every Scot can attest. I'm not sure that England was the first Christian nation. He elides Britain and England.
Part 2: I agree that there is a yearning in Britain for meaning. I'm not sure that a secular state cannot provide this. I agree it can go horribly wrong.
Part 3: I was interested in this. It's plausible, but I don't know if it's true
Part 4: I disagree that Woke should be destroyed. I disagree that it should be a function of the state to destroy it.
Part 5: If pressed, I'd disagree with this
Part 6: I'd disagree with this. Give Caesar that which is Caesar's, give God that which is God's
Overall: Christian Nationalism in Britain, with Islam taking the place of Judaism as "tolerated ally" in the American version.
The speech deserves a longer response which I may not be in a position to give. Normally I would consider an article but RSS Conference is in September and I have no headspace. In the meantime I refer you to @Hyufd and @MattW's comments below[1][2]
Having listened (I wasn't expecting it to be Parliament, and I wasn't expecting just 11 minutes), he's trying to argue for a "Christian basis" (in his terms) to our society as the "big table" on which all the different parts of the jigsaw come together.
That's a contrast to eg the National Secular Society, who want a French style laicite, and religion to be personal, and in the closet where homosexuality used to be.
In one sense it's an attempt to leap backwards 100 years and dodge roudn everything that has happened since, to an earlier understanding, even within his own viewpoint. There's no engagement with modernism, or a post-Christian society. That is perhaps his greatest weakness, because society evolves - it does not go backwards.
He has weaknesses in his imagining of history, a lot of glosses, and it's also quite an old argument in some respects. For a comparator I'd reach for the establishment Victorian justifications of how society worked, or perhaps for the case made by reactions to the atheistic movement that arose in the 1930s, or from philosophical challenges in the 1960s. Robinson's Honest to God was a contrasting response.
It might be interesting to compare to CS Lewis's writings on British society, since he was an atheist who converted to Christianity in the 1930s, and did interesting but non-academic style writing about many questions.
Archbishop William Tempe may also be interesting background.
I think the stuff about "invading religions" is an insertion of contemporary politics.
Thanks @Viewcode for that summary, which is impressive but less than accurate in parts. Kruger does not argue that woke should be destroyed, he urges that it should be removed from the public sphere - those are two very different concepts. The freedom of belief that he argues for within a Christian country would naturally include a freedom to believe in wokism, but he wants it to become a minority sect - using the example of druidism.
How does one achieve this without demanding that people change their beliefs and values, which would be anti-freedom? Simply remove taxpayer funding and state backing. A country should not, and in the long term cannot, fund and nurture that which seeks its destruction. To every challenge this country now faces - economic, fiscal, migration, crime, social disintegration, 'woke' is the opposite of the answer. Yet every piece of research or cultural initiative that seeks a Government grant must prove that it advances the cause of DEI, not that it advances the cause of the country that funds it. That's a sample of what Kruger quite understandably wishes to eliminate.
On that point specifically, and without trying a wider engagement, I'm not sure that Kruger knows what he means by "woke" or even "DEI", so I don't see how he can actually oppose it coherently. The USA NatCons have the same problem imo - they are looking inwards, not outwards.
Has he defined his terms somewhere? In the speech, from Hansard, this is what he says:
This other religion is a hybrid of old and new ideas, and it does not have a proper name. I do not think that “woke” does justice to its seriousness. It is a combination of ancient paganism, Christian heresies and the cult of modernism, all mashed up into a deeply mistaken and deeply dangerous ideology of power that is hostile to the essential objects of our affections and our loyalties: families, communities and nations.? https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2025-07-17/debates/9A873234-C5FC-4806-BA78-A4A5672E5A4F/FutureOfTheChurchOfEngland
That strikes me as deeply confused. He's attacking something, but what does he even mean? Nor has he defined the basis of a Christian position from which he is critiquing. What is that? He can't remove X from the public sphere without identifying it.
(There may be an intriguing analogy with "The Cloud of Unknowing" from 13xx, in that perhaps Kruger may identify what he is trying to oppose by reflecting on it as if behind a cloud and seeking to identify different aspects.)
When he dsicusses a Christian stance, I see a strange melange of the person of Jesus, whilst trying to attach to it various diverse notions that do not easily fit into the Gospels or the New Testament. And there's some constrained church history there - he talks about 11c reformers (who?), puritans and evangelicals, but nothing about the return of RC which is perhaps the most successful mission to England of all in the last 500 years.
A senior nurse at Lucy Letby’s hospital warned she was facing her “worst nightmare” after deadly bacteria was found on several taps in the “over-capacity” baby unit, leaked emails show.
Eirian Powell, the manager of the neonatal unit at the Countess of Chester Hospital, argued the department was “taking too many risks” and “compromising patient safety”.
The email was sent to senior managers in December 2015, the middle of the period in which there was a spike of baby deaths at the unit, for which Letby was convicted of murder.
Former Estates Management staff at the hospital also told The Telegraph that nappy pads were placed in the ceiling of the unit to prevent sewage leaking through.
As I have said, I don't know very much about the details of the Letby case, but it does seems like the place was a shit show....literally.
Tomorrow might (Sunday at 10.20pm), ITV have the first big "was she guilty" doc since the mood changed towards a potential miscarriage of justice.
Panorama are about a week behind, and I think Channel 4 have one in production.
Will be interesting to see what difference they make.
Someone upthread posted that deaths had stopped when Letby was taken off duty. I doubt that's entirely true..... tiny prem babies do have an increased death risk ...... but, and this important, in the absence of other changes, did the death rate drop significantly when Letby was removed from duty? Or were there too many other changes to permit a comparison to be made?
Of curse the other question to be asked is whether there was a rising death rate before she became involved?
The death rate on the ward doubled compared to the year before Letby started. When Letby was moved from night shifts to day shifts, there stopped being lots of deaths at night and started being lots in the day. Staff spent months trying to explain this all as having some other cause.
Go read the Coffey and Moritz book "Unmasking Lucy Letby". The whole case is fascinating and rather different from how some Letby truthers present it.
Thanks. Not conclusive but compelling.
No single piece of evidence is conclusive. The whole trial was a jigsaw of evidence. There was the insulin overdoses, the notes she took, being caught alone in a room with a collapsed neonate just watching, not triggering alarms or attempting resuscitation, also don't forget the near misses that happened that were not fatal, albeit leaving some long term damage.
Their was a 9 month trial, with expensive lawyers on both sides, and intense media scrutiny before the guilty verdict. If the conviction is wrong (everything I have read suggests the verdict is correct) then can we trust any conviction?
Otoh, every miscarriage of justice case started with a trial and conviction by a jury. Sometimes the system gets it wrong, no matter how compelling things seemed at the time, and despite being right the vast majority of the time.
A senior nurse at Lucy Letby’s hospital warned she was facing her “worst nightmare” after deadly bacteria was found on several taps in the “over-capacity” baby unit, leaked emails show.
Eirian Powell, the manager of the neonatal unit at the Countess of Chester Hospital, argued the department was “taking too many risks” and “compromising patient safety”.
The email was sent to senior managers in December 2015, the middle of the period in which there was a spike of baby deaths at the unit, for which Letby was convicted of murder.
Former Estates Management staff at the hospital also told The Telegraph that nappy pads were placed in the ceiling of the unit to prevent sewage leaking through.
As I have said, I don't know very much about the details of the Letby case, but it does seems like the place was a shit show....literally.
Tomorrow might (Sunday at 10.20pm), ITV have the first big "was she guilty" doc since the mood changed towards a potential miscarriage of justice.
Panorama are about a week behind, and I think Channel 4 have one in production.
Will be interesting to see what difference they make.
Someone upthread posted that deaths had stopped when Letby was taken off duty. I doubt that's entirely true..... tiny prem babies do have an increased death risk ...... but, and this important, in the absence of other changes, did the death rate drop significantly when Letby was removed from duty? Or were there too many other changes to permit a comparison to be made?
Of curse the other question to be asked is whether there was a rising death rate before she became involved?
The death rate on the ward doubled compared to the year before Letby started. When Letby was moved from night shifts to day shifts, there stopped being lots of deaths at night and started being lots in the day. Staff spent months trying to explain this all as having some other cause.
Go read the Coffey and Moritz book "Unmasking Lucy Letby". The whole case is fascinating and rather different from how some Letby truthers present it.
Thanks. Not conclusive but compelling.
No single piece of evidence is conclusive. The whole trial was a jigsaw of evidence. There was the insulin overdoses, the notes she took, being caught alone in a room with a collapsed neonate just watching, not triggering alarms or attempting resuscitation, also don't forget the near misses that happened that were not fatal, albeit leaving some long term damage.
Their was a 9 month trial, with expensive lawyers on both sides, and intense media scrutiny before the guilty verdict. If the conviction is wrong (everything I have read suggests the verdict is correct) then can we trust any conviction?
I’ve always found it astonishing that the hospital failed to install CCTV on the ward in response to the allegations by the consultants.
Perhaps they felt that would leave them accused of being responsible if there were further deaths?
I have never found the implication that senior consultants framed an innocent nurse in order to take the spotlight off their high death rate a tenable one.
If it had led to an adverse CQC report* then it would have made waves locally but not even made the national news, but being famous for having a serial killer on their staff is now something that the Countess of Chester will be known for for decades. The damage to reputation is far worse with Lucy Letby than without.
Easy easy easy....we have Stokes right...oh....but we do bat deep....oh....we are missing our best batter of the bowlers.
Overton is probably a better bat than Woakes and Gus has a test century so its not all bad! But yeah, not a easy prospect
Woakes has quite a bit better average in FC and of course he has played loads of test cricket where you rarely face dobbers to pad your average, and has on many occasions constructed an innings over many hours.
T20, Overton is worked on becoming very handy smasher.
A cryptocurrency company made an ad making fun of the mess Britain finds itself. The ad was banned by the ASA
Promoting a financial investment without highlighting the risks?
That would be illegal that would
Is it not just promoting the platform ?
No different to how investment platforms advertise ?
But investment platforms have the text at the end “investments can go up and down and you may not get all your money back, etc etc”
I have managed to accumulate a few hundred thousands in pensions. I am thinking about retiring in maybe 4 years once I get the old age pension. I am increasingly anxious about where to put this money over the next few years. Our economy is a mess and getting poorer by the day. It is hard to see much growth that is not generated (short term) by debt. Very few opportunities for growth.
The western economy as a whole is not in a good place. That moron is in the White House with his ridiculous tariffs, his attack on the statistics, his appalling Big Beautiful Bill which threatens even the US's stability and financial strength, the damage he is doing is incalculable. China is wildly overexposed to a debt bubble and in danger of a collapse. Safe havens are hard to find.
If my pension funds are worth more than they are today in 4 years time I will be pleasantly surprised. If the environment for pensions is as favourable then as it is today with a major tax free lump sum and generous contributions to my pension fund on payments I would be astonished. The numbers simply do not add up.
So how do I protect myself from the chaos and crisis that is coming? It keeps me awake at night.
See an IFA. Your needs will differ from others.
All I know in all the time I’ve been invested is there have been issues. Dotcom Bubble, financial crash , Covid, Russia invades Ukraine, Israel attacks Gaza etc etc. yet things bounce back over time.
Part 1: He delves into the history of the chamber, esp the original use of the chamber as St Stephen's Chapel.
Part 2: He says that there is yearning in Britain for meaning. He points out that secular states cannot provide this and it can go horribly wrong.
Part 3: The intercedent (name?) points out that the multifaith society we have is made possible by Britain being a Christian state as it provides the framework for secular/non-Christian spaces
Part 4: he points out that two religions are moving in: Islam and Woke. He skips over Islam but attacks Woke as a power hostile to family, communities and nations, and belives with some force that it should be destroyed and it should be a function of Parliament to destroy it
Part 5: He says that the strong gods are back, that worship of the Christian god is necessary to underpin rights and the nation
Part 6: A religious revival is necessary and that the state should be explicitly based on Christian teaching.
My first response is
Part 1: I disagree that the Church of England is the religion of "the country", as every Scot can attest. I'm not sure that England was the first Christian nation. He elides Britain and England.
Part 2: I agree that there is a yearning in Britain for meaning. I'm not sure that a secular state cannot provide this. I agree it can go horribly wrong.
Part 3: I was interested in this. It's plausible, but I don't know if it's true
Part 4: I disagree that Woke should be destroyed. I disagree that it should be a function of the state to destroy it.
Part 5: If pressed, I'd disagree with this
Part 6: I'd disagree with this. Give Caesar that which is Caesar's, give God that which is God's
Overall: Christian Nationalism in Britain, with Islam taking the place of Judaism as "tolerated ally" in the American version.
The speech deserves a longer response which I may not be in a position to give. Normally I would consider an article but RSS Conference is in September and I have no headspace. In the meantime I refer you to @Hyufd and @MattW's comments below[1][2]
On Paddy Power, it's 1/3 India, 9/4 England and 100/1 the Draw (or is that a Tie?).
If we're not going to last 50 overs, 1/3 looks a bet with a quick return if you have £30,000 down the back of the sofa (and who on here doesn't apparently?).
Comments
They are about as attractive as having a large heat pump in the back garden.
Also, you have a very weird idea of how people get very rich, if they are self made
They tend to have unique skills which cannot be replaced. That’s why we aren’t all multi millionaires
- Rightmove: https://www.rightmove.co.uk/news/articles/property-news/house-prices-fall-jul25/
- Halifax: https://www.halifax.co.uk/media-centre/house-price-index.html
- Halifax II: https://www.halifax.co.uk/assets/pdf/june-2025-halifax-house-price-index.pdf
- UK House Price Index: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/uk-house-price-index-for-may-2025/uk-house-price-index-summary-may-2025
Note that they are all a bit laggy, with the Rightmove one the least laggy and the UK House Price Index the most laggy.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxSegKzbPgc
(I'm saying this in the hope that it means England will somehow bat out for the draw.)
There's a systemic issue if it plunges people into negative equity though. Not sure how to do deal with that - otherwise, it's great news for renters and dreadful news for minted outright owners. The mortgage class is a shrinking proportion and the mainstream parties need to grow and defend that class if they are to win elections.
And - I just checked - quite a lot of rain on Monday as well
The series win may be saved by Sergeant Squally-Showers, GC
No matter how irreplaceable some people are, they're not generating their wealth in a vacuum.
It was a bit of intentional snark, which pales against your regular stream invective.
If you're irritated, and can't deal with that, then that's on you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKtSsMgE18k
I never thought he'd get it, hence no tip. Outside shot of 2nd, I thought. Astonishing surprise.
PB is not a good place to post under these circumstances (I can think of another poster of the same ilk). PBs population is not made up of the average joe. It has a wide spread of deep knowledge on so many subjects.
MPs with subscriptions include Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds, who expensed a two-year subscription for NordVPN in April 2024 — and Labour MP Sarah Champion, who in 2022 urged the then-Conservative government to examine if widespread VPN usage among teenagers could undermine the protections afforded by age checks.
https://www.politico.eu/article/britain-mps-charge-vpns-expenses-minister-caution-tech-jonathan-reynolds-data/
For me, but not for thee.
Sounds like a recruitment agency.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMgUhZTNPRE
This was posted in the early hours and shares the suspicion previously posted here that China's much publicised build-up against Taiwan is really a cover for taking back their half of Siberia.
How does one achieve this without demanding that people change their beliefs and values, which would be anti-freedom? Simply remove taxpayer funding and state backing. A country should not, and in the long term cannot, fund and nurture that which seeks its destruction. To every challenge this country now faces - economic, fiscal, migration, crime, social disintegration, 'woke' is the opposite of the answer. Yet every piece of research or cultural initiative that seeks a Government grant must prove that it advances the cause of DEI, not that it advances the cause of the country that funds it. That's a sample of what Kruger quite understandably wishes to eliminate.
HM Chief Inspector of Constabulary warns factors which fuelled the violence, such as community tensions and online misinformation, persist
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/08/02/summer-riots-could-happen-again-says-police-watchdog/
The authorities keep pushing this narrative to the media. I find it quite odd. The UK rarely does rioting, certainly not on large scale for extended periods.
‘ More I think about this ad the more I think it reflects a rubicon moment. Not because loads of Brits are going to suddenly invest in crypto. But because a US based company felt comfortable/able to market itself to Brits themselves on the basis of things in the UK being rubbish!’
https://x.com/luketryl/status/1951664440597750031?s=61
Go read the Coffey and Moritz book "Unmasking Lucy Letby". The whole case is fascinating and rather different from how some Letby truthers present it.
This site doesn't need a Leon mini-me, and your idol makes more unpleasant personal comments than all the rest of us combined.
Their was a 9 month trial, with expensive lawyers on both sides, and intense media scrutiny before the guilty verdict. If the conviction is wrong (everything I have read suggests the verdict is correct) then can we trust any conviction?
Perhaps they felt that would leave them accused of being responsible if there were further deaths?
The western economy as a whole is not in a good place. That moron is in the White House with his ridiculous tariffs, his attack on the statistics, his appalling Big Beautiful Bill which threatens even the US's stability and financial strength, the damage he is doing is incalculable. China is wildly overexposed to a debt bubble and in danger of a collapse. Safe havens are hard to find.
If my pension funds are worth more than they are today in 4 years time I will be pleasantly surprised. If the environment for pensions is as favourable then as it is today with a major tax free lump sum and generous contributions to my pension fund on payments I would be astonished. The numbers simply do not add up.
So how do I protect myself from the chaos and crisis that is coming? It keeps me awake at night.
The Tories have to start telling the unpopular truth that the UK is no longer a rich country, we're a middle income country pretending to be rich and we need to start living in that reality if we're ever going to become a rich nation again.
As a narcissist, this pleases me
As an observer of human nature, I say FFS get a life you losers and stop wanking on about someone you've never even met. You're pitifully obsessed, especially @IanB2, @kjh and @occasionalranter
There is literally something wrong with you, and I mean that in a kind way
If it had led to an adverse CQC report* then it would have made waves locally but not even made the national news, but being famous for having a serial killer on their staff is now something that the Countess of Chester will be known for for decades. The damage to reputation is far worse with Lucy Letby than without.
* the CQC had indeed visited previos to this spate of deaths and given a fairly positive report, even praising the quality and openness of management. This may of course merely demonstrate how useless the CQC reports are, I couldn't possibly comment.
Unlikely to make much difference in the end, we were unlikely to get 340 let alone 380
We didn't, at retiring,, have to worry about supporting our children financially. Which helps.
Don't worry too much. Worry kills.
Has he defined his terms somewhere? In the speech, from Hansard, this is what he says:
This other religion is a hybrid of old and new ideas, and it does not have a proper name. I do not think that “woke” does justice to its seriousness. It is a combination of ancient paganism, Christian heresies and the cult of modernism, all mashed up into a deeply mistaken and deeply dangerous ideology of power that is hostile to the essential objects of our affections and our loyalties: families, communities and nations.?
https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2025-07-17/debates/9A873234-C5FC-4806-BA78-A4A5672E5A4F/FutureOfTheChurchOfEngland
That strikes me as deeply confused. He's attacking something, but what does he even mean? Nor has he defined the basis of a Christian position from which he is critiquing. What is that? He can't remove X from the public sphere without identifying it.
(There may be an intriguing analogy with "The Cloud of Unknowing" from 13xx, in that perhaps Kruger may identify what he is trying to oppose by reflecting on it as if behind a cloud and seeking to identify different aspects.)
When he dsicusses a Christian stance, I see a strange melange of the person of Jesus, whilst trying to attach to it various diverse notions that do not easily fit into the Gospels or the New Testament. And there's some constrained church history there - he talks about 11c reformers (who?), puritans and evangelicals, but nothing about the return of RC which is perhaps the most successful mission to England of all in the last 500 years.
Just thoughts.
But yeah, not a easy prospect
T20, Overton is worked on becoming very handy smasher.
All I know in all the time I’ve been invested is there have been issues. Dotcom Bubble, financial crash , Covid, Russia invades Ukraine, Israel attacks Gaza etc etc. yet things bounce back over time.
India 1.44
Draw 120
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/en/cricket/test-matches/england-v-india-betting-34556642
If we're not going to last 50 overs, 1/3 looks a bet with a quick return if you have £30,000 down the back of the sofa (and who on here doesn't apparently?).