Skip to content

The Tories are now in fifth place (with younger voters) – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,718
edited 3:17PM in General
The Tories are now in fifth place (with younger voters) – politicalbetting.com

@TomTugendhat setting out some hard truths for the Conservatives. Young people have been let down since the late ‘90s as people with assets / equity have gained while people without a home / shares / secure work have lost out. Says the triple lock is unsustainable. pic.twitter.com/zuY1csNJrK

Read the full story here

«134

Comments

  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 67,777
    edited 3:22PM
    As far as your comment on the triple lock is concerned every party is signed up to it indefinitely

    Apparently the Lib Dems are minor party status as well !!!
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 68,334

    As far as your comment on the triple lock is concerned every party is signed up to it indefinitely

    Apparently the Lib Dems are minor party status as well !!!

    Madness.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 45,752
    Are those figures on the back projection correct? They seem to add up to 100% on both left and right.

    England only?
  • FossFoss Posts: 1,817
    Whose numbers are those? They look very different to YouGov's (narrower ranged) Zoomer numbers where it looks like the Greens (and possibly the LDs) are about to give Labour a kicking...
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 20,427
    edited 3:26PM
    There's probably a risk of too much attention being paid to the triple lock. It's a useful indicator of whether a party is remotely serious, but it's far from being the be-all and end-all.

    Someone needs to do some serious thinking that goes a bit deeper than that.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 124,148
    edited 3:28PM
    Carnyx said:

    Are those figures on the back projection correct? They seem to add up to 100% on both left and right.

    England only?

    Yes, there's some Wales and Scotland polling AIUI conducted too but not on any screenshots yet.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 67,777

    There's probably a risk of too much attention being paid to the triple lock. It's a useful indicator of whether a party is remotely serious, but it's far from being the be-all and end-all.

    Subscribe needs to do some serious thinking that goes a bit deeper than that.

    It's pointless discussing the triple lock if every party endorse it for fear of the electorate

    They are all as bad as each other
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 34,889

    I am not sure I can be in the same party as Robert Jenrick.

    If the party wants to go down the Jenrick route then it deserves to die.

    Just in case anyone was naive enough to take his comments last night as throwaway chat at a Tory dinner, he comes up today demanding that we TAKE OUR COUNTRY BACK.

    We're now in a polity where the parties of the right are so hard over to the right that they have to compete with each other about who can stoke division and hate the hardest.

    Sorry mate, the party is cooked. Because even if Badenoch is ousted you're getting *that* as leader, after whom there will be little left.
    If Bob was dog whistling for clicks and headlines he can award himself an A*.
    It's unusual for a prospective leader of one of the main parties to persuade me *not* to vote for a party he's in charge of before he even gets the job! well done, Jenrick!
    I suspect Honest Bob has calculated that for every JosiasJessop he repels he attracts ten Lucy Connollys.
    Like it or not, an awful lot of people in the country think Farage is right about immigration. People like my next door neighbour. Not a beer swilling, skinhead, BNP type racist, just someone who think that immigration is out of control.

    I am not suggesting he is wrong or right, but if you want to get elected you need votes. And you need enough to get you a majority.
    Good politicians... well, bad politicians as well... I guess I'm saying effective politicians don't just follow the little-thought-through views of the electorate. They persuade the electorate. They respond to the concerns of the electorate (they think immigration has been out of control), but not by just giving them the obvious kneejerk response (saying immigration is still out of control and all immigrants are bad).
    I think good politicians are also ones who realise that sometimes the plebs are right.
    Jenrick has taken the media by storm today and certainly made the news

    Apparently Badenoch is being interviewed by Beth Rigby from the conference live on Sky at 5.00pm
    Yes, after last week's disastrous Labour Party Conference your party has captured the narrative (captured exclusively by Jenrick).

    You have had a great day today! No news is bad news, and he has stolen the news cycle.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 124,148
    Foss said:

    Whose numbers are those? They look very different to YouGov's (narrower ranged) Zoomer numbers where it looks like the Greens (and possibly the LDs) are about to give Labour a kicking...

    https://ukonward.com/reports/becoming-blue/
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 33,208
    Squeaky bum time for the 1.01 backers (now 1.3) in the ladies' cricket as England chase Bangladesh.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 124,148
    Carnyx said:

    Are those figures on the back projection correct? They seem to add up to 100% on both left and right.

    England only?

    So here's the GB wide figures.


  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 57,278

    Squeaky bum time for the 1.01 backers (now 1.3) in the ladies' cricket as England chase Bangladesh.

    This is on in my pub. They’ve got the overs left if they can keep hold of the wickets.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 57,409

    There's probably a risk of too much attention being paid to the triple lock. It's a useful indicator of whether a party is remotely serious, but it's far from being the be-all and end-all.

    Subscribe needs to do some serious thinking that goes a bit deeper than that.

    It's pointless discussing the triple lock if every party endorse it for fear of the electorate

    They are all as bad as each other
    Which is why the way out is taxation.

    The basic pension, at approx the IT threshold, isnt a lot.

    The issue is, people on 50k pensions sticking that on top.

    So

    1) merge employee NI and IT.
    2) Pensioners on the basic rate of tax continue with the old rate of tax.
    3) Pensioners on the higher rate pay the new rate of tax (old IT + NI)
    4) Quadruple lock - the state pension sets the tax free allowance for everyone.

    This means that everyone pays NI (in effect) on all income. Except poorer pensioners.

    And you can boast of improving the triple lock to a quadruple lock.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 35,826
    Sandpit said:

    Squeaky bum time for the 1.01 backers (now 1.3) in the ladies' cricket as England chase Bangladesh.

    This is on in my pub. They’ve got the overs left if they can keep hold of the wickets.
    Let Bangladesh spinners loose on a pitch designed for spin and the opposition have problems.
  • FossFoss Posts: 1,817

    Foss said:

    Whose numbers are those? They look very different to YouGov's (narrower ranged) Zoomer numbers where it looks like the Greens (and possibly the LDs) are about to give Labour a kicking...

    https://ukonward.com/reports/becoming-blue/
    3.5.1's...

    “Government should cut taxes and redistribute less income” (48%), in comparison with a minority who instead agree that the “Government should increase taxes and redistribute more income” (28%)."

    ...really goes against popular narrative.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 30,801
    These figures only underline why the Tories can be level with Labour and still in a worse position for the next election.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 30,801
    The triple lock is always mentioned.
    Home ownership not so much.
    Student debt even less. 6 figures is not uncommon now.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 21,220

    I am not sure I can be in the same party as Robert Jenrick.

    If the party wants to go down the Jenrick route then it deserves to die.

    Just in case anyone was naive enough to take his comments last night as throwaway chat at a Tory dinner, he comes up today demanding that we TAKE OUR COUNTRY BACK.

    We're now in a polity where the parties of the right are so hard over to the right that they have to compete with each other about who can stoke division and hate the hardest.

    Sorry mate, the party is cooked. Because even if Badenoch is ousted you're getting *that* as leader, after whom there will be little left.
    If Bob was dog whistling for clicks and headlines he can award himself an A*.
    It's unusual for a prospective leader of one of the main parties to persuade me *not* to vote for a party he's in charge of before he even gets the job! well done, Jenrick!
    I suspect Honest Bob has calculated that for every JosiasJessop he repels he attracts ten Lucy Connollys.
    Like it or not, an awful lot of people in the country think Farage is right about immigration. People like my next door neighbour. Not a beer swilling, skinhead, BNP type racist, just someone who think that immigration is out of control.

    I am not suggesting he is wrong or right, but if you want to get elected you need votes. And you need enough to get you a majority.
    Good politicians... well, bad politicians as well... I guess I'm saying effective politicians don't just follow the little-thought-through views of the electorate. They persuade the electorate. They respond to the concerns of the electorate (they think immigration has been out of control), but not by just giving them the obvious kneejerk response (saying immigration is still out of control and all immigrants are bad).
    I think good politicians are also ones who realise that sometimes the plebs are right.
    Jenrick has taken the media by storm today and certainly made the news

    Apparently Badenoch is being interviewed by Beth Rigby from the conference live on Sky at 5.00pm
    Yes, after last week's disastrous Labour Party Conference your party has captured the narrative (captured exclusively by Jenrick).

    You have had a great day today! No news is bad news, and he has stolen the news cycle.
    I'm in France so it's not ideal to get the full flavour of what's going on, But am I right in thinking

    1. Jenrick has screwed his chances of ever leading a group of boy scouts let alone a political Party

    or

    2. Has the leadership of the Tory Party nailed on?
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 25,292
    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    The Tories seem intent on casting themselves into irrelevance by their attempt to out-Reform Reform.

    They appear to have missed the fact that there is a gap in the market on economic restructuring/radical reform of the state literally crying out for someone to fill it, and instead are majoring on who can announce the most authoritarian policy/say the most dubious comment.

    It is a desperate strategy I believe is doomed to fail. I am not even saying they shouldn’t tack to the right on certain topics, but that should not have been their emphasis. Anyone who wants a strong border policy and wants a culture war is already deserting them for Farage. They cannot offer anything different in that space.

    There may be a gap in the market, but how big is it?
    It's like the post earlier bemoaning the LD's not being Orange Book enough.
    There's plenty on here up for it. But few in the general population.
    And most of us who accept the patriotic need for economic restructuring shuffle away a bit nervously when its consequences look like getting too near us. If you want to know why Mel Stride is planning to not touch the triple lock, look at who votes for his party. Same goes for those who want to leave taxes unraised and those who want to leave public spending uncut.

    The politics were hard enough in 2008-10, they are harder still now.
    Indeed.
    There's a good reason why the "economic restructuring" which is wildly popular on PB is exclusively a tax cuts for the well off, benefits and service cuts for the rest kind.
    Why should all parties inhabit a space that requires high taxes and high spending in perpetuity? Why is there not a space for a party arguing for a smaller state, lower taxes, and working better with public expenditure?

    This is not a message that is just the preserve of the “well off”, as you term it.
    The State has shrunk, in many ways.

    Let's break down government spending - education, healthcare, defence, pensions etc - and look at how much they were as a percentage of GDP in both 2007 and 2024:
                    2007/8          2024/5          Change
    Health 7.1% 9.2% +2.1pp
    Education 5.6% 4.1% -1.5pp
    Defence 2.4% 2.1% -0.3pp
    State pensions 3.5% 5.1% +1.6pp
    Interest 2.0% 3.1% +1.1pp
    Pulic order 2.1% 1.9% -0.2pp
    As a percentage of GDP, the amount we spend on justice (police, prisons and courts) has fallen by a tenth, defence has dropped more. While education spending has sharply contracted.

    By contrast what we spend on oldies has risen shaply. Spending on health has risen by as much as we spend in total on defence! Spending on state pensions has increased by the equivalent of 40% of the education budget.

    There is genuine austerity in government. We just don't see it, because we're spending ever more on oldies. (And bear in mind, this excludes all the local government spending on oldies.)
    We are a country in complete denial about our demographics. That, and housing, is pretty much the reason for our bad governance.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 20,427
    Roger said:

    I am not sure I can be in the same party as Robert Jenrick.

    If the party wants to go down the Jenrick route then it deserves to die.

    Just in case anyone was naive enough to take his comments last night as throwaway chat at a Tory dinner, he comes up today demanding that we TAKE OUR COUNTRY BACK.

    We're now in a polity where the parties of the right are so hard over to the right that they have to compete with each other about who can stoke division and hate the hardest.

    Sorry mate, the party is cooked. Because even if Badenoch is ousted you're getting *that* as leader, after whom there will be little left.
    If Bob was dog whistling for clicks and headlines he can award himself an A*.
    It's unusual for a prospective leader of one of the main parties to persuade me *not* to vote for a party he's in charge of before he even gets the job! well done, Jenrick!
    I suspect Honest Bob has calculated that for every JosiasJessop he repels he attracts ten Lucy Connollys.
    Like it or not, an awful lot of people in the country think Farage is right about immigration. People like my next door neighbour. Not a beer swilling, skinhead, BNP type racist, just someone who think that immigration is out of control.

    I am not suggesting he is wrong or right, but if you want to get elected you need votes. And you need enough to get you a majority.
    Good politicians... well, bad politicians as well... I guess I'm saying effective politicians don't just follow the little-thought-through views of the electorate. They persuade the electorate. They respond to the concerns of the electorate (they think immigration has been out of control), but not by just giving them the obvious kneejerk response (saying immigration is still out of control and all immigrants are bad).
    I think good politicians are also ones who realise that sometimes the plebs are right.
    Jenrick has taken the media by storm today and certainly made the news

    Apparently Badenoch is being interviewed by Beth Rigby from the conference live on Sky at 5.00pm
    Yes, after last week's disastrous Labour Party Conference your party has captured the narrative (captured exclusively by Jenrick).

    You have had a great day today! No news is bad news, and he has stolen the news cycle.
    I'm in France so it's not ideal to get the full flavour of what's going on, But am I right in thinking

    1. Jenrick has screwed his chances of ever leading a group of boy scouts let alone a political Party

    or

    2. Has the leadership of the Tory Party nailed on?
    I think he had the leadership of the Conservatives nailed on.

    Whether they will amount to much more than a group of boy scouts after the next election is doubtful.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 67,777

    I am not sure I can be in the same party as Robert Jenrick.

    If the party wants to go down the Jenrick route then it deserves to die.

    Just in case anyone was naive enough to take his comments last night as throwaway chat at a Tory dinner, he comes up today demanding that we TAKE OUR COUNTRY BACK.

    We're now in a polity where the parties of the right are so hard over to the right that they have to compete with each other about who can stoke division and hate the hardest.

    Sorry mate, the party is cooked. Because even if Badenoch is ousted you're getting *that* as leader, after whom there will be little left.
    If Bob was dog whistling for clicks and headlines he can award himself an A*.
    It's unusual for a prospective leader of one of the main parties to persuade me *not* to vote for a party he's in charge of before he even gets the job! well done, Jenrick!
    I suspect Honest Bob has calculated that for every JosiasJessop he repels he attracts ten Lucy Connollys.
    Like it or not, an awful lot of people in the country think Farage is right about immigration. People like my next door neighbour. Not a beer swilling, skinhead, BNP type racist, just someone who think that immigration is out of control.

    I am not suggesting he is wrong or right, but if you want to get elected you need votes. And you need enough to get you a majority.
    Good politicians... well, bad politicians as well... I guess I'm saying effective politicians don't just follow the little-thought-through views of the electorate. They persuade the electorate. They respond to the concerns of the electorate (they think immigration has been out of control), but not by just giving them the obvious kneejerk response (saying immigration is still out of control and all immigrants are bad).
    I think good politicians are also ones who realise that sometimes the plebs are right.
    Jenrick has taken the media by storm today and certainly made the news

    Apparently Badenoch is being interviewed by Beth Rigby from the conference live on Sky at 5.00pm
    Yes, after last week's disastrous Labour Party Conference your party has captured the narrative (captured exclusively by Jenrick).

    You have had a great day today! No news is bad news, and he has stolen the news cycle.
    I had a great day shopping with my good lady and not really into the news

    It is good to realise everything is not about politics
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 57,278
    edited 3:51PM
    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    The Tories seem intent on casting themselves into irrelevance by their attempt to out-Reform Reform.

    They appear to have missed the fact that there is a gap in the market on economic restructuring/radical reform of the state literally crying out for someone to fill it, and instead are majoring on who can announce the most authoritarian policy/say the most dubious comment.

    It is a desperate strategy I believe is doomed to fail. I am not even saying they shouldn’t tack to the right on certain topics, but that should not have been their emphasis. Anyone who wants a strong border policy and wants a culture war is already deserting them for Farage. They cannot offer anything different in that space.

    There may be a gap in the market, but how big is it?
    It's like the post earlier bemoaning the LD's not being Orange Book enough.
    There's plenty on here up for it. But few in the general population.
    And most of us who accept the patriotic need for economic restructuring shuffle away a bit nervously when its consequences look like getting too near us. If you want to know why Mel Stride is planning to not touch the triple lock, look at who votes for his party. Same goes for those who want to leave taxes unraised and those who want to leave public spending uncut.

    The politics were hard enough in 2008-10, they are harder still now.
    Indeed.
    There's a good reason why the "economic restructuring" which is wildly popular on PB is exclusively a tax cuts for the well off, benefits and service cuts for the rest kind.
    Why should all parties inhabit a space that requires high taxes and high spending in perpetuity? Why is there not a space for a party arguing for a smaller state, lower taxes, and working better with public expenditure?

    This is not a message that is just the preserve of the “well off”, as you term it.
    The State has shrunk, in many ways.

    Let's break down government spending - education, healthcare, defence, pensions etc - and look at how much they were as a percentage of GDP in both 2007 and 2024:
                    2007/8          2024/5          Change
    Health 7.1% 9.2% +2.1pp
    Education 5.6% 4.1% -1.5pp
    Defence 2.4% 2.1% -0.3pp
    State pensions 3.5% 5.1% +1.6pp
    Interest 2.0% 3.1% +1.1pp
    Pulic order 2.1% 1.9% -0.2pp
    As a percentage of GDP, the amount we spend on justice (police, prisons and courts) has fallen by a tenth, defence has dropped more. While education spending has sharply contracted.

    By contrast what we spend on oldies has risen shaply. Spending on health has risen by as much as we spend in total on defence! Spending on state pensions has increased by the equivalent of 40% of the education budget.

    There is genuine austerity in government. We just don't see it, because we're spending ever more on oldies. (And bear in mind, this excludes all the local government spending on oldies.)
    Ooh, so much to argue with there.

    2007/8 is a seriously bad baseline, right at the top of a boom when government was somehow running a deficit.

    Spending as a percentage of GDP is also a terrible measure to use, as it goes up (good, yay!) as the productive economy shrinks.

    The focus should be on the scope of the State, and the size of the debt interest bill which now makes monetary policy more significant than fiscal policy.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 67,777
    Roger said:

    I am not sure I can be in the same party as Robert Jenrick.

    If the party wants to go down the Jenrick route then it deserves to die.

    Just in case anyone was naive enough to take his comments last night as throwaway chat at a Tory dinner, he comes up today demanding that we TAKE OUR COUNTRY BACK.

    We're now in a polity where the parties of the right are so hard over to the right that they have to compete with each other about who can stoke division and hate the hardest.

    Sorry mate, the party is cooked. Because even if Badenoch is ousted you're getting *that* as leader, after whom there will be little left.
    If Bob was dog whistling for clicks and headlines he can award himself an A*.
    It's unusual for a prospective leader of one of the main parties to persuade me *not* to vote for a party he's in charge of before he even gets the job! well done, Jenrick!
    I suspect Honest Bob has calculated that for every JosiasJessop he repels he attracts ten Lucy Connollys.
    Like it or not, an awful lot of people in the country think Farage is right about immigration. People like my next door neighbour. Not a beer swilling, skinhead, BNP type racist, just someone who think that immigration is out of control.

    I am not suggesting he is wrong or right, but if you want to get elected you need votes. And you need enough to get you a majority.
    Good politicians... well, bad politicians as well... I guess I'm saying effective politicians don't just follow the little-thought-through views of the electorate. They persuade the electorate. They respond to the concerns of the electorate (they think immigration has been out of control), but not by just giving them the obvious kneejerk response (saying immigration is still out of control and all immigrants are bad).
    I think good politicians are also ones who realise that sometimes the plebs are right.
    Jenrick has taken the media by storm today and certainly made the news

    Apparently Badenoch is being interviewed by Beth Rigby from the conference live on Sky at 5.00pm
    Yes, after last week's disastrous Labour Party Conference your party has captured the narrative (captured exclusively by Jenrick).

    You have had a great day today! No news is bad news, and he has stolen the news cycle.
    I'm in France so it's not ideal to get the full flavour of what's going on, But am I right in thinking

    1. Jenrick has screwed his chances of ever leading a group of boy scouts let alone a political Party

    or

    2. Has the leadership of the Tory Party nailed on?
    The same France that is collapsing into political turmoil and chaos

    I would rather be here in Wales and the UK despite its problems
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 61,792
    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    The Tories seem intent on casting themselves into irrelevance by their attempt to out-Reform Reform.

    They appear to have missed the fact that there is a gap in the market on economic restructuring/radical reform of the state literally crying out for someone to fill it, and instead are majoring on who can announce the most authoritarian policy/say the most dubious comment.

    It is a desperate strategy I believe is doomed to fail. I am not even saying they shouldn’t tack to the right on certain topics, but that should not have been their emphasis. Anyone who wants a strong border policy and wants a culture war is already deserting them for Farage. They cannot offer anything different in that space.

    There may be a gap in the market, but how big is it?
    It's like the post earlier bemoaning the LD's not being Orange Book enough.
    There's plenty on here up for it. But few in the general population.
    And most of us who accept the patriotic need for economic restructuring shuffle away a bit nervously when its consequences look like getting too near us. If you want to know why Mel Stride is planning to not touch the triple lock, look at who votes for his party. Same goes for those who want to leave taxes unraised and those who want to leave public spending uncut.

    The politics were hard enough in 2008-10, they are harder still now.
    Indeed.
    There's a good reason why the "economic restructuring" which is wildly popular on PB is exclusively a tax cuts for the well off, benefits and service cuts for the rest kind.
    Why should all parties inhabit a space that requires high taxes and high spending in perpetuity? Why is there not a space for a party arguing for a smaller state, lower taxes, and working better with public expenditure?

    This is not a message that is just the preserve of the “well off”, as you term it.
    The State has shrunk, in many ways.

    Let's break down government spending - education, healthcare, defence, pensions etc - and look at how much they were as a percentage of GDP in both 2007 and 2024:
                    2007/8          2024/5          Change
    Health 7.1% 9.2% +2.1pp
    Education 5.6% 4.1% -1.5pp
    Defence 2.4% 2.1% -0.3pp
    State pensions 3.5% 5.1% +1.6pp
    Interest 2.0% 3.1% +1.1pp
    Pulic order 2.1% 1.9% -0.2pp
    As a percentage of GDP, the amount we spend on justice (police, prisons and courts) has fallen by a tenth, defence has dropped more. While education spending has sharply contracted.

    By contrast what we spend on oldies has risen shaply. Spending on health has risen by as much as we spend in total on defence! Spending on state pensions has increased by the equivalent of 40% of the education budget.

    There is genuine austerity in government. We just don't see it, because we're spending ever more on oldies. (And bear in mind, this excludes all the local government spending on oldies.)
    Ooh, so much to argue with there.

    2007/8 is a seriously bad baseline, right at the top of a boom when government was somehow running a deficit.

    Spending as a percentage of GDP is also a terrible measure to use, as it goes up (good, yay!) as the productive economy shrinks.
    Happy to use whatever year you like as a baseline, but the % on healthcare and on pensions is rising with an ageing population and the triple lock irrespective of which years you use.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 7,202
    Lovely time in Majorca. The only thing I have seen of consequence is the loony leftiness of Gary Neville. He is an arse of epic proportions.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 12,106
    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    The Tories seem intent on casting themselves into irrelevance by their attempt to out-Reform Reform.

    They appear to have missed the fact that there is a gap in the market on economic restructuring/radical reform of the state literally crying out for someone to fill it, and instead are majoring on who can announce the most authoritarian policy/say the most dubious comment.

    It is a desperate strategy I believe is doomed to fail. I am not even saying they shouldn’t tack to the right on certain topics, but that should not have been their emphasis. Anyone who wants a strong border policy and wants a culture war is already deserting them for Farage. They cannot offer anything different in that space.

    There may be a gap in the market, but how big is it?
    It's like the post earlier bemoaning the LD's not being Orange Book enough.
    There's plenty on here up for it. But few in the general population.
    And most of us who accept the patriotic need for economic restructuring shuffle away a bit nervously when its consequences look like getting too near us. If you want to know why Mel Stride is planning to not touch the triple lock, look at who votes for his party. Same goes for those who want to leave taxes unraised and those who want to leave public spending uncut.

    The politics were hard enough in 2008-10, they are harder still now.
    Indeed.
    There's a good reason why the "economic restructuring" which is wildly popular on PB is exclusively a tax cuts for the well off, benefits and service cuts for the rest kind.
    Why should all parties inhabit a space that requires high taxes and high spending in perpetuity? Why is there not a space for a party arguing for a smaller state, lower taxes, and working better with public expenditure?

    This is not a message that is just the preserve of the “well off”, as you term it.
    The State has shrunk, in many ways.

    Let's break down government spending - education, healthcare, defence, pensions etc - and look at how much they were as a percentage of GDP in both 2007 and 2024:
                    2007/8          2024/5          Change
    Health 7.1% 9.2% +2.1pp
    Education 5.6% 4.1% -1.5pp
    Defence 2.4% 2.1% -0.3pp
    State pensions 3.5% 5.1% +1.6pp
    Interest 2.0% 3.1% +1.1pp
    Pulic order 2.1% 1.9% -0.2pp
    As a percentage of GDP, the amount we spend on justice (police, prisons and courts) has fallen by a tenth, defence has dropped more. While education spending has sharply contracted.

    By contrast what we spend on oldies has risen shaply. Spending on health has risen by as much as we spend in total on defence! Spending on state pensions has increased by the equivalent of 40% of the education budget.

    There is genuine austerity in government. We just don't see it, because we're spending ever more on oldies. (And bear in mind, this excludes all the local government spending on oldies.)
    Ooh, so much to argue with there.

    2007/8 is a seriously bad baseline, right at the top of a boom when government was somehow running a deficit.

    Spending as a percentage of GDP is also a terrible measure to use, as it goes up (good, yay!) as the productive economy shrinks.

    The focus should be on the scope of the State, and the size of the debt interest bill which now makes monetary policy more significant than fiscal policy.
    Enjoyed that oxymoron.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 20,571

    Roger said:

    I am not sure I can be in the same party as Robert Jenrick.

    If the party wants to go down the Jenrick route then it deserves to die.

    Just in case anyone was naive enough to take his comments last night as throwaway chat at a Tory dinner, he comes up today demanding that we TAKE OUR COUNTRY BACK.

    We're now in a polity where the parties of the right are so hard over to the right that they have to compete with each other about who can stoke division and hate the hardest.

    Sorry mate, the party is cooked. Because even if Badenoch is ousted you're getting *that* as leader, after whom there will be little left.
    If Bob was dog whistling for clicks and headlines he can award himself an A*.
    It's unusual for a prospective leader of one of the main parties to persuade me *not* to vote for a party he's in charge of before he even gets the job! well done, Jenrick!
    I suspect Honest Bob has calculated that for every JosiasJessop he repels he attracts ten Lucy Connollys.
    Like it or not, an awful lot of people in the country think Farage is right about immigration. People like my next door neighbour. Not a beer swilling, skinhead, BNP type racist, just someone who think that immigration is out of control.

    I am not suggesting he is wrong or right, but if you want to get elected you need votes. And you need enough to get you a majority.
    Good politicians... well, bad politicians as well... I guess I'm saying effective politicians don't just follow the little-thought-through views of the electorate. They persuade the electorate. They respond to the concerns of the electorate (they think immigration has been out of control), but not by just giving them the obvious kneejerk response (saying immigration is still out of control and all immigrants are bad).
    I think good politicians are also ones who realise that sometimes the plebs are right.
    Jenrick has taken the media by storm today and certainly made the news

    Apparently Badenoch is being interviewed by Beth Rigby from the conference live on Sky at 5.00pm
    Yes, after last week's disastrous Labour Party Conference your party has captured the narrative (captured exclusively by Jenrick).

    You have had a great day today! No news is bad news, and he has stolen the news cycle.
    I'm in France so it's not ideal to get the full flavour of what's going on, But am I right in thinking

    1. Jenrick has screwed his chances of ever leading a group of boy scouts let alone a political Party

    or

    2. Has the leadership of the Tory Party nailed on?
    I think he had the leadership of the Conservatives nailed on.

    Whether they will amount to much more than a group of boy scouts after the next election is doubtful.
    We are all a bit guilty of projection. We are between elections. Most (as in 99%) of the population is not interested in politics. They care about football, The Masked Singer, Bake Off, the weather etc. Anything BUT politics.

    We on PB are the weird ones.

    I'd be astonished if the final election totals look anything like the current polling. Kemi will be gone, Reform will subside (as the Alliance did too) and even Labour may well get some mojo if a bit of growth comes back.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 53,068
    And many of the Tories few remaining voters are going to drop from the register in the next decade. Where are the replacements coming from?
  • maaarshmaaarsh Posts: 3,610

    There's probably a risk of too much attention being paid to the triple lock. It's a useful indicator of whether a party is remotely serious, but it's far from being the be-all and end-all.

    Subscribe needs to do some serious thinking that goes a bit deeper than that.

    It's pointless discussing the triple lock if every party endorse it for fear of the electorate

    They are all as bad as each other
    Which is why the way out is taxation.

    The basic pension, at approx the IT threshold, isnt a lot.

    The issue is, people on 50k pensions sticking that on top.

    So

    1) merge employee NI and IT.
    2) Pensioners on the basic rate of tax continue with the old rate of tax.
    3) Pensioners on the higher rate pay the new rate of tax (old IT + NI)
    4) Quadruple lock - the state pension sets the tax free allowance for everyone.

    This means that everyone pays NI (in effect) on all income. Except poorer pensioners.

    And you can boast of improving the triple lock to a quadruple lock.
    Not sure doubling down on the triple lock problem by applying the same ratchet to personal allowance to further hollow out the already extremely narrow tax base is the way forward unless you want to work towards a UBI by stealth with obscene tax rates on 50k+ to help fund a free ride for most people.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 25,292
    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    The Tories seem intent on casting themselves into irrelevance by their attempt to out-Reform Reform.

    They appear to have missed the fact that there is a gap in the market on economic restructuring/radical reform of the state literally crying out for someone to fill it, and instead are majoring on who can announce the most authoritarian policy/say the most dubious comment.

    It is a desperate strategy I believe is doomed to fail. I am not even saying they shouldn’t tack to the right on certain topics, but that should not have been their emphasis. Anyone who wants a strong border policy and wants a culture war is already deserting them for Farage. They cannot offer anything different in that space.

    There may be a gap in the market, but how big is it?
    It's like the post earlier bemoaning the LD's not being Orange Book enough.
    There's plenty on here up for it. But few in the general population.
    And most of us who accept the patriotic need for economic restructuring shuffle away a bit nervously when its consequences look like getting too near us. If you want to know why Mel Stride is planning to not touch the triple lock, look at who votes for his party. Same goes for those who want to leave taxes unraised and those who want to leave public spending uncut.

    The politics were hard enough in 2008-10, they are harder still now.
    Indeed.
    There's a good reason why the "economic restructuring" which is wildly popular on PB is exclusively a tax cuts for the well off, benefits and service cuts for the rest kind.
    Why should all parties inhabit a space that requires high taxes and high spending in perpetuity? Why is there not a space for a party arguing for a smaller state, lower taxes, and working better with public expenditure?

    This is not a message that is just the preserve of the “well off”, as you term it.
    The State has shrunk, in many ways.

    Let's break down government spending - education, healthcare, defence, pensions etc - and look at how much they were as a percentage of GDP in both 2007 and 2024:
                    2007/8          2024/5          Change
    Health 7.1% 9.2% +2.1pp
    Education 5.6% 4.1% -1.5pp
    Defence 2.4% 2.1% -0.3pp
    State pensions 3.5% 5.1% +1.6pp
    Interest 2.0% 3.1% +1.1pp
    Pulic order 2.1% 1.9% -0.2pp
    As a percentage of GDP, the amount we spend on justice (police, prisons and courts) has fallen by a tenth, defence has dropped more. While education spending has sharply contracted.

    By contrast what we spend on oldies has risen shaply. Spending on health has risen by as much as we spend in total on defence! Spending on state pensions has increased by the equivalent of 40% of the education budget.

    There is genuine austerity in government. We just don't see it, because we're spending ever more on oldies. (And bear in mind, this excludes all the local government spending on oldies.)
    Ooh, so much to argue with there.

    2007/8 is a seriously bad baseline, right at the top of a boom when government was somehow running a deficit.

    Spending as a percentage of GDP is also a terrible measure to use, as it goes up (good, yay!) as the productive economy shrinks.
    Happy to use whatever year you like as a baseline, but the % on healthcare and on pensions is rising with an ageing population and the triple lock irrespective of which years you use.
    And will inevitably soak up more resources in the years ahead.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 67,777
    IanB2 said:

    And many of the Tories few remaining voters are going to drop from the register in the next decade. Where are the replacements coming from?

    You mean me and my wife ?
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 4,079
    Good for Tom Tugendhat.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 57,278
    Indian student in Russia got caught selling drugs.

    Next thing you know, he’s on the front line in Ukraine and ends up as a PoW.

    https://x.com/bohuslavskakate/status/1975588186026815852
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 57,409
    maaarsh said:

    There's probably a risk of too much attention being paid to the triple lock. It's a useful indicator of whether a party is remotely serious, but it's far from being the be-all and end-all.

    Subscribe needs to do some serious thinking that goes a bit deeper than that.

    It's pointless discussing the triple lock if every party endorse it for fear of the electorate

    They are all as bad as each other
    Which is why the way out is taxation.

    The basic pension, at approx the IT threshold, isnt a lot.

    The issue is, people on 50k pensions sticking that on top.

    So

    1) merge employee NI and IT.
    2) Pensioners on the basic rate of tax continue with the old rate of tax.
    3) Pensioners on the higher rate pay the new rate of tax (old IT + NI)
    4) Quadruple lock - the state pension sets the tax free allowance for everyone.

    This means that everyone pays NI (in effect) on all income. Except poorer pensioners.

    And you can boast of improving the triple lock to a quadruple lock.
    Not sure doubling down on the triple lock problem by applying the same ratchet to personal allowance to further hollow out the already extremely narrow tax base is the way forward unless you want to work towards a UBI by stealth with obscene tax rates on 50k+ to help fund a free ride for most people.
    It’s a landline for the next chancellor after me.

    He/she will be forced to end the Quadruple lock. Or be Truss’d by the bond markets.
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 5,359
    edited 3:56PM
    O/T rant...

    PlusNet (BT, essentially) need to sort out their processes.

    Call to inform them my father is deceased and no longer requires their services
    Email sent to his email address confirming account is cancelled and that his details have been deleted, confirmed by phone
    --crickets--
    Letter to him from debt collection agency demanding £x

    Now £x is only a trivial amount but I don't think you can pass on debts when you didn't sent a bill in the first place - because you removed the email address to which you would have sent it and didn't try paper.

    If I was in a bad mood (I have Covid, so yes, I am) I might find the need to complain to someone. The debt collection company don't want to pursue it so that's obviously fewer pennies in the pound next time they want to sell their "debts"...


    Does anyone do their job properly these days?
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 4,079

    There's probably a risk of too much attention being paid to the triple lock. It's a useful indicator of whether a party is remotely serious, but it's far from being the be-all and end-all.

    Subscribe needs to do some serious thinking that goes a bit deeper than that.

    It's pointless discussing the triple lock if every party endorse it for fear of the electorate

    They are all as bad as each other
    Seems to me it's a useful topic for starting some realistic tough talking.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 20,122
    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    The Tories seem intent on casting themselves into irrelevance by their attempt to out-Reform Reform.

    They appear to have missed the fact that there is a gap in the market on economic restructuring/radical reform of the state literally crying out for someone to fill it, and instead are majoring on who can announce the most authoritarian policy/say the most dubious comment.

    It is a desperate strategy I believe is doomed to fail. I am not even saying they shouldn’t tack to the right on certain topics, but that should not have been their emphasis. Anyone who wants a strong border policy and wants a culture war is already deserting them for Farage. They cannot offer anything different in that space.

    There may be a gap in the market, but how big is it?
    It's like the post earlier bemoaning the LD's not being Orange Book enough.
    There's plenty on here up for it. But few in the general population.
    And most of us who accept the patriotic need for economic restructuring shuffle away a bit nervously when its consequences look like getting too near us. If you want to know why Mel Stride is planning to not touch the triple lock, look at who votes for his party. Same goes for those who want to leave taxes unraised and those who want to leave public spending uncut.

    The politics were hard enough in 2008-10, they are harder still now.
    Indeed.
    There's a good reason why the "economic restructuring" which is wildly popular on PB is exclusively a tax cuts for the well off, benefits and service cuts for the rest kind.
    Why should all parties inhabit a space that requires high taxes and high spending in perpetuity? Why is there not a space for a party arguing for a smaller state, lower taxes, and working better with public expenditure?

    This is not a message that is just the preserve of the “well off”, as you term it.
    The State has shrunk, in many ways.

    Let's break down government spending - education, healthcare, defence, pensions etc - and look at how much they were as a percentage of GDP in both 2007 and 2024:
                    2007/8          2024/5          Change
    Health 7.1% 9.2% +2.1pp
    Education 5.6% 4.1% -1.5pp
    Defence 2.4% 2.1% -0.3pp
    State pensions 3.5% 5.1% +1.6pp
    Interest 2.0% 3.1% +1.1pp
    Pulic order 2.1% 1.9% -0.2pp
    As a percentage of GDP, the amount we spend on justice (police, prisons and courts) has fallen by a tenth, defence has dropped more. While education spending has sharply contracted.

    By contrast what we spend on oldies has risen shaply. Spending on health has risen by as much as we spend in total on defence! Spending on state pensions has increased by the equivalent of 40% of the education budget.

    There is genuine austerity in government. We just don't see it, because we're spending ever more on oldies. (And bear in mind, this excludes all the local government spending on oldies.)
    Ooh, so much to argue with there.

    2007/8 is a seriously bad baseline, right at the top of a boom when government was somehow running a deficit.

    Spending as a percentage of GDP is also a terrible measure to use, as it goes up (good, yay!) as the productive economy shrinks.
    Happy to use whatever year you like as a baseline, but the % on healthcare and on pensions is rising with an ageing population and the triple lock irrespective of which years you use.
    Is it possible to break down the state pensions figure into "higher pensions" and "more pensioners" components?

    (What am I saying? I'm sure it's possible. Rephrase that as "has anyone published that breakdown, because I'm both curious and lazy.)
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 12,106

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    The Tories seem intent on casting themselves into irrelevance by their attempt to out-Reform Reform.

    They appear to have missed the fact that there is a gap in the market on economic restructuring/radical reform of the state literally crying out for someone to fill it, and instead are majoring on who can announce the most authoritarian policy/say the most dubious comment.

    It is a desperate strategy I believe is doomed to fail. I am not even saying they shouldn’t tack to the right on certain topics, but that should not have been their emphasis. Anyone who wants a strong border policy and wants a culture war is already deserting them for Farage. They cannot offer anything different in that space.

    There may be a gap in the market, but how big is it?
    It's like the post earlier bemoaning the LD's not being Orange Book enough.
    There's plenty on here up for it. But few in the general population.
    And most of us who accept the patriotic need for economic restructuring shuffle away a bit nervously when its consequences look like getting too near us. If you want to know why Mel Stride is planning to not touch the triple lock, look at who votes for his party. Same goes for those who want to leave taxes unraised and those who want to leave public spending uncut.

    The politics were hard enough in 2008-10, they are harder still now.
    Indeed.
    There's a good reason why the "economic restructuring" which is wildly popular on PB is exclusively a tax cuts for the well off, benefits and service cuts for the rest kind.
    Why should all parties inhabit a space that requires high taxes and high spending in perpetuity? Why is there not a space for a party arguing for a smaller state, lower taxes, and working better with public expenditure?

    This is not a message that is just the preserve of the “well off”, as you term it.
    The State has shrunk, in many ways.

    Let's break down government spending - education, healthcare, defence, pensions etc - and look at how much they were as a percentage of GDP in both 2007 and 2024:
                    2007/8          2024/5          Change
    Health 7.1% 9.2% +2.1pp
    Education 5.6% 4.1% -1.5pp
    Defence 2.4% 2.1% -0.3pp
    State pensions 3.5% 5.1% +1.6pp
    Interest 2.0% 3.1% +1.1pp
    Pulic order 2.1% 1.9% -0.2pp
    As a percentage of GDP, the amount we spend on justice (police, prisons and courts) has fallen by a tenth, defence has dropped more. While education spending has sharply contracted.

    By contrast what we spend on oldies has risen shaply. Spending on health has risen by as much as we spend in total on defence! Spending on state pensions has increased by the equivalent of 40% of the education budget.

    There is genuine austerity in government. We just don't see it, because we're spending ever more on oldies. (And bear in mind, this excludes all the local government spending on oldies.)
    Ooh, so much to argue with there.

    2007/8 is a seriously bad baseline, right at the top of a boom when government was somehow running a deficit.

    Spending as a percentage of GDP is also a terrible measure to use, as it goes up (good, yay!) as the productive economy shrinks.
    Happy to use whatever year you like as a baseline, but the % on healthcare and on pensions is rising with an ageing population and the triple lock irrespective of which years you use.
    Is it possible to break down the state pensions figure into "higher pensions" and "more pensioners" components?

    (What am I saying? I'm sure it's possible. Rephrase that as "has anyone published that breakdown, because I'm both curious and lazy.)
    The same with health. The population is ageing but nowhere near fast enough to explain that growth.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 31,143

    IanB2 said:

    And many of the Tories few remaining voters are going to drop from the register in the next decade. Where are the replacements coming from?

    You mean me and my wife ?
    Without being indelicate, death is the end for all of us. We all want a long and productive life but eventually all good things must come to an end.

    The point Ian was making is that unless the Tory party can bring in younger voters, it will be in trouble over the coming years. And there are few signs that they are managing to do so.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 61,792

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    The Tories seem intent on casting themselves into irrelevance by their attempt to out-Reform Reform.

    They appear to have missed the fact that there is a gap in the market on economic restructuring/radical reform of the state literally crying out for someone to fill it, and instead are majoring on who can announce the most authoritarian policy/say the most dubious comment.

    It is a desperate strategy I believe is doomed to fail. I am not even saying they shouldn’t tack to the right on certain topics, but that should not have been their emphasis. Anyone who wants a strong border policy and wants a culture war is already deserting them for Farage. They cannot offer anything different in that space.

    There may be a gap in the market, but how big is it?
    It's like the post earlier bemoaning the LD's not being Orange Book enough.
    There's plenty on here up for it. But few in the general population.
    And most of us who accept the patriotic need for economic restructuring shuffle away a bit nervously when its consequences look like getting too near us. If you want to know why Mel Stride is planning to not touch the triple lock, look at who votes for his party. Same goes for those who want to leave taxes unraised and those who want to leave public spending uncut.

    The politics were hard enough in 2008-10, they are harder still now.
    Indeed.
    There's a good reason why the "economic restructuring" which is wildly popular on PB is exclusively a tax cuts for the well off, benefits and service cuts for the rest kind.
    Why should all parties inhabit a space that requires high taxes and high spending in perpetuity? Why is there not a space for a party arguing for a smaller state, lower taxes, and working better with public expenditure?

    This is not a message that is just the preserve of the “well off”, as you term it.
    The State has shrunk, in many ways.

    Let's break down government spending - education, healthcare, defence, pensions etc - and look at how much they were as a percentage of GDP in both 2007 and 2024:
                    2007/8          2024/5          Change
    Health 7.1% 9.2% +2.1pp
    Education 5.6% 4.1% -1.5pp
    Defence 2.4% 2.1% -0.3pp
    State pensions 3.5% 5.1% +1.6pp
    Interest 2.0% 3.1% +1.1pp
    Pulic order 2.1% 1.9% -0.2pp
    As a percentage of GDP, the amount we spend on justice (police, prisons and courts) has fallen by a tenth, defence has dropped more. While education spending has sharply contracted.

    By contrast what we spend on oldies has risen shaply. Spending on health has risen by as much as we spend in total on defence! Spending on state pensions has increased by the equivalent of 40% of the education budget.

    There is genuine austerity in government. We just don't see it, because we're spending ever more on oldies. (And bear in mind, this excludes all the local government spending on oldies.)
    Ooh, so much to argue with there.

    2007/8 is a seriously bad baseline, right at the top of a boom when government was somehow running a deficit.

    Spending as a percentage of GDP is also a terrible measure to use, as it goes up (good, yay!) as the productive economy shrinks.
    Happy to use whatever year you like as a baseline, but the % on healthcare and on pensions is rising with an ageing population and the triple lock irrespective of which years you use.
    And will inevitably soak up more resources in the years ahead.
    Even if we didn't have an ever greater proportion of the population of pensionable age, then the triple lock would ensure pension spending grows faster than the economy. But when combined with an ageing population, then it looks really ugly.

    And there's nothing we can do about it, without grasping the nettle and either (a) moving the retirement age, and/or (b) eliminating the triple lock. Both of which are electoral poison.
  • BattlebusBattlebus Posts: 1,677
    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    The Tories seem intent on casting themselves into irrelevance by their attempt to out-Reform Reform.

    They appear to have missed the fact that there is a gap in the market on economic restructuring/radical reform of the state literally crying out for someone to fill it, and instead are majoring on who can announce the most authoritarian policy/say the most dubious comment.

    It is a desperate strategy I believe is doomed to fail. I am not even saying they shouldn’t tack to the right on certain topics, but that should not have been their emphasis. Anyone who wants a strong border policy and wants a culture war is already deserting them for Farage. They cannot offer anything different in that space.

    There may be a gap in the market, but how big is it?
    It's like the post earlier bemoaning the LD's not being Orange Book enough.
    There's plenty on here up for it. But few in the general population.
    And most of us who accept the patriotic need for economic restructuring shuffle away a bit nervously when its consequences look like getting too near us. If you want to know why Mel Stride is planning to not touch the triple lock, look at who votes for his party. Same goes for those who want to leave taxes unraised and those who want to leave public spending uncut.

    The politics were hard enough in 2008-10, they are harder still now.
    Indeed.
    There's a good reason why the "economic restructuring" which is wildly popular on PB is exclusively a tax cuts for the well off, benefits and service cuts for the rest kind.
    Why should all parties inhabit a space that requires high taxes and high spending in perpetuity? Why is there not a space for a party arguing for a smaller state, lower taxes, and working better with public expenditure?

    This is not a message that is just the preserve of the “well off”, as you term it.
    The State has shrunk, in many ways.

    Let's break down government spending - education, healthcare, defence, pensions etc - and look at how much they were as a percentage of GDP in both 2007 and 2024:
                    2007/8          2024/5          Change
    Health 7.1% 9.2% +2.1pp
    Education 5.6% 4.1% -1.5pp
    Defence 2.4% 2.1% -0.3pp
    State pensions 3.5% 5.1% +1.6pp
    Interest 2.0% 3.1% +1.1pp
    Pulic order 2.1% 1.9% -0.2pp
    As a percentage of GDP, the amount we spend on justice (police, prisons and courts) has fallen by a tenth, defence has dropped more. While education spending has sharply contracted.

    By contrast what we spend on oldies has risen shaply. Spending on health has risen by as much as we spend in total on defence! Spending on state pensions has increased by the equivalent of 40% of the education budget.

    There is genuine austerity in government. We just don't see it, because we're spending ever more on oldies. (And bear in mind, this excludes all the local government spending on oldies.)
    If you are looking for economic growth, then Labour and every other government needs to have a conversation about the oldies ....
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 57,278
    edited 4:01PM

    Sandpit said:

    Squeaky bum time for the 1.01 backers (now 1.3) in the ladies' cricket as England chase Bangladesh.

    This is on in my pub. They’ve got the overs left if they can keep hold of the wickets.
    Let Bangladesh spinners loose on a pitch designed for spin and the opposition have problems.
    These two girls could win this game from here. Ms Knight and Ms Dean.

    I don’t follow women’s cricket, but if the Banglas were 1.01 I’d be pleased not to have bet on them.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 67,777

    IanB2 said:

    And many of the Tories few remaining voters are going to drop from the register in the next decade. Where are the replacements coming from?

    You mean me and my wife ?
    Without being indelicate, death is the end for all of us. We all want a long and productive life but eventually all good things must come to an end.

    The point Ian was making is that unless the Tory party can bring in younger voters, it will be in trouble over the coming years. And there are few signs that they are managing to do so.
    Yes of course but seeking the demise of pensioners for political gain is not pleasant

    We have no idea where the political climate will be in 10 years and even next year
  • TimSTimS Posts: 16,263

    Roger said:

    I am not sure I can be in the same party as Robert Jenrick.

    If the party wants to go down the Jenrick route then it deserves to die.

    Just in case anyone was naive enough to take his comments last night as throwaway chat at a Tory dinner, he comes up today demanding that we TAKE OUR COUNTRY BACK.

    We're now in a polity where the parties of the right are so hard over to the right that they have to compete with each other about who can stoke division and hate the hardest.

    Sorry mate, the party is cooked. Because even if Badenoch is ousted you're getting *that* as leader, after whom there will be little left.
    If Bob was dog whistling for clicks and headlines he can award himself an A*.
    It's unusual for a prospective leader of one of the main parties to persuade me *not* to vote for a party he's in charge of before he even gets the job! well done, Jenrick!
    I suspect Honest Bob has calculated that for every JosiasJessop he repels he attracts ten Lucy Connollys.
    Like it or not, an awful lot of people in the country think Farage is right about immigration. People like my next door neighbour. Not a beer swilling, skinhead, BNP type racist, just someone who think that immigration is out of control.

    I am not suggesting he is wrong or right, but if you want to get elected you need votes. And you need enough to get you a majority.
    Good politicians... well, bad politicians as well... I guess I'm saying effective politicians don't just follow the little-thought-through views of the electorate. They persuade the electorate. They respond to the concerns of the electorate (they think immigration has been out of control), but not by just giving them the obvious kneejerk response (saying immigration is still out of control and all immigrants are bad).
    I think good politicians are also ones who realise that sometimes the plebs are right.
    Jenrick has taken the media by storm today and certainly made the news

    Apparently Badenoch is being interviewed by Beth Rigby from the conference live on Sky at 5.00pm
    Yes, after last week's disastrous Labour Party Conference your party has captured the narrative (captured exclusively by Jenrick).

    You have had a great day today! No news is bad news, and he has stolen the news cycle.
    I'm in France so it's not ideal to get the full flavour of what's going on, But am I right in thinking

    1. Jenrick has screwed his chances of ever leading a group of boy scouts let alone a political Party

    or

    2. Has the leadership of the Tory Party nailed on?
    The same France that is collapsing into political turmoil and chaos

    I would rather be here in Wales and the UK despite its problems
    Rather as I suspect the case is in Wales, and as any Londoner who’s ever read US social media coverage of our city would know, you should never judge the day to day life of a country by its more lurid headlines.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 31,143

    IanB2 said:

    And many of the Tories few remaining voters are going to drop from the register in the next decade. Where are the replacements coming from?

    You mean me and my wife ?
    Without being indelicate, death is the end for all of us. We all want a long and productive life but eventually all good things must come to an end.

    The point Ian was making is that unless the Tory party can bring in younger voters, it will be in trouble over the coming years. And there are few signs that they are managing to do so.
    Yes of course but seeking the demise of pensioners for political gain is not pleasant

    We have no idea where the political climate will be in 10 years and even next year
    I didn't read his post as seeking anything. Just a statement of reality.

    Today's politics is a torment, but as a Tory do you think your conference will bring in members or drive them away? Bring in voters or drive them away?
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 67,777

    I am not sure I can be in the same party as Robert Jenrick.

    If the party wants to go down the Jenrick route then it deserves to die.

    Just in case anyone was naive enough to take his comments last night as throwaway chat at a Tory dinner, he comes up today demanding that we TAKE OUR COUNTRY BACK.

    We're now in a polity where the parties of the right are so hard over to the right that they have to compete with each other about who can stoke division and hate the hardest.

    Sorry mate, the party is cooked. Because even if Badenoch is ousted you're getting *that* as leader, after whom there will be little left.
    If Bob was dog whistling for clicks and headlines he can award himself an A*.
    It's unusual for a prospective leader of one of the main parties to persuade me *not* to vote for a party he's in charge of before he even gets the job! well done, Jenrick!
    I suspect Honest Bob has calculated that for every JosiasJessop he repels he attracts ten Lucy Connollys.
    Like it or not, an awful lot of people in the country think Farage is right about immigration. People like my next door neighbour. Not a beer swilling, skinhead, BNP type racist, just someone who think that immigration is out of control.

    I am not suggesting he is wrong or right, but if you want to get elected you need votes. And you need enough to get you a majority.
    Good politicians... well, bad politicians as well... I guess I'm saying effective politicians don't just follow the little-thought-through views of the electorate. They persuade the electorate. They respond to the concerns of the electorate (they think immigration has been out of control), but not by just giving them the obvious kneejerk response (saying immigration is still out of control and all immigrants are bad).
    I think good politicians are also ones who realise that sometimes the plebs are right.
    Jenrick has taken the media by storm today and certainly made the news

    Apparently Badenoch is being interviewed by Beth Rigby from the conference live on Sky at 5.00pm
    Yes, after last week's disastrous Labour Party Conference your party has captured the narrative (captured exclusively by Jenrick).

    You have had a great day today! No news is bad news, and he has stolen the news cycle.
    I had a great day shopping with my good lady and not really into the news

    It is good to realise everything is not about politics
    Exactly what is a ‘good day shopping’; I can’t imagine such a thing.
    I am so sorry for being insensitive, but just to be able to get to M & S together with our mobility issues is a good day for us

  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 53,068
    edited 4:05PM
    Meanwhile, my today’s lunch stop (DFS):


  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 61,792
    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    The Tories seem intent on casting themselves into irrelevance by their attempt to out-Reform Reform.

    They appear to have missed the fact that there is a gap in the market on economic restructuring/radical reform of the state literally crying out for someone to fill it, and instead are majoring on who can announce the most authoritarian policy/say the most dubious comment.

    It is a desperate strategy I believe is doomed to fail. I am not even saying they shouldn’t tack to the right on certain topics, but that should not have been their emphasis. Anyone who wants a strong border policy and wants a culture war is already deserting them for Farage. They cannot offer anything different in that space.

    There may be a gap in the market, but how big is it?
    It's like the post earlier bemoaning the LD's not being Orange Book enough.
    There's plenty on here up for it. But few in the general population.
    And most of us who accept the patriotic need for economic restructuring shuffle away a bit nervously when its consequences look like getting too near us. If you want to know why Mel Stride is planning to not touch the triple lock, look at who votes for his party. Same goes for those who want to leave taxes unraised and those who want to leave public spending uncut.

    The politics were hard enough in 2008-10, they are harder still now.
    Indeed.
    There's a good reason why the "economic restructuring" which is wildly popular on PB is exclusively a tax cuts for the well off, benefits and service cuts for the rest kind.
    Why should all parties inhabit a space that requires high taxes and high spending in perpetuity? Why is there not a space for a party arguing for a smaller state, lower taxes, and working better with public expenditure?

    This is not a message that is just the preserve of the “well off”, as you term it.
    The State has shrunk, in many ways.

    Let's break down government spending - education, healthcare, defence, pensions etc - and look at how much they were as a percentage of GDP in both 2007 and 2024:
                    2007/8          2024/5          Change
    Health 7.1% 9.2% +2.1pp
    Education 5.6% 4.1% -1.5pp
    Defence 2.4% 2.1% -0.3pp
    State pensions 3.5% 5.1% +1.6pp
    Interest 2.0% 3.1% +1.1pp
    Pulic order 2.1% 1.9% -0.2pp
    As a percentage of GDP, the amount we spend on justice (police, prisons and courts) has fallen by a tenth, defence has dropped more. While education spending has sharply contracted.

    By contrast what we spend on oldies has risen shaply. Spending on health has risen by as much as we spend in total on defence! Spending on state pensions has increased by the equivalent of 40% of the education budget.

    There is genuine austerity in government. We just don't see it, because we're spending ever more on oldies. (And bear in mind, this excludes all the local government spending on oldies.)
    Ooh, so much to argue with there.

    2007/8 is a seriously bad baseline, right at the top of a boom when government was somehow running a deficit.

    Spending as a percentage of GDP is also a terrible measure to use, as it goes up (good, yay!) as the productive economy shrinks.

    The focus should be on the scope of the State, and the size of the debt interest bill which now makes monetary policy more significant than fiscal policy.
    What you're saying, I think, is that if spending on (say) the NHS rises, then it increases the size of the economy, skewing % of GDP.

    My point is this:

    Let's say you want government spending as a percentage of GDP to be flat to down. Let's say you want us to be below 40%. Well, if some elements are hardwired to grow faster than the economy as a whole, then that means that the other elements have to fall as a percentage of GDP. And that's what's happened.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 67,777

    IanB2 said:

    And many of the Tories few remaining voters are going to drop from the register in the next decade. Where are the replacements coming from?

    You mean me and my wife ?
    Without being indelicate, death is the end for all of us. We all want a long and productive life but eventually all good things must come to an end.

    The point Ian was making is that unless the Tory party can bring in younger voters, it will be in trouble over the coming years. And there are few signs that they are managing to do so.
    Yes of course but seeking the demise of pensioners for political gain is not pleasant

    We have no idea where the political climate will be in 10 years and even next year
    I didn't read his post as seeking anything. Just a statement of reality.

    Today's politics is a torment, but as a Tory do you think your conference will bring in members or drive them away? Bring in voters or drive them away?
    No idea to be honest
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 61,792
    Sandpit said:

    Indian student in Russia got caught selling drugs.

    Next thing you know, he’s on the front line in Ukraine and ends up as a PoW.

    https://x.com/bohuslavskakate/status/1975588186026815852

    He's rather lucked out.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 40,420
    @forwardnotback

    One of @UKLabour’s better attack messages


  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 5,359
    edited 4:11PM
    IanB2 said:

    Meanwhile, my today’s lunch stop (DFS):


    Nice. Almost like Barnsley...

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2644955.stm

    [Yes, I know that's not actually Tuscany, but still]
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 31,143

    IanB2 said:

    And many of the Tories few remaining voters are going to drop from the register in the next decade. Where are the replacements coming from?

    You mean me and my wife ?
    Without being indelicate, death is the end for all of us. We all want a long and productive life but eventually all good things must come to an end.

    The point Ian was making is that unless the Tory party can bring in younger voters, it will be in trouble over the coming years. And there are few signs that they are managing to do so.
    Yes of course but seeking the demise of pensioners for political gain is not pleasant

    We have no idea where the political climate will be in 10 years and even next year
    I didn't read his post as seeking anything. Just a statement of reality.

    Today's politics is a torment, but as a Tory do you think your conference will bring in members or drive them away? Bring in voters or drive them away?
    No idea to be honest
    Well, 20 Tory councillors defected to Reform this morning alone...
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 61,792

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    The Tories seem intent on casting themselves into irrelevance by their attempt to out-Reform Reform.

    They appear to have missed the fact that there is a gap in the market on economic restructuring/radical reform of the state literally crying out for someone to fill it, and instead are majoring on who can announce the most authoritarian policy/say the most dubious comment.

    It is a desperate strategy I believe is doomed to fail. I am not even saying they shouldn’t tack to the right on certain topics, but that should not have been their emphasis. Anyone who wants a strong border policy and wants a culture war is already deserting them for Farage. They cannot offer anything different in that space.

    There may be a gap in the market, but how big is it?
    It's like the post earlier bemoaning the LD's not being Orange Book enough.
    There's plenty on here up for it. But few in the general population.
    And most of us who accept the patriotic need for economic restructuring shuffle away a bit nervously when its consequences look like getting too near us. If you want to know why Mel Stride is planning to not touch the triple lock, look at who votes for his party. Same goes for those who want to leave taxes unraised and those who want to leave public spending uncut.

    The politics were hard enough in 2008-10, they are harder still now.
    Indeed.
    There's a good reason why the "economic restructuring" which is wildly popular on PB is exclusively a tax cuts for the well off, benefits and service cuts for the rest kind.
    Why should all parties inhabit a space that requires high taxes and high spending in perpetuity? Why is there not a space for a party arguing for a smaller state, lower taxes, and working better with public expenditure?

    This is not a message that is just the preserve of the “well off”, as you term it.
    The State has shrunk, in many ways.

    Let's break down government spending - education, healthcare, defence, pensions etc - and look at how much they were as a percentage of GDP in both 2007 and 2024:
                    2007/8          2024/5          Change
    Health 7.1% 9.2% +2.1pp
    Education 5.6% 4.1% -1.5pp
    Defence 2.4% 2.1% -0.3pp
    State pensions 3.5% 5.1% +1.6pp
    Interest 2.0% 3.1% +1.1pp
    Pulic order 2.1% 1.9% -0.2pp
    As a percentage of GDP, the amount we spend on justice (police, prisons and courts) has fallen by a tenth, defence has dropped more. While education spending has sharply contracted.

    By contrast what we spend on oldies has risen shaply. Spending on health has risen by as much as we spend in total on defence! Spending on state pensions has increased by the equivalent of 40% of the education budget.

    There is genuine austerity in government. We just don't see it, because we're spending ever more on oldies. (And bear in mind, this excludes all the local government spending on oldies.)
    Ooh, so much to argue with there.

    2007/8 is a seriously bad baseline, right at the top of a boom when government was somehow running a deficit.

    Spending as a percentage of GDP is also a terrible measure to use, as it goes up (good, yay!) as the productive economy shrinks.
    Happy to use whatever year you like as a baseline, but the % on healthcare and on pensions is rising with an ageing population and the triple lock irrespective of which years you use.
    Is it possible to break down the state pensions figure into "higher pensions" and "more pensioners" components?

    (What am I saying? I'm sure it's possible. Rephrase that as "has anyone published that breakdown, because I'm both curious and lazy.)
    I'm sure it is. And I've asked ChatGPT. Whether the answer will be accurate or not, I do not know.
  • TazTaz Posts: 21,310
    Scott_xP said:

    @forwardnotback

    One of @UKLabour’s better attack messages


    That’s pretty good.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 67,777

    IanB2 said:

    And many of the Tories few remaining voters are going to drop from the register in the next decade. Where are the replacements coming from?

    You mean me and my wife ?
    Without being indelicate, death is the end for all of us. We all want a long and productive life but eventually all good things must come to an end.

    The point Ian was making is that unless the Tory party can bring in younger voters, it will be in trouble over the coming years. And there are few signs that they are managing to do so.
    Yes of course but seeking the demise of pensioners for political gain is not pleasant

    We have no idea where the political climate will be in 10 years and even next year
    I didn't read his post as seeking anything. Just a statement of reality.

    Today's politics is a torment, but as a Tory do you think your conference will bring in members or drive them away? Bring in voters or drive them away?
    No idea to be honest
    Well, 20 Tory councillors defected to Reform this morning alone...
    If they want to go to Reform then that is their choice but I await the public's verdict in the polls post conference with interest
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 57,278
    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Indian student in Russia got caught selling drugs.

    Next thing you know, he’s on the front line in Ukraine and ends up as a PoW.

    https://x.com/bohuslavskakate/status/1975588186026815852

    He's rather lucked out.
    Properly lucked out, the Ukranians are probably going to give him a thorough debriefing and then deport him back to India.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 124,148
    Never in doubt, England women beat Bangladesh.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 35,826

    I am not sure I can be in the same party as Robert Jenrick.

    If the party wants to go down the Jenrick route then it deserves to die.

    Just in case anyone was naive enough to take his comments last night as throwaway chat at a Tory dinner, he comes up today demanding that we TAKE OUR COUNTRY BACK.

    We're now in a polity where the parties of the right are so hard over to the right that they have to compete with each other about who can stoke division and hate the hardest.

    Sorry mate, the party is cooked. Because even if Badenoch is ousted you're getting *that* as leader, after whom there will be little left.
    If Bob was dog whistling for clicks and headlines he can award himself an A*.
    It's unusual for a prospective leader of one of the main parties to persuade me *not* to vote for a party he's in charge of before he even gets the job! well done, Jenrick!
    I suspect Honest Bob has calculated that for every JosiasJessop he repels he attracts ten Lucy Connollys.
    Like it or not, an awful lot of people in the country think Farage is right about immigration. People like my next door neighbour. Not a beer swilling, skinhead, BNP type racist, just someone who think that immigration is out of control.

    I am not suggesting he is wrong or right, but if you want to get elected you need votes. And you need enough to get you a majority.
    Good politicians... well, bad politicians as well... I guess I'm saying effective politicians don't just follow the little-thought-through views of the electorate. They persuade the electorate. They respond to the concerns of the electorate (they think immigration has been out of control), but not by just giving them the obvious kneejerk response (saying immigration is still out of control and all immigrants are bad).
    I think good politicians are also ones who realise that sometimes the plebs are right.
    Jenrick has taken the media by storm today and certainly made the news

    Apparently Badenoch is being interviewed by Beth Rigby from the conference live on Sky at 5.00pm
    Yes, after last week's disastrous Labour Party Conference your party has captured the narrative (captured exclusively by Jenrick).

    You have had a great day today! No news is bad news, and he has stolen the news cycle.
    I had a great day shopping with my good lady and not really into the news

    It is good to realise everything is not about politics
    Exactly what is a ‘good day shopping’; I can’t imagine such a thing.
    I am so sorry for being insensitive, but just to be able to get to M & S together with our mobility issues is a good day for us

    I have serious mobility issues but I can’t see a trip to M&S as being something to aim at!
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 53,068
    edited 4:19PM

    IanB2 said:

    Meanwhile, my today’s lunch stop (DFS):


    Nice. Almost like Barnsley...

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2644955.stm

    [Yes, I know that's not actually Tuscany, but still]
    In a straight line, it’s about ten miles from France. Indeed the background high hills, where I am headed tomorrow, probably are France, or at least the border thereof.

    Meanwhile the dog for scale wishes to make it known that the apparent black eye is a photographic peculiarity, and doesn’t arise from any misjudged pursuit of his ball, an encounter with an Italian cat, or any interaction with his owner.
  • AramintaMoonbeamQCAramintaMoonbeamQC Posts: 3,987
    Sandpit said:

    Indian student in Russia got caught selling drugs.

    Next thing you know, he’s on the front line in Ukraine and ends up as a PoW.

    https://x.com/bohuslavskakate/status/1975588186026815852

    Wow, the final boss of FAFO.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 35,826
    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Indian student in Russia got caught selling drugs.

    Next thing you know, he’s on the front line in Ukraine and ends up as a PoW.

    https://x.com/bohuslavskakate/status/1975588186026815852

    He's rather lucked out.
    Not if he’s a POW.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 21,220

    Roger said:

    I am not sure I can be in the same party as Robert Jenrick.

    If the party wants to go down the Jenrick route then it deserves to die.

    Just in case anyone was naive enough to take his comments last night as throwaway chat at a Tory dinner, he comes up today demanding that we TAKE OUR COUNTRY BACK.

    We're now in a polity where the parties of the right are so hard over to the right that they have to compete with each other about who can stoke division and hate the hardest.

    Sorry mate, the party is cooked. Because even if Badenoch is ousted you're getting *that* as leader, after whom there will be little left.
    If Bob was dog whistling for clicks and headlines he can award himself an A*.
    It's unusual for a prospective leader of one of the main parties to persuade me *not* to vote for a party he's in charge of before he even gets the job! well done, Jenrick!
    I suspect Honest Bob has calculated that for every JosiasJessop he repels he attracts ten Lucy Connollys.
    Like it or not, an awful lot of people in the country think Farage is right about immigration. People like my next door neighbour. Not a beer swilling, skinhead, BNP type racist, just someone who think that immigration is out of control.

    I am not suggesting he is wrong or right, but if you want to get elected you need votes. And you need enough to get you a majority.
    Good politicians... well, bad politicians as well... I guess I'm saying effective politicians don't just follow the little-thought-through views of the electorate. They persuade the electorate. They respond to the concerns of the electorate (they think immigration has been out of control), but not by just giving them the obvious kneejerk response (saying immigration is still out of control and all immigrants are bad).
    I think good politicians are also ones who realise that sometimes the plebs are right.
    Jenrick has taken the media by storm today and certainly made the news

    Apparently Badenoch is being interviewed by Beth Rigby from the conference live on Sky at 5.00pm
    Yes, after last week's disastrous Labour Party Conference your party has captured the narrative (captured exclusively by Jenrick).

    You have had a great day today! No news is bad news, and he has stolen the news cycle.
    I'm in France so it's not ideal to get the full flavour of what's going on, But am I right in thinking

    1. Jenrick has screwed his chances of ever leading a group of boy scouts let alone a political Party

    or

    2. Has the leadership of the Tory Party nailed on?
    The same France that is collapsing into political turmoil and chaos

    I would rather be here in Wales and the UK despite its problems
    A sunny place with an azure blue sea and bars and cafes heaving with cheerful staff from all over the continent including Ireland here to learn the language and have fun...

    Everyone but the English.......

    What a screw up your selfish rotten Party have made of the UK
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 20,122

    IanB2 said:

    And many of the Tories few remaining voters are going to drop from the register in the next decade. Where are the replacements coming from?

    You mean me and my wife ?
    Without being indelicate, death is the end for all of us. We all want a long and productive life but eventually all good things must come to an end.

    The point Ian was making is that unless the Tory party can bring in younger voters, it will be in trouble over the coming years. And there are few signs that they are managing to do so.
    Yes of course but seeking the demise of pensioners for political gain is not pleasant

    We have no idea where the political climate will be in 10 years and even next year
    I didn't read his post as seeking anything. Just a statement of reality.

    Today's politics is a torment, but as a Tory do you think your conference will bring in members or drive them away? Bring in voters or drive them away?
    No idea to be honest
    The answer is "probably neither", because I suspect it won't impact much on most voters. (One of the things all politicos should do from time to time is have a week where they get all their news from what was Yourtown FM, and is now something networked. All the news you need in 180 seconds or thereabouts.)

    But for those watching,
    1 there's hardly anyone there from the party
    2 there are very few operatives, which is why you get fails like the misspelt attack confectionery
    3 the professional schmoozers are largely absent, because there's no point schmoozing a party with a one-way ticket to Obscurityville.

    Something happened in the mid-2010s to turn the age-voting graph much steeper than before. It is showing no signs of flipping back, and the Conservatives are failing to convert people as they enter middle age. Unless that changes, the party has a problem.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 67,777

    I am not sure I can be in the same party as Robert Jenrick.

    If the party wants to go down the Jenrick route then it deserves to die.

    Just in case anyone was naive enough to take his comments last night as throwaway chat at a Tory dinner, he comes up today demanding that we TAKE OUR COUNTRY BACK.

    We're now in a polity where the parties of the right are so hard over to the right that they have to compete with each other about who can stoke division and hate the hardest.

    Sorry mate, the party is cooked. Because even if Badenoch is ousted you're getting *that* as leader, after whom there will be little left.
    If Bob was dog whistling for clicks and headlines he can award himself an A*.
    It's unusual for a prospective leader of one of the main parties to persuade me *not* to vote for a party he's in charge of before he even gets the job! well done, Jenrick!
    I suspect Honest Bob has calculated that for every JosiasJessop he repels he attracts ten Lucy Connollys.
    Like it or not, an awful lot of people in the country think Farage is right about immigration. People like my next door neighbour. Not a beer swilling, skinhead, BNP type racist, just someone who think that immigration is out of control.

    I am not suggesting he is wrong or right, but if you want to get elected you need votes. And you need enough to get you a majority.
    Good politicians... well, bad politicians as well... I guess I'm saying effective politicians don't just follow the little-thought-through views of the electorate. They persuade the electorate. They respond to the concerns of the electorate (they think immigration has been out of control), but not by just giving them the obvious kneejerk response (saying immigration is still out of control and all immigrants are bad).
    I think good politicians are also ones who realise that sometimes the plebs are right.
    Jenrick has taken the media by storm today and certainly made the news

    Apparently Badenoch is being interviewed by Beth Rigby from the conference live on Sky at 5.00pm
    Yes, after last week's disastrous Labour Party Conference your party has captured the narrative (captured exclusively by Jenrick).

    You have had a great day today! No news is bad news, and he has stolen the news cycle.
    I had a great day shopping with my good lady and not really into the news

    It is good to realise everything is not about politics
    Exactly what is a ‘good day shopping’; I can’t imagine such a thing.
    I am so sorry for being insensitive, but just to be able to get to M & S together with our mobility issues is a good day for us

    aDec
    I have serious mobility issues but I can’t see a trip to M&S as being something to aim at!
    I know you have, and my mobility is causing me real issues with us ordering a purpose made mobility twin adjustable bed and looking at buying a mobility scooter for me

    Age never comes alone but my wife and I have so much to be grateful for
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 53,068
    edited 4:24PM
    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    Meanwhile, my today’s lunch stop (DFS):


    Nice. Almost like Barnsley...

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2644955.stm

    [Yes, I know that's not actually Tuscany, but still]
    In a straight line, it’s about ten miles from France. Indeed the background high hills, where I am headed tomorrow, probably are France, or at least the border thereof.

    Meanwhile the dog for scale wishes to make it known that the apparent black eye is a photographic peculiarity, and doesn’t arise from any misjudged pursuit of his ball, an encounter with an Italian cat, or any interaction with his owner.
    He also cannot explain how he managed to cast two opposing shadows.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 67,777
    Taz said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @forwardnotback

    One of @UKLabour’s better attack messages


    That’s pretty good.
    Yes but again labour promoting Reform
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 124,148

    Taz said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @forwardnotback

    One of @UKLabour’s better attack messages


    That’s pretty good.
    Yes but again labour promoting Reform
    No, it is something that has been discussed on here including in the headers, if Reform looks like mostly a bunch of ex Tories that's bad for Reform and good for Labour.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 15,608
    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    The Tories seem intent on casting themselves into irrelevance by their attempt to out-Reform Reform.

    They appear to have missed the fact that there is a gap in the market on economic restructuring/radical reform of the state literally crying out for someone to fill it, and instead are majoring on who can announce the most authoritarian policy/say the most dubious comment.

    It is a desperate strategy I believe is doomed to fail. I am not even saying they shouldn’t tack to the right on certain topics, but that should not have been their emphasis. Anyone who wants a strong border policy and wants a culture war is already deserting them for Farage. They cannot offer anything different in that space.

    There may be a gap in the market, but how big is it?
    It's like the post earlier bemoaning the LD's not being Orange Book enough.
    There's plenty on here up for it. But few in the general population.
    And most of us who accept the patriotic need for economic restructuring shuffle away a bit nervously when its consequences look like getting too near us. If you want to know why Mel Stride is planning to not touch the triple lock, look at who votes for his party. Same goes for those who want to leave taxes unraised and those who want to leave public spending uncut.

    The politics were hard enough in 2008-10, they are harder still now.
    Indeed.
    There's a good reason why the "economic restructuring" which is wildly popular on PB is exclusively a tax cuts for the well off, benefits and service cuts for the rest kind.
    Why should all parties inhabit a space that requires high taxes and high spending in perpetuity? Why is there not a space for a party arguing for a smaller state, lower taxes, and working better with public expenditure?

    This is not a message that is just the preserve of the “well off”, as you term it.
    The State has shrunk, in many ways.

    Let's break down government spending - education, healthcare, defence, pensions etc - and look at how much they were as a percentage of GDP in both 2007 and 2024:
                    2007/8          2024/5          Change
    Health 7.1% 9.2% +2.1pp
    Education 5.6% 4.1% -1.5pp
    Defence 2.4% 2.1% -0.3pp
    State pensions 3.5% 5.1% +1.6pp
    Interest 2.0% 3.1% +1.1pp
    Pulic order 2.1% 1.9% -0.2pp
    As a percentage of GDP, the amount we spend on justice (police, prisons and courts) has fallen by a tenth, defence has dropped more. While education spending has sharply contracted.

    By contrast what we spend on oldies has risen shaply. Spending on health has risen by as much as we spend in total on defence! Spending on state pensions has increased by the equivalent of 40% of the education budget.

    There is genuine austerity in government. We just don't see it, because we're spending ever more on oldies. (And bear in mind, this excludes all the local government spending on oldies.)
    Ooh, so much to argue with there.

    2007/8 is a seriously bad baseline, right at the top of a boom when government was somehow running a deficit.

    Spending as a percentage of GDP is also a terrible measure to use, as it goes up (good, yay!) as the productive economy shrinks.
    Happy to use whatever year you like as a baseline, but the % on healthcare and on pensions is rising with an ageing population and the triple lock irrespective of which years you use.
    Two points. Austerity as spending more is never true.

    Secondly, returning to a question within the nest, why no real small state, low spend, low tax parties? The answer is this: we are the products of a developmental non revolutionary history.

    This has two major impacts: firstly all actual (ignore the rhetoric) politics is a continuation of the moment at which any particular government takes office . (As Reform may be going to discover). So as Small State party takes over it finds the state payment systems already up and running to spend 44% or so of all GDP.

    To alter this bigly is massively disruptive. Eg to shave £10 billion, a tiny sum in the scheme of things and less than 1% of state expenditure, off the welfare bill means removing £5000 per year and continuing from two million people. This is disruptive in the sense of riots, fires, protests, media storms, votes, MP support and so on.

    That doesn't even begin on the realities of an actual small state - one in which say only 25-30% of GDP is TME.

    Which is why (a) whenever Reform are asked about their fiscal plans they lie; and (b) why a Reform government will be social democrat, high spend and therefore high tax. As we shall discover.

    A real small state low tax low spend government would arise only out of an actual, real revolution.
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 5,359
    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    I am not sure I can be in the same party as Robert Jenrick.

    If the party wants to go down the Jenrick route then it deserves to die.

    Just in case anyone was naive enough to take his comments last night as throwaway chat at a Tory dinner, he comes up today demanding that we TAKE OUR COUNTRY BACK.

    We're now in a polity where the parties of the right are so hard over to the right that they have to compete with each other about who can stoke division and hate the hardest.

    Sorry mate, the party is cooked. Because even if Badenoch is ousted you're getting *that* as leader, after whom there will be little left.
    If Bob was dog whistling for clicks and headlines he can award himself an A*.
    It's unusual for a prospective leader of one of the main parties to persuade me *not* to vote for a party he's in charge of before he even gets the job! well done, Jenrick!
    I suspect Honest Bob has calculated that for every JosiasJessop he repels he attracts ten Lucy Connollys.
    Like it or not, an awful lot of people in the country think Farage is right about immigration. People like my next door neighbour. Not a beer swilling, skinhead, BNP type racist, just someone who think that immigration is out of control.

    I am not suggesting he is wrong or right, but if you want to get elected you need votes. And you need enough to get you a majority.
    Good politicians... well, bad politicians as well... I guess I'm saying effective politicians don't just follow the little-thought-through views of the electorate. They persuade the electorate. They respond to the concerns of the electorate (they think immigration has been out of control), but not by just giving them the obvious kneejerk response (saying immigration is still out of control and all immigrants are bad).
    I think good politicians are also ones who realise that sometimes the plebs are right.
    Jenrick has taken the media by storm today and certainly made the news

    Apparently Badenoch is being interviewed by Beth Rigby from the conference live on Sky at 5.00pm
    Yes, after last week's disastrous Labour Party Conference your party has captured the narrative (captured exclusively by Jenrick).

    You have had a great day today! No news is bad news, and he has stolen the news cycle.
    I'm in France so it's not ideal to get the full flavour of what's going on, But am I right in thinking

    1. Jenrick has screwed his chances of ever leading a group of boy scouts let alone a political Party

    or

    2. Has the leadership of the Tory Party nailed on?
    The same France that is collapsing into political turmoil and chaos

    I would rather be here in Wales and the UK despite its problems
    A sunny place with an azure blue sea and bars and cafes heaving with cheerful staff from all over the continent including Ireland here to learn the language and have fun...

    Everyone but the English.......

    What a screw up your selfish rotten Party have made of the UK
    Do you visit Marseille often?
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 67,777
    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    I am not sure I can be in the same party as Robert Jenrick.

    If the party wants to go down the Jenrick route then it deserves to die.

    Just in case anyone was naive enough to take his comments last night as throwaway chat at a Tory dinner, he comes up today demanding that we TAKE OUR COUNTRY BACK.

    We're now in a polity where the parties of the right are so hard over to the right that they have to compete with each other about who can stoke division and hate the hardest.

    Sorry mate, the party is cooked. Because even if Badenoch is ousted you're getting *that* as leader, after whom there will be little left.
    If Bob was dog whistling for clicks and headlines he can award himself an A*.
    It's unusual for a prospective leader of one of the main parties to persuade me *not* to vote for a party he's in charge of before he even gets the job! well done, Jenrick!
    I suspect Honest Bob has calculated that for every JosiasJessop he repels he attracts ten Lucy Connollys.
    Like it or not, an awful lot of people in the country think Farage is right about immigration. People like my next door neighbour. Not a beer swilling, skinhead, BNP type racist, just someone who think that immigration is out of control.

    I am not suggesting he is wrong or right, but if you want to get elected you need votes. And you need enough to get you a majority.
    Good politicians... well, bad politicians as well... I guess I'm saying effective politicians don't just follow the little-thought-through views of the electorate. They persuade the electorate. They respond to the concerns of the electorate (they think immigration has been out of control), but not by just giving them the obvious kneejerk response (saying immigration is still out of control and all immigrants are bad).
    I think good politicians are also ones who realise that sometimes the plebs are right.
    Jenrick has taken the media by storm today and certainly made the news

    Apparently Badenoch is being interviewed by Beth Rigby from the conference live on Sky at 5.00pm
    Yes, after last week's disastrous Labour Party Conference your party has captured the narrative (captured exclusively by Jenrick).

    You have had a great day today! No news is bad news, and he has stolen the news cycle.
    I'm in France so it's not ideal to get the full flavour of what's going on, But am I right in thinking

    1. Jenrick has screwed his chances of ever leading a group of boy scouts let alone a political Party

    or

    2. Has the leadership of the Tory Party nailed on?
    The same France that is collapsing into political turmoil and chaos

    I would rather be here in Wales and the UK despite its problems
    A sunny place with an azure blue sea and bars and cafes heaving with cheerful staff from all over the continent including Ireland here to learn the language and have fun...

    Everyone but the English.......

    What a screw up your selfish rotten Party have made of the UK
    Walk down Mostyn Street in Llandudno and experience the same heaving cafes and staff from across the world having fun

    Walk along the Promenade with flags of many different nations flying high

    And as for Brexit you can moan as much as you like, but remain lost a winnable referendum and the argument

    And my granddaughter spent one year at Turin University last year with lots of students from the UK

    And we have our difficulties but at least we haven't had 5 PMs in as many minutes and a lame duck President

  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 35,826

    I am not sure I can be in the same party as Robert Jenrick.

    If the party wants to go down the Jenrick route then it deserves to die.

    Just in case anyone was naive enough to take his comments last night as throwaway chat at a Tory dinner, he comes up today demanding that we TAKE OUR COUNTRY BACK.

    We're now in a polity where the parties of the right are so hard over to the right that they have to compete with each other about who can stoke division and hate the hardest.

    Sorry mate, the party is cooked. Because even if Badenoch is ousted you're getting *that* as leader, after whom there will be little left.
    If Bob was dog whistling for clicks and headlines he can award himself an A*.
    It's unusual for a prospective leader of one of the main parties to persuade me *not* to vote for a party he's in charge of before he even gets the job! well done, Jenrick!
    I suspect Honest Bob has calculated that for every JosiasJessop he repels he attracts ten Lucy Connollys.
    Like it or not, an awful lot of people in the country think Farage is right about immigration. People like my next door neighbour. Not a beer swilling, skinhead, BNP type racist, just someone who think that immigration is out of control.

    I am not suggesting he is wrong or right, but if you want to get elected you need votes. And you need enough to get you a majority.
    Good politicians... well, bad politicians as well... I guess I'm saying effective politicians don't just follow the little-thought-through views of the electorate. They persuade the electorate. They respond to the concerns of the electorate (they think immigration has been out of control), but not by just giving them the obvious kneejerk response (saying immigration is still out of control and all immigrants are bad).
    I think good politicians are also ones who realise that sometimes the plebs are right.
    Jenrick has taken the media by storm today and certainly made the news

    Apparently Badenoch is being interviewed by Beth Rigby from the conference live on Sky at 5.00pm
    Yes, after last week's disastrous Labour Party Conference your party has captured the narrative (captured exclusively by Jenrick).

    You have had a great day today! No news is bad news, and he has stolen the news cycle.
    I had a great day shopping with my good lady and not really into the news

    It is good to realise everything is not about politics
    Exactly what is a ‘good day shopping’; I can’t imagine such a thing.
    I am so sorry for being insensitive, but just to be able to get to M & S together with our mobility issues is a good day for us

    aDec
    I have serious mobility issues but I can’t see a trip to M&S as being something to aim at!
    I know you have, and my mobility is causing me real issues with us ordering a purpose made mobility twin adjustable bed and looking at buying a mobility scooter for me

    Age never comes alone but my wife and I have so much to be grateful for
    I’ve got a mobility scooter; if I have further than to go than the barbers, the pharmacy, or the pub I use it. Otherwise I walk with a set of wheels, for the exercise.
  • eekeek Posts: 31,457

    I am not sure I can be in the same party as Robert Jenrick.

    If the party wants to go down the Jenrick route then it deserves to die.

    Just in case anyone was naive enough to take his comments last night as throwaway chat at a Tory dinner, he comes up today demanding that we TAKE OUR COUNTRY BACK.

    We're now in a polity where the parties of the right are so hard over to the right that they have to compete with each other about who can stoke division and hate the hardest.

    Sorry mate, the party is cooked. Because even if Badenoch is ousted you're getting *that* as leader, after whom there will be little left.
    If Bob was dog whistling for clicks and headlines he can award himself an A*.
    It's unusual for a prospective leader of one of the main parties to persuade me *not* to vote for a party he's in charge of before he even gets the job! well done, Jenrick!
    I suspect Honest Bob has calculated that for every JosiasJessop he repels he attracts ten Lucy Connollys.
    Like it or not, an awful lot of people in the country think Farage is right about immigration. People like my next door neighbour. Not a beer swilling, skinhead, BNP type racist, just someone who think that immigration is out of control.

    I am not suggesting he is wrong or right, but if you want to get elected you need votes. And you need enough to get you a majority.
    Good politicians... well, bad politicians as well... I guess I'm saying effective politicians don't just follow the little-thought-through views of the electorate. They persuade the electorate. They respond to the concerns of the electorate (they think immigration has been out of control), but not by just giving them the obvious kneejerk response (saying immigration is still out of control and all immigrants are bad).
    I think good politicians are also ones who realise that sometimes the plebs are right.
    Jenrick has taken the media by storm today and certainly made the news

    Apparently Badenoch is being interviewed by Beth Rigby from the conference live on Sky at 5.00pm
    Yes, after last week's disastrous Labour Party Conference your party has captured the narrative (captured exclusively by Jenrick).

    You have had a great day today! No news is bad news, and he has stolen the news cycle.
    I had a great day shopping with my good lady and not really into the news

    It is good to realise everything is not about politics
    Exactly what is a ‘good day shopping’; I can’t imagine such a thing.
    I am so sorry for being insensitive, but just to be able to get to M & S together with our mobility issues is a good day for us

    I have serious mobility issues but I can’t see a trip to M&S as being something to aim at!
    There’s a choice of coffee shops (Costa, m&s cafe, Hotel Chocolat) and ice cream nearby
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 53,068

    Taz said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @forwardnotback

    One of @UKLabour’s better attack messages


    That’s pretty good.
    Yes but again labour promoting Reform
    In their place, I’d think that worth the risk. The chance of Reform imploding before or during the next election campaign remains relatively high; meanwhile the more Tories that can be persuaded to desert their long term voting habits, the better.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 21,220

    IanB2 said:

    And many of the Tories few remaining voters are going to drop from the register in the next decade. Where are the replacements coming from?

    You mean me and my wife ?
    Without being indelicate, death is the end for all of us. We all want a long and productive life but eventually all good things must come to an end.

    The point Ian was making is that unless the Tory party can bring in younger voters, it will be in trouble over the coming years. And there are few signs that they are managing to do so.
    Yes of course but seeking the demise of pensioners for political gain is not pleasant

    We have no idea where the political climate will be in 10 years and even next year
    I didn't read his post as seeking anything. Just a statement of reality.

    Today's politics is a torment, but as a Tory do you think your conference will bring in members or drive them away? Bring in voters or drive them away?
    No idea to be honest
    Well, 20 Tory councillors defected to Reform this morning alone...
    Not racist enough for them?
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 16,419
    Part of the problem with Jenrick's claim of no white faces and a lack of integration is that he appears to lump all non-white people into one bucket, as if different non-white people living together and integrating with each other doesn't count.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 57,278
    edited 4:37PM
    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    The Tories seem intent on casting themselves into irrelevance by their attempt to out-Reform Reform.

    They appear to have missed the fact that there is a gap in the market on economic restructuring/radical reform of the state literally crying out for someone to fill it, and instead are majoring on who can announce the most authoritarian policy/say the most dubious comment.

    It is a desperate strategy I believe is doomed to fail. I am not even saying they shouldn’t tack to the right on certain topics, but that should not have been their emphasis. Anyone who wants a strong border policy and wants a culture war is already deserting them for Farage. They cannot offer anything different in that space.

    There may be a gap in the market, but how big is it?
    It's like the post earlier bemoaning the LD's not being Orange Book enough.
    There's plenty on here up for it. But few in the general population.
    And most of us who accept the patriotic need for economic restructuring shuffle away a bit nervously when its consequences look like getting too near us. If you want to know why Mel Stride is planning to not touch the triple lock, look at who votes for his party. Same goes for those who want to leave taxes unraised and those who want to leave public spending uncut.

    The politics were hard enough in 2008-10, they are harder still now.
    Indeed.
    There's a good reason why the "economic restructuring" which is wildly popular on PB is exclusively a tax cuts for the well off, benefits and service cuts for the rest kind.
    Why should all parties inhabit a space that requires high taxes and high spending in perpetuity? Why is there not a space for a party arguing for a smaller state, lower taxes, and working better with public expenditure?

    This is not a message that is just the preserve of the “well off”, as you term it.
    The State has shrunk, in many ways.

    Let's break down government spending - education, healthcare, defence, pensions etc - and look at how much they were as a percentage of GDP in both 2007 and 2024:
                    2007/8          2024/5          Change
    Health 7.1% 9.2% +2.1pp
    Education 5.6% 4.1% -1.5pp
    Defence 2.4% 2.1% -0.3pp
    State pensions 3.5% 5.1% +1.6pp
    Interest 2.0% 3.1% +1.1pp
    Pulic order 2.1% 1.9% -0.2pp
    As a percentage of GDP, the amount we spend on justice (police, prisons and courts) has fallen by a tenth, defence has dropped more. While education spending has sharply contracted.

    By contrast what we spend on oldies has risen shaply. Spending on health has risen by as much as we spend in total on defence! Spending on state pensions has increased by the equivalent of 40% of the education budget.

    There is genuine austerity in government. We just don't see it, because we're spending ever more on oldies. (And bear in mind, this excludes all the local government spending on oldies.)
    Ooh, so much to argue with there.

    2007/8 is a seriously bad baseline, right at the top of a boom when government was somehow running a deficit.

    Spending as a percentage of GDP is also a terrible measure to use, as it goes up (good, yay!) as the productive economy shrinks.

    The focus should be on the scope of the State, and the size of the debt interest bill which now makes monetary policy more significant than fiscal policy.
    What you're saying, I think, is that if spending on (say) the NHS rises, then it increases the size of the economy, skewing % of GDP.

    My point is this:

    Let's say you want government spending as a percentage of GDP to be flat to down. Let's say you want us to be below 40%. Well, if some elements are hardwired to grow faster than the economy as a whole, then that means that the other elements have to fall as a percentage of GDP. And that's what's happened.
    I was saying it the other way around, that in a recession your favoured spending to GDP ratio would go up. In the same way as the bankers losing their bonuses made the “poverty” (inequality) numbers better.

    Departmental spending as a ratio of all government spending would be a better measure - and also demonstrate how much the Department of Debt Interest has taken over government in recent years.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 26,054
    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    Meanwhile, my today’s lunch stop (DFS):


    Nice. Almost like Barnsley...

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2644955.stm

    [Yes, I know that's not actually Tuscany, but still]
    In a straight line, it’s about ten miles from France. Indeed the background high hills, where I am headed tomorrow, probably are France, or at least the border thereof.

    Meanwhile the dog for scale wishes to make it known that the apparent black eye is a photographic peculiarity, and doesn’t arise from any misjudged pursuit of his ball, an encounter with an Italian cat, or any interaction with his owner.
    He also cannot explain how he managed to cast two opposing shadows.
    https://youtu.be/goVU20DNwY8?si=18QAQB0rhAXcpNld
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 35,826
    eek said:

    I am not sure I can be in the same party as Robert Jenrick.

    If the party wants to go down the Jenrick route then it deserves to die.

    Just in case anyone was naive enough to take his comments last night as throwaway chat at a Tory dinner, he comes up today demanding that we TAKE OUR COUNTRY BACK.

    We're now in a polity where the parties of the right are so hard over to the right that they have to compete with each other about who can stoke division and hate the hardest.

    Sorry mate, the party is cooked. Because even if Badenoch is ousted you're getting *that* as leader, after whom there will be little left.
    If Bob was dog whistling for clicks and headlines he can award himself an A*.
    It's unusual for a prospective leader of one of the main parties to persuade me *not* to vote for a party he's in charge of before he even gets the job! well done, Jenrick!
    I suspect Honest Bob has calculated that for every JosiasJessop he repels he attracts ten Lucy Connollys.
    Like it or not, an awful lot of people in the country think Farage is right about immigration. People like my next door neighbour. Not a beer swilling, skinhead, BNP type racist, just someone who think that immigration is out of control.

    I am not suggesting he is wrong or right, but if you want to get elected you need votes. And you need enough to get you a majority.
    Good politicians... well, bad politicians as well... I guess I'm saying effective politicians don't just follow the little-thought-through views of the electorate. They persuade the electorate. They respond to the concerns of the electorate (they think immigration has been out of control), but not by just giving them the obvious kneejerk response (saying immigration is still out of control and all immigrants are bad).
    I think good politicians are also ones who realise that sometimes the plebs are right.
    Jenrick has taken the media by storm today and certainly made the news

    Apparently Badenoch is being interviewed by Beth Rigby from the conference live on Sky at 5.00pm
    Yes, after last week's disastrous Labour Party Conference your party has captured the narrative (captured exclusively by Jenrick).

    You have had a great day today! No news is bad news, and he has stolen the news cycle.
    I had a great day shopping with my good lady and not really into the news

    It is good to realise everything is not about politics
    Exactly what is a ‘good day shopping’; I can’t imagine such a thing.
    I am so sorry for being insensitive, but just to be able to get to M & S together with our mobility issues is a good day for us

    I have serious mobility issues but I can’t see a trip to M&S as being something to aim at!
    There’s a choice of coffee shops (Costa, m&s cafe, Hotel Chocolat) and ice cream nearby
    No pub?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 53,068
    viewcode said:

    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    Meanwhile, my today’s lunch stop (DFS):


    Nice. Almost like Barnsley...

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2644955.stm

    [Yes, I know that's not actually Tuscany, but still]
    In a straight line, it’s about ten miles from France. Indeed the background high hills, where I am headed tomorrow, probably are France, or at least the border thereof.

    Meanwhile the dog for scale wishes to make it known that the apparent black eye is a photographic peculiarity, and doesn’t arise from any misjudged pursuit of his ball, an encounter with an Italian cat, or any interaction with his owner.
    He also cannot explain how he managed to cast two opposing shadows.
    https://youtu.be/goVU20DNwY8?si=18QAQB0rhAXcpNld
    What’s a clip from a children’s programme got to do with anything?
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 4,913

    There's probably a risk of too much attention being paid to the triple lock. It's a useful indicator of whether a party is remotely serious, but it's far from being the be-all and end-all.

    Subscribe needs to do some serious thinking that goes a bit deeper than that.

    It's pointless discussing the triple lock if every party endorse it for fear of the electorate

    They are all as bad as each other
    Which is why the way out is taxation.

    The basic pension, at approx the IT threshold, isnt a lot.

    The issue is, people on 50k pensions sticking that on top.

    So

    1) merge employee NI and IT.
    2) Pensioners on the basic rate of tax continue with the old rate of tax.
    3) Pensioners on the higher rate pay the new rate of tax (old IT + NI)
    4) Quadruple lock - the state pension sets the tax free allowance for everyone.

    This means that everyone pays NI (in effect) on all income. Except poorer pensioners.

    And you can boast of improving the triple lock to a quadruple lock.
    I agree all apart from 2. I wouldn't be avetse to paying NI and tax on all money above allowance.
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 5,359
    edited 4:41PM

    Taz said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @forwardnotback

    One of @UKLabour’s better attack messages


    That’s pretty good.
    Yes but again labour promoting Reform
    No, it is something that has been discussed on here including in the headers, if Reform looks like mostly a bunch of ex Tories that's bad for Reform and good for Labour.
    I wonder whether it is also good for the Tories if they are eventually seen as just a bunch of failed Tories.

    Maybe not in the short term, but come 2029?
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 47,564
    edited 4:39PM
    I've had a blinding flash. Hasn't happened for a while but just now - fizz bang wallop - I've had one. It's this. Reform will not be able to win the next general election on immigration. The space is getting too crowded and the issue is close to peaking in salience. So to win they are going to have convince people across the board on things like the economy, health, education, defence, taxation and the public finances. They might succeed in this but it'll be a huge challenge for what is essentially a one man band. They are a lay at current prices imo.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 67,777

    eek said:

    I am not sure I can be in the same party as Robert Jenrick.

    If the party wants to go down the Jenrick route then it deserves to die.

    Just in case anyone was naive enough to take his comments last night as throwaway chat at a Tory dinner, he comes up today demanding that we TAKE OUR COUNTRY BACK.

    We're now in a polity where the parties of the right are so hard over to the right that they have to compete with each other about who can stoke division and hate the hardest.

    Sorry mate, the party is cooked. Because even if Badenoch is ousted you're getting *that* as leader, after whom there will be little left.
    If Bob was dog whistling for clicks and headlines he can award himself an A*.
    It's unusual for a prospective leader of one of the main parties to persuade me *not* to vote for a party he's in charge of before he even gets the job! well done, Jenrick!
    I suspect Honest Bob has calculated that for every JosiasJessop he repels he attracts ten Lucy Connollys.
    Like it or not, an awful lot of people in the country think Farage is right about immigration. People like my next door neighbour. Not a beer swilling, skinhead, BNP type racist, just someone who think that immigration is out of control.

    I am not suggesting he is wrong or right, but if you want to get elected you need votes. And you need enough to get you a majority.
    Good politicians... well, bad politicians as well... I guess I'm saying effective politicians don't just follow the little-thought-through views of the electorate. They persuade the electorate. They respond to the concerns of the electorate (they think immigration has been out of control), but not by just giving them the obvious kneejerk response (saying immigration is still out of control and all immigrants are bad).
    I think good politicians are also ones who realise that sometimes the plebs are right.
    Jenrick has taken the media by storm today and certainly made the news

    Apparently Badenoch is being interviewed by Beth Rigby from the conference live on Sky at 5.00pm
    Yes, after last week's disastrous Labour Party Conference your party has captured the narrative (captured exclusively by Jenrick).

    You have had a great day today! No news is bad news, and he has stolen the news cycle.
    I had a great day shopping with my good lady and not really into the news

    It is good to realise everything is not about politics
    Exactly what is a ‘good day shopping’; I can’t imagine such a thing.
    I am so sorry for being insensitive, but just to be able to get to M & S together with our mobility issues is a good day for us

    I have serious mobility issues but I can’t see a trip to M&S as being something to aim at!
    There’s a choice of coffee shops (Costa, m&s cafe, Hotel Chocolat) and ice cream nearby
    No pub?
    Yes but @eek is referring to the immediate shopping area which is adjacent to M & S
  • DoubleCarpetDoubleCarpet Posts: 971
    kinabalu said:

    I've had a blinding flash. Hasn't happened for a while but just now - fizz bang wallop - I've had one. It's this. Reform will not be able to win the next general election on immigration. The space is getting too crowded and the issue is close to peaking in salience. So to win they are going to have convince people across the board on things like the economy, health, education, defence, taxation and the public finances. They might succeed in this but it'll be a huge challenge for what is essentially a one man band. They are a lay at current prices imo.

    Weren't you saying last year that Trump was a lay?
  • RogerRoger Posts: 21,220
    You know the old saying about digging.........

    Well someone needs to give these Tories at conference a whole load of free gaffer tape and tell them to button up while they've still got a party to save
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 64,326
    Trouble is, we all think it's bonkers, but last time I checked polling support for the triple-lock was very strong, even among younger voters.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 26,054
    IanB2 said:

    viewcode said:

    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    Meanwhile, my today’s lunch stop (DFS):


    Nice. Almost like Barnsley...

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2644955.stm

    [Yes, I know that's not actually Tuscany, but still]
    In a straight line, it’s about ten miles from France. Indeed the background high hills, where I am headed tomorrow, probably are France, or at least the border thereof.

    Meanwhile the dog for scale wishes to make it known that the apparent black eye is a photographic peculiarity, and doesn’t arise from any misjudged pursuit of his ball, an encounter with an Italian cat, or any interaction with his owner.
    He also cannot explain how he managed to cast two opposing shadows.
    https://youtu.be/goVU20DNwY8?si=18QAQB0rhAXcpNld
    What’s a clip from a children’s programme got to do with anything?
    (Technically Dr Who is not a children's programme, being made by the Drama dept before it was outsourced. But I digress)

    The episode in question is "Silence in the Library" and the villains are the Vashta Nerada, a race of tiny predators who hunt in packs and hide in shadows. They attach themselves to their victims and this attachment is visible as a second shadow. Since @IanB2 's pleasant dog has two shadows, I was suggesting he (the dog) would be predated by the Vashta Nerada and reduced to a skeleton

    Which would be ruff

    😎
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 64,326
    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    The Tories seem intent on casting themselves into irrelevance by their attempt to out-Reform Reform.

    They appear to have missed the fact that there is a gap in the market on economic restructuring/radical reform of the state literally crying out for someone to fill it, and instead are majoring on who can announce the most authoritarian policy/say the most dubious comment.

    It is a desperate strategy I believe is doomed to fail. I am not even saying they shouldn’t tack to the right on certain topics, but that should not have been their emphasis. Anyone who wants a strong border policy and wants a culture war is already deserting them for Farage. They cannot offer anything different in that space.

    There may be a gap in the market, but how big is it?
    It's like the post earlier bemoaning the LD's not being Orange Book enough.
    There's plenty on here up for it. But few in the general population.
    And most of us who accept the patriotic need for economic restructuring shuffle away a bit nervously when its consequences look like getting too near us. If you want to know why Mel Stride is planning to not touch the triple lock, look at who votes for his party. Same goes for those who want to leave taxes unraised and those who want to leave public spending uncut.

    The politics were hard enough in 2008-10, they are harder still now.
    Indeed.
    There's a good reason why the "economic restructuring" which is wildly popular on PB is exclusively a tax cuts for the well off, benefits and service cuts for the rest kind.
    Why should all parties inhabit a space that requires high taxes and high spending in perpetuity? Why is there not a space for a party arguing for a smaller state, lower taxes, and working better with public expenditure?

    This is not a message that is just the preserve of the “well off”, as you term it.
    The State has shrunk, in many ways.

    Let's break down government spending - education, healthcare, defence, pensions etc - and look at how much they were as a percentage of GDP in both 2007 and 2024:
                    2007/8          2024/5          Change
    Health 7.1% 9.2% +2.1pp
    Education 5.6% 4.1% -1.5pp
    Defence 2.4% 2.1% -0.3pp
    State pensions 3.5% 5.1% +1.6pp
    Interest 2.0% 3.1% +1.1pp
    Pulic order 2.1% 1.9% -0.2pp
    As a percentage of GDP, the amount we spend on justice (police, prisons and courts) has fallen by a tenth, defence has dropped more. While education spending has sharply contracted.

    By contrast what we spend on oldies has risen shaply. Spending on health has risen by as much as we spend in total on defence! Spending on state pensions has increased by the equivalent of 40% of the education budget.

    There is genuine austerity in government. We just don't see it, because we're spending ever more on oldies. (And bear in mind, this excludes all the local government spending on oldies.)
    Utterly bonkers.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 57,278

    Trouble is, we all think it's bonkers, but last time I checked polling support for the triple-lock was very strong, even among younger voters.

    The way to do it, it to raise the pension age faster than is currently proposed.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 67,777
    Roger said:

    You know the old saying about digging.........

    Well someone needs to give these Tories at conference a whole load of free gaffer tape and tell them to button up while they've still got a party to save

    You dont get politics do you

    Shut anyone up with a different view is your preferred mantra ?
  • RattersRatters Posts: 1,506
    edited 4:46PM
    maaarsh said:

    There's probably a risk of too much attention being paid to the triple lock. It's a useful indicator of whether a party is remotely serious, but it's far from being the be-all and end-all.

    Subscribe needs to do some serious thinking that goes a bit deeper than that.

    It's pointless discussing the triple lock if every party endorse it for fear of the electorate

    They are all as bad as each other
    Which is why the way out is taxation.

    The basic pension, at approx the IT threshold, isnt a lot.

    The issue is, people on 50k pensions sticking that on top.

    So

    1) merge employee NI and IT.
    2) Pensioners on the basic rate of tax continue with the old rate of tax.
    3) Pensioners on the higher rate pay the new rate of tax (old IT + NI)
    4) Quadruple lock - the state pension sets the tax free allowance for everyone.

    This means that everyone pays NI (in effect) on all income. Except poorer pensioners.

    And you can boast of improving the triple lock to a quadruple lock.
    Not sure doubling down on the triple lock problem by applying the same ratchet to personal allowance to further hollow out the already extremely narrow tax base is the way forward unless you want to work towards a UBI by stealth with obscene tax rates on 50k+ to help fund a free ride for most people.
    Yep. If state pensions go above the tax free threshold, just reduce any pay above that threshold by 20% at source, as no one will be eligible for it regardless of tax status.

    So if you announce a £15k state pension and £12.5k personal allowance, then plug in a £14.5k payment into the computer in terms of what actually gets paid.
  • TazTaz Posts: 21,310
    Sandpit said:

    Trouble is, we all think it's bonkers, but last time I checked polling support for the triple-lock was very strong, even among younger voters.

    The way to do it, it to raise the pension age faster than is currently proposed.
    Which will happen when the pension age review reports in 2029. 2029 !!

    Hardly fair on those coming up who are a decade or so away from retirement. They have to wait longer to protect others already getting money.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 26,063
    Roger said:

    You know the old saying about digging.........

    Well someone needs to give these Tories at conference a whole load of free gaffer tape and tell them to button up while they've still got a party to save

    LOL

    youve spent years wishing death on the Conservative Party and now they are on their last legs youre calling in the medics
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 34,889
    Wow.

    BBC R4 PM interview Conservative Peer Lord Tony Sewell as an impartial foil to Jenrick's commentary. Instead he agreed and doubled down on Jenrick's analysis.

    The BBC has lost the plot. Jenrick has unfortunately had the greatest day of his career. He has put the Tories in the forefront of public opinion.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 53,068
    edited 4:49PM

    Trouble is, we all think it's bonkers, but last time I checked polling support for the triple-lock was very strong, even among younger voters.

    But any policy question will produce a result like that if there’s no downside to the cost. Ask us anziani whether we support free toys for toddlers and we’d mostly say yes.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 67,777

    Wow.

    BBC R4 PM interview Conservative Peer Lord Tony Sewell as an impartial foil to Jenrick's commentary. Instead he agreed and doubled down on Jenrick's analysis.

    The BBC has lost the plot. Jenrick has unfortunately had the greatest day of his career. He has put the Tories in the forefront of public opinion.

    Has he though ?

    That is an unanswered question
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 34,889

    Part of the problem with Jenrick's claim of no white faces and a lack of integration is that he appears to lump all non-white people into one bucket, as if different non-white people living together and integrating with each other doesn't count.

    He's read the media narrative brilliantly. He should have been vilified. He's been congratulated.
Sign In or Register to comment.