I just found out my favourite Indian restaurant is currently battling a noise complaint from someone who has just bought the flat above. An unlicensed family place with no music. This is not the first time one of my fave spots has had to deal with something like this.
If I work out who it is there will certainly be some noise. Anyway, my point is that getting our pubs and restaurants buzzing is something we should welcome, particularly as it's part of the economy not under threat from AI. Ditching NIMBY regulation and welcoming such a buzz is really important for this sector.
I don't have a problem with the idea (actually I approve), but this was the lead story on the Guardian website. Which suggests it was briefed as a major initiative.
I just found out my favourite Indian restaurant is currently battling a noise complaint from someone who has just bought the flat above. An unlicensed family place with no music. This is not the first time one of my fave spots has had to deal with something like this.
If I work out who it is there will certainly be some noise. Anyway, my point is that getting our pubs and restaurants buzzing is something we should welcome, particularly as it's part of the economy not under threat from AI. Ditching NIMBY regulation and welcoming such a buzz is really important for this sector.
Almost bad as our local Turkish restaurant being pursued by Lewisham Council for £2.5 million under the Proceeds of Crime Act, because an extractor vent - which they installed because a neighbour complained about barbecue smells - didn’t comply with planning regs.
Badenoch’s SDLT idea is a good one. It needs to be paid for, ideally by land value taxation.
As it happens I was on a panel at the conference fringe on Monday and we were asked a question by a CIOT representative in the audience about what single revenue-neutral tax measure we would suggest to boost growth.
I said abolish SDLT and replace with land value taxation. TimSdamus. I did think the shadow treasury minister to my right looked a bit perplexed by my answer. Did he worry there was a leak?
The Times loved it. I’m glad she did well, it would be a shame if she were the equivalent of a one cap wonder. In an ideal world the stories and Reform will team up somehow. I think I might be beginning to prefer Badenoch’s Tories to Reform, who seem to be a little bit brash
Kemi Badenoch stamps her authority and gets the crowd on its feet
She pulled it off. She marched from the stage in a vague sense of triumph. There were chants of “Kemi! Kemi! Kemi!”. They may have been more than a little underwhelming, but they happened. On her way out of the hall she shook hands with a young man who appeared at first sight to be standing on the safety barrier but was, in fact, merely the tallest person anyone present had ever seen, seven feet at a minimum.
Her first ever conference speech had been a success. If the Tories have any desire to be taken even remotely seriously ever again, they may wish to consider resisting the temptation to make it her last.
ICE is really upset that local businesses in Chicago and Seattle won’t let them use the potty and I just have to admit, I apologize to the 3rd Amendment for previously underestimating its importance https://x.com/lydiakauppi/status/1975749485192999086
Badenoch’s SDLT idea is a good one. It needs to be paid for, ideally by land value taxation.
As it happens I was on a panel at the conference fringe on Monday and we were asked a question by a CIOT representative in the audience about what single revenue-neutral tax measure we would suggest to boost growth.
I said abolish SDLT and replace with land value taxation. TimSdamus. I did think the shadow treasury minister to my right looked a bit perplexed by my answer. Did he worry there was a leak?
That's the rub.
There's half a good idea here- SDLT is a bad way of taxing things- it's lumpy and deters people from moving house. But the other half of the idea is missing; the "plan" is that fairies are going to provide the money, and the effect would be to bung cash at rich southern downsizers.
As things stand, the badness of the second half (which bit of the "there's not even enough money to afford a note saying that there's no money" do the Conservatives not understand?) outweighs the virtue of the first half.
I just watched it. Was certainly well-delivered and she seemed entirely at ease: a good sign as temperament is incredibly important in a role like that.
I keep going backwards and forwards with Kemi. She has become leader too early, perhaps fatally so, like Hague. And yet, the talent is there, and maybe a sprinkling of stardust. But the ogre of May 2026 lies in wait. I wish her luck as she could well be a good thing.
I thought the speech utterly incoherent. Actually worse than Liz Truss. The difference of course was that Truss was Prime Minister and important, while Badenoch fortunately is irrelevant.
The Times loved it. I’m glad she did well, it would be a shame if she were the equivalent of a one cap wonder. In an ideal world the stories and Reform will team up somehow. I think I might be beginning to prefer Badenoch’s Tories to Reform, who seem to be a little bit brash
Kemi Badenoch stamps her authority and gets the crowd on its feet
She pulled it off. She marched from the stage in a vague sense of triumph. There were chants of “Kemi! Kemi! Kemi!”. They may have been more than a little underwhelming, but they happened. On her way out of the hall she shook hands with a young man who appeared at first sight to be standing on the safety barrier but was, in fact, merely the tallest person anyone present had ever seen, seven feet at a minimum.
Her first ever conference speech had been a success. If the Tories have any desire to be taken even remotely seriously ever again, they may wish to consider resisting the temptation to make it her last.
Didn't Tone usher in twenty-four hour drinking all those years ago?
Someone could write a book on the methodical process by which late night stuff is being cutoff and shut down.
My favourite, recently, was the opposition of the police to a jazz venue in Covent Garden. Which would lead to crime, according to the police.
No, they didn’t think that black musicians would be encouraging the smoking of The Demon Weed.
They said that it would encourage muggers and pickpockets to target the clientele….
Forget the day-to-day weather; the long-term climatic cycle has been that the British Boomers (born up to about 1965) have basically got what they wanted at each stage of their lives. Hedonism in their youth, as much free education as they wanted, cheap money and houses as they settled down, low taxes while they were paying in... then slam on the brakes, no more building by me, defintiely no noisy young people and more generous provision than they funded for their parents.
And they have been so electorally hefty that politicians have had little choice but to dance to their tune.
Badenoch’s SDLT idea is a good one. It needs to be paid for, ideally by land value taxation.
As it happens I was on a panel at the conference fringe on Monday and we were asked a question by a CIOT representative in the audience about what single revenue-neutral tax measure we would suggest to boost growth.
I said abolish SDLT and replace with land value taxation. TimSdamus. I did think the shadow treasury minister to my right looked a bit perplexed by my answer. Did he worry there was a leak?
That's the rub.
There's half a good idea here- SDLT is a bad way of taxing things- it's lumpy and deters people from moving house. But the other half of the idea is missing; the "plan" is that fairies are going to provide the money, and the effect would be to bung cash at rich southern downsizers.
As things stand, the badness of the second half (which bit of the "there's not even enough money to afford a note saying that there's no money" do the Conservatives not understand?) outweighs the virtue of the first half.
Utter garbage.
The Tories identified £47bn worth of savings. Not enough granted, but a start. They have 'spent' approximately £8bn of that in tax cuts. That makes them £39bn more responsible than your bunch of goons. As things stand, it makes them more responsible fiscally than any major party, and it isn't even close.
Your very acute case of sour grapes that the Tory conference was a success is embarrassing. I'd have a lie down and forget about it.
Didn't Tone usher in twenty-four hour drinking all those years ago?
Someone could write a book on the methodical process by which late night stuff is being cutoff and shut down.
My favourite, recently, was the opposition of the police to a jazz venue in Covent Garden. Which would lead to crime, according to the police.
No, they didn’t think that black musicians would be encouraging the smoking of The Demon Weed.
They said that it would encourage muggers and pickpockets to target the clientele….
Forget the day-to-day weather; the long-term climatic cycle has been that the British Boomers (born up to about 1965) have basically got what they wanted at each stage of their lives. Hedonism in their youth, as much free education as they wanted, cheap money and houses as they settled down, low taxes while they were paying in... then slam on the brakes, no more building by me, defintiely no noisy young people and more generous provision than they funded for their parents.
And they have been so electorally hefty that politicians have had little choice but to dance to their tune.
Glad I was born a year too late. They sound selfish bastards.
Sources close to Hamas telling me a deal is done between Israel and Hamas on #Gaza. “Now for the hard work” he added. Announcement could come as soon as tonight.
Didn't Tone usher in twenty-four hour drinking all those years ago?
Someone could write a book on the methodical process by which late night stuff is being cutoff and shut down.
My favourite, recently, was the opposition of the police to a jazz venue in Covent Garden. Which would lead to crime, according to the police.
No, they didn’t think that black musicians would be encouraging the smoking of The Demon Weed.
They said that it would encourage muggers and pickpockets to target the clientele….
Forget the day-to-day weather; the long-term climatic cycle has been that the British Boomers (born up to about 1965) have basically got what they wanted at each stage of their lives. Hedonism in their youth, as much free education as they wanted, cheap money and houses as they settled down, low taxes while they were paying in... then slam on the brakes, no more building by me, defintiely no noisy young people and more generous provision than they funded for their parents.
And they have been so electorally hefty that politicians have had little choice but to dance to their tune.
It's not so much old residents in, say, Soho. The dynamics are much more interesting. Part is property developers - see the chap closing the Prince Charles Cinema. Part is using people living in council housing in the areas as the complaints to head the campaigns. There is a a lot of money behind this and it's quite methodical.
Am struggling to understand why a massive tax cut for expensive homeowners in the southeast would have been received so positively by the folk at the Times?
Secretary of State Marco Rubio whispers in the ear of President Donald Trump after handing him a note about a Middle East deal saying “Very close. We need you to approve a Truth Social post soon so you can announce deal first”
Conference season ends and I believe the unexpected happened
Kemi Badenoch delivered the best speech, rolled out an array of policies, and stamp duty the 'rabbit out of the hat'
She energised her supporters and have given them something to sell on the doorstep
And she did what I prayed she would, sent out a positive [conservative] message and barely mentioned Starmer or Farage
Labour and Farage fell into the trap of hurling insults at each other to the detriment of both
The added bonus is Jenrick is the biggest loser
I do not know how the polls will react, but today was a start on the long road to relevance
Rabbit out of a hat, or bollocks out of her arse?
Pound shop Liz Truss.
A tad rattled?
Kemi explained where the money is coming from and it has been welcomed by most think tanks with Paul Johnson formerly of the IFS saying it is the worse of many bad taxes
Furthermore it will be excellent for growth
She is not speaking to the tribal opposition but laying out a path to a recovering party
Reeves has done far more damage to our economy than the 6 weeks of Truss evidenced by higher bond rates today
Sources close to Hamas telling me a deal is done between Israel and Hamas on #Gaza. “Now for the hard work” he added. Announcement could come as soon as tonight.
Conference season ends and I believe the unexpected happened
Kemi Badenoch delivered the best speech, rolled out an array of policies, and stamp duty the 'rabbit out of the hat'
She energised her supporters and have given them something to sell on the doorstep
And she did what I prayed she would, sent out a positive [conservative] message and barely mentioned Starmer or Farage
Labour and Farage fell into the trap of hurling insults at each other to the detriment of both
The added bonus is Jenrick is the biggest loser
I do not know how the polls will react, but today was a start on the long road to relevance
Rabbit out of a hat, or bollocks out of her arse?
Pound shop Liz Truss.
A tad rattled?
Kemi explained where the money is coming from and it has been welcomed by most think tanks with Paul Johnson formerly of the IFS saying it is the worse of many bad taxes
Furthermore it will be excellent for growth
She is not speaking to the tribal opposition but laying out a path to a recovering party
Reeves has done far more damage to our economy than the 6 weeks of Truss evidenced by higher bond rates today
Quite.
I was wondering what you thought of the speech, and it's nice to be aligned for once.
I just watched it. Was certainly well-delivered and she seemed entirely at ease: a good sign as temperament is incredibly important in a role like that.
I keep going backwards and forwards with Kemi. She has become leader too early, perhaps fatally so, like Hague. And yet, the talent is there, and maybe a sprinkling of stardust. But the ogre of May 2026 lies in wait. I wish her luck as she could well be a good thing.
I thought the speech utterly incoherent. Actually worse than Liz Truss. The difference of course was that Truss was Prime Minister and important, while Badenoch fortunately is irrelevant.
Badenoch’s SDLT idea is a good one. It needs to be paid for, ideally by land value taxation.
As it happens I was on a panel at the conference fringe on Monday and we were asked a question by a CIOT representative in the audience about what single revenue-neutral tax measure we would suggest to boost growth.
I said abolish SDLT and replace with land value taxation. TimSdamus. I did think the shadow treasury minister to my right looked a bit perplexed by my answer. Did he worry there was a leak?
That's the rub.
There's half a good idea here- SDLT is a bad way of taxing things- it's lumpy and deters people from moving house. But the other half of the idea is missing; the "plan" is that fairies are going to provide the money, and the effect would be to bung cash at rich southern downsizers.
As things stand, the badness of the second half (which bit of the "there's not even enough money to afford a note saying that there's no money" do the Conservatives not understand?) outweighs the virtue of the first half.
The attraction of stamp duty is that there is actually liquid cash to tax. The nonsense is that the buyer pays the tax while the seller makes the profit.
Conference season ends and I believe the unexpected happened
Kemi Badenoch delivered the best speech, rolled out an array of policies, and stamp duty the 'rabbit out of the hat'
She energised her supporters and have given them something to sell on the doorstep
And she did what I prayed she would, sent out a positive [conservative] message and barely mentioned Starmer or Farage
Labour and Farage fell into the trap of hurling insults at each other to the detriment of both
The added bonus is Jenrick is the biggest loser
I do not know how the polls will react, but today was a start on the long road to relevance
Rabbit out of a hat, or bollocks out of her arse?
Pound shop Liz Truss.
A tad rattled?
Kemi explained where the money is coming from and it has been welcomed by most think tanks with Paul Johnson formerly of the IFS saying it is the worse of many bad taxes
Furthermore it will be excellent for growth
She is not speaking to the tribal opposition but laying out a path to a recovering party
Reeves has done far more damage to our economy than the 6 weeks of Truss evidenced by higher bond rates today
Property prices will simply rise to make up the difference. Buyers will be no better off, but sellers will trouser the cash that would otherwise be funding public services and bolstering the nation's defences.
Conference season ends and I believe the unexpected happened
Kemi Badenoch delivered the best speech, rolled out an array of policies, and stamp duty the 'rabbit out of the hat'
She energised her supporters and have given them something to sell on the doorstep
And she did what I prayed she would, sent out a positive [conservative] message and barely mentioned Starmer or Farage
Labour and Farage fell into the trap of hurling insults at each other to the detriment of both
The added bonus is Jenrick is the biggest loser
I do not know how the polls will react, but today was a start on the long road to relevance
Rabbit out of a hat, or bollocks out of her arse?
Pound shop Liz Truss.
A tad rattled?
Kemi explained where the money is coming from and it has been welcomed by most think tanks with Paul Johnson formerly of the IFS saying it is the worse of many bad taxes
Furthermore it will be excellent for growth
She is not speaking to the tribal opposition but laying out a path to a recovering party
Reeves has done far more damage to our economy than the 6 weeks of Truss evidenced by higher bond rates today
Quite.
I was wondering what you thought of the speech, and it's nice to be aligned for once.
Conference season ends and I believe the unexpected happened
Kemi Badenoch delivered the best speech, rolled out an array of policies, and stamp duty the 'rabbit out of the hat'
She energised her supporters and have given them something to sell on the doorstep
And she did what I prayed she would, sent out a positive [conservative] message and barely mentioned Starmer or Farage
Labour and Farage fell into the trap of hurling insults at each other to the detriment of both
The added bonus is Jenrick is the biggest loser
I do not know how the polls will react, but today was a start on the long road to relevance
Rabbit out of a hat, or bollocks out of her arse?
Pound shop Liz Truss.
A tad rattled?
Kemi explained where the money is coming from and it has been welcomed by most think tanks with Paul Johnson formerly of the IFS saying it is the worse of many bad taxes
Furthermore it will be excellent for growth
She is not speaking to the tribal opposition but laying out a path to a recovering party
Reeves has done far more damage to our economy than the 6 weeks of Truss evidenced by higher bond rates today
Property prices will simply rise to make up the difference. Buyers will be no better off, but sellers will trouser the cash that would otherwise be funding public services and bolstering the nation's defences.
Property prices are governed by affordability and adding stamp duty will make them much more unaffordable
The money saved will generate a lot of growth in the economy to pay towards public services and pay down debt
Badenoch’s SDLT idea is a good one. It needs to be paid for, ideally by land value taxation.
As it happens I was on a panel at the conference fringe on Monday and we were asked a question by a CIOT representative in the audience about what single revenue-neutral tax measure we would suggest to boost growth.
I said abolish SDLT and replace with land value taxation. TimSdamus. I did think the shadow treasury minister to my right looked a bit perplexed by my answer. Did he worry there was a leak?
That's the rub.
There's half a good idea here- SDLT is a bad way of taxing things- it's lumpy and deters people from moving house. But the other half of the idea is missing; the "plan" is that fairies are going to provide the money, and the effect would be to bung cash at rich southern downsizers.
As things stand, the badness of the second half (which bit of the "there's not even enough money to afford a note saying that there's no money" do the Conservatives not understand?) outweighs the virtue of the first half.
Utter garbage.
The Tories identified £47bn worth of savings. Not enough granted, but a start. They have 'spent' approximately £8bn of that in tax cuts. That makes them £39bn more responsible than your bunch of goons. As things stand, it makes them more responsible fiscally than any major party, and it isn't even close.
Your very acute case of sour grapes that the Tory conference was a success is embarrassing. I'd have a lie down and forget about it.
Um not quite - they've claimed to find £47bn of spending cuts but without exact details we don't know if that figure is accurate or complete bullshit.
Remember Reform found a whole set of cuts at Kent County Council - supposedly enough that next years council tax increase was cancelled.
Now 4 months later it's looking like another 5% increase to council tax in Kent...
Conference season ends and I believe the unexpected happened
Kemi Badenoch delivered the best speech, rolled out an array of policies, and stamp duty the 'rabbit out of the hat'
She energised her supporters and have given them something to sell on the doorstep
And she did what I prayed she would, sent out a positive [conservative] message and barely mentioned Starmer or Farage
Labour and Farage fell into the trap of hurling insults at each other to the detriment of both
The added bonus is Jenrick is the biggest loser
I do not know how the polls will react, but today was a start on the long road to relevance
Rabbit out of a hat, or bollocks out of her arse?
Pound shop Liz Truss.
No Kemi identified welfare and spending cuts to fund her tax cut
It wasn't just welfare but cuts in climate change subsidies and increasing north sea production with associated tax income, as well as welcoming back millionaires, entrepreneurs, and wealth creators
She also will scrap IHT on farmers and abolish vat on private school fees
Add in banning doctor strikes
This is conservative policies and is a direct challenge to Labour and Reform
Conference season ends and I believe the unexpected happened
Kemi Badenoch delivered the best speech, rolled out an array of policies, and stamp duty the 'rabbit out of the hat'
She energised her supporters and have given them something to sell on the doorstep
And she did what I prayed she would, sent out a positive [conservative] message and barely mentioned Starmer or Farage
Labour and Farage fell into the trap of hurling insults at each other to the detriment of both
The added bonus is Jenrick is the biggest loser
I do not know how the polls will react, but today was a start on the long road to relevance
Rabbit out of a hat, or bollocks out of her arse?
Pound shop Liz Truss.
No Kemi identified welfare and spending cuts to fund her tax cut
It wasn't just welfare but cuts in climate change subsidies and increasing north sea production with associated tax income, as well as welcoming back millionaires, entrepreneurs, and wealth creators
She also will scrap IHT on farmers and abolish vat on private school fees
Add in banning doctor strikes
This is conservative policies and is a direct challenge to Labour and Reform
Scrapping IHT on farmers won't help farmers but just continue the tax dodgy of farm land being a great way of avoiding inheritance tax..
Conference season ends and I believe the unexpected happened
Kemi Badenoch delivered the best speech, rolled out an array of policies, and stamp duty the 'rabbit out of the hat'
She energised her supporters and have given them something to sell on the doorstep
And she did what I prayed she would, sent out a positive [conservative] message and barely mentioned Starmer or Farage
Labour and Farage fell into the trap of hurling insults at each other to the detriment of both
The added bonus is Jenrick is the biggest loser
I do not know how the polls will react, but today was a start on the long road to relevance
Rabbit out of a hat, or bollocks out of her arse?
Pound shop Liz Truss.
No Kemi identified welfare and spending cuts to fund her tax cut
It wasn't just welfare but cuts in climate change subsidies and increasing north sea production with associated tax income, as well as welcoming back millionaires, entrepreneurs, and wealth creators
She also will scrap IHT on farmers and abolish vat on private school fees
Add in banning doctor strikes
This is conservative policies and is a direct challenge to Labour and Reform
Scrapping IHT on farmers won't help farmers but just continue the tax dodgy of farm land being a great way of avoiding inheritance tax..
I just watched it. Was certainly well-delivered and she seemed entirely at ease: a good sign as temperament is incredibly important in a role like that.
I keep going backwards and forwards with Kemi. She has become leader too early, perhaps fatally so, like Hague. And yet, the talent is there, and maybe a sprinkling of stardust. But the ogre of May 2026 lies in wait. I wish her luck as she could well be a good thing.
I thought the speech utterly incoherent. Actually worse than Liz Truss. The difference of course was that Truss was Prime Minister and important, while Badenoch fortunately is irrelevant.
You OK hun?
Not really politically speaking but Badenoch's dismal Conference speech has nothing to do with that. Half her speech was platitudes and insults against the other parties - mainly Labour even though Labour isn't at all the driver for the Conservatives' 16% standing in the polls. But fair enough, if a party leader can't serve platitudes and insult the other parties in a conference speech, when can they?
The other half is the problem. So she says:
[Young people] feel they are living somewhere where things never get any better. Britain is stagnating, while the world around us moves on. We are competing with restless and ambitious countries around the world. We are competing with a billion people in India striving to become middle class. We are competing with economic success stories like Poland. 15 years ago, Polish workers came here to find opportunity. Now, Poland is growing twice as fast as we are. While Britain was redefining what a woman is, China was building five nuclear reactors.
On whose watch did this happen and why? Does she think that happened entirely in the last 14 months? Actually from the rest of the speech it appears she does. But not the slightest hint of the "bold ideas", "positive vision for this country" and "plan to deliver it" in her speech.
A public sector which already every year, demands more and more and more of our money, yet services don’t get better, they get worse.
Why does she think this is? (I have a good idea and interestingly I don't think it's mainly the previous government's fault). Her solution for collapsing public services is to spend less money on them.
Her "fully costed savings" that offset uncosted tax cuts
I just watched it. Was certainly well-delivered and she seemed entirely at ease: a good sign as temperament is incredibly important in a role like that.
I keep going backwards and forwards with Kemi. She has become leader too early, perhaps fatally so, like Hague. And yet, the talent is there, and maybe a sprinkling of stardust. But the ogre of May 2026 lies in wait. I wish her luck as she could well be a good thing.
I thought the speech utterly incoherent. Actually worse than Liz Truss. The difference of course was that Truss was Prime Minister and important, while Badenoch fortunately is irrelevant.
You OK hun?
Not really politically speaking but Badenoch's dismal Conference speech has nothing to do with that. Half her speech was platitudes and insults against the other parties - mainly Labour even though Labour isn't at all the driver for the Conservatives' 16% standing in the polls. But fair enough, if a party leader can't serve platitudes and insult the other parties in a conference speech, when can they?
The other half is the problem. So she says:
[Young people] feel they are living somewhere where things never get any better. Britain is stagnating, while the world around us moves on. We are competing with restless and ambitious countries around the world. We are competing with a billion people in India striving to become middle class. We are competing with economic success stories like Poland. 15 years ago, Polish workers came here to find opportunity. Now, Poland is growing twice as fast as we are. While Britain was redefining what a woman is, China was building five nuclear reactors.
On whose watch did this happen and why? Does she think that happened entirely in the last 14 months? Actually from the rest of the speech it appears she does. But not the slightest hint of the "bold ideas", "positive vision for this country" and "plan to deliver it" in her speech.
A public sector which already every year, demands more and more and more of our money, yet services don’t get better, they get worse.
Why does she think this is? (I have a good idea and interestingly I don't think it's mainly the previous government's fault). Her solution for collapsing public services is to spend less money on them.
Her "fully costed savings" that offset mostly uncosted tax cuts
Starmer and Reeves have done far more damage to our economy with their job destroying budgets and enormous new black hole entirely made in nos 10 and 11
I just watched it. Was certainly well-delivered and she seemed entirely at ease: a good sign as temperament is incredibly important in a role like that.
I keep going backwards and forwards with Kemi. She has become leader too early, perhaps fatally so, like Hague. And yet, the talent is there, and maybe a sprinkling of stardust. But the ogre of May 2026 lies in wait. I wish her luck as she could well be a good thing.
I thought the speech utterly incoherent. Actually worse than Liz Truss. The difference of course was that Truss was Prime Minister and important, while Badenoch fortunately is irrelevant.
You OK hun?
Not really politically speaking but Badenoch's dismal Conference speech has nothing to do with that. Half her speech was platitudes and insults against the other parties - mainly Labour even though Labour isn't at all the driver for the Conservatives' 16% standing in the polls. But fair enough, if a party leader can't serve platitudes and insult the other parties in a conference speech, when can they?
The other half is the problem. So she says:
[Young people] feel they are living somewhere where things never get any better. Britain is stagnating, while the world around us moves on. We are competing with restless and ambitious countries around the world. We are competing with a billion people in India striving to become middle class. We are competing with economic success stories like Poland. 15 years ago, Polish workers came here to find opportunity. Now, Poland is growing twice as fast as we are. While Britain was redefining what a woman is, China was building five nuclear reactors.
On whose watch did this happen and why? Does she think that happened entirely in the last 14 months? Actually from the rest of the speech it appears she does. But not the slightest hint of the "bold ideas", "positive vision for this country" and "plan to deliver it" in her speech.
A public sector which already every year, demands more and more and more of our money, yet services don’t get better, they get worse.
Why does she think this is? (I have a good idea and interestingly I don't think it's mainly the previous government's fault). Her solution for collapsing public services is to spend less money on them.
Her "fully costed savings" that offset mostly uncosted tax cuts
Starmer and Reeves have done far more damage to our economy with their job destroying budgets and enormous new black hole entirely made in nos 10 and 11
No they haven't. Give them time and they may. But it's a colossal leap of magical thinking to imagine they've undone 14 years in 14 months.
I just watched it. Was certainly well-delivered and she seemed entirely at ease: a good sign as temperament is incredibly important in a role like that.
I keep going backwards and forwards with Kemi. She has become leader too early, perhaps fatally so, like Hague. And yet, the talent is there, and maybe a sprinkling of stardust. But the ogre of May 2026 lies in wait. I wish her luck as she could well be a good thing.
I thought the speech utterly incoherent. Actually worse than Liz Truss. The difference of course was that Truss was Prime Minister and important, while Badenoch fortunately is irrelevant.
You OK hun?
Not really politically speaking but Badenoch's dismal Conference speech has nothing to do with that. Half her speech was platitudes and insults against the other parties - mainly Labour even though Labour isn't at all the driver for the Conservatives' 16% standing in the polls. But fair enough, if a party leader can't serve platitudes and insult the other parties in a conference speech, when can they?
The other half is the problem. So she says:
[Young people] feel they are living somewhere where things never get any better. Britain is stagnating, while the world around us moves on. We are competing with restless and ambitious countries around the world. We are competing with a billion people in India striving to become middle class. We are competing with economic success stories like Poland. 15 years ago, Polish workers came here to find opportunity. Now, Poland is growing twice as fast as we are. While Britain was redefining what a woman is, China was building five nuclear reactors.
On whose watch did this happen and why? Does she think that happened entirely in the last 14 months? Actually from the rest of the speech it appears she does. But not the slightest hint of the "bold ideas", "positive vision for this country" and "plan to deliver it" in her speech.
A public sector which already every year, demands more and more and more of our money, yet services don’t get better, they get worse.
Why does she think this is? (I have a good idea and interestingly I don't think it's mainly the previous government's fault). Her solution for collapsing public services is to spend less money on them.
Her "fully costed savings" that offset mostly uncosted tax cuts
Starmer and Reeves have done far more damage to our economy with their job destroying budgets and enormous new black hole entirely made in nos 10 and 11
I blame Starmer and Reeves for not focusing on growth as they said they were going to do and have got far too much caught up in Reform's culture wars. Nevertheless economic growth so far is marginally higher than it was in the last couple of years when Badenoch was in government.
Conference season ends and I believe the unexpected happened
Kemi Badenoch delivered the best speech, rolled out an array of policies, and stamp duty the 'rabbit out of the hat'
She energised her supporters and have given them something to sell on the doorstep
And she did what I prayed she would, sent out a positive [conservative] message and barely mentioned Starmer or Farage
Labour and Farage fell into the trap of hurling insults at each other to the detriment of both
The added bonus is Jenrick is the biggest loser
I do not know how the polls will react, but today was a start on the long road to relevance
Rabbit out of a hat, or bollocks out of her arse?
Pound shop Liz Truss.
No Kemi identified welfare and spending cuts to fund her tax cut
It wasn't just welfare but cuts in climate change subsidies and increasing north sea production with associated tax income, as well as welcoming back millionaires, entrepreneurs, and wealth creators
She also will scrap IHT on farmers and abolish vat on private school fees
Add in banning doctor strikes
This is conservative policies and is a direct challenge to Labour and Reform
Scrapping IHT on farmers won't help farmers but just continue the tax dodgy of farm land being a great way of avoiding inheritance tax..
Of course it will help farmers by ensuring they can pass on the family farm to their sons rather than many having to sell up. Indeed the family farm tax is so awful that not only the Conservatives but Reform, the LDs and even the SNP have also pledged to scrap it.
Reeves could have required farmland to be actively used for livestock or crops to benefit from the agricultural property relief from inheritance tax exemption if she wanted to hit tax dodgers
Conference season ends and I believe the unexpected happened
Kemi Badenoch delivered the best speech, rolled out an array of policies, and stamp duty the 'rabbit out of the hat'
She energised her supporters and have given them something to sell on the doorstep
And she did what I prayed she would, sent out a positive [conservative] message and barely mentioned Starmer or Farage
Labour and Farage fell into the trap of hurling insults at each other to the detriment of both
The added bonus is Jenrick is the biggest loser
I do not know how the polls will react, but today was a start on the long road to relevance
Rabbit out of a hat, or bollocks out of her arse?
Pound shop Liz Truss.
No Kemi identified welfare and spending cuts to fund her tax cut
It wasn't just welfare but cuts in climate change subsidies and increasing north sea production with associated tax income, as well as welcoming back millionaires, entrepreneurs, and wealth creators
She also will scrap IHT on farmers and abolish vat on private school fees
Add in banning doctor strikes
This is conservative policies and is a direct challenge to Labour and Reform
Scrapping IHT on farmers won't help farmers but just continue the tax dodgy of farm land being a great way of avoiding inheritance tax..
Yes but it is good politics
Only for the hard of thinking - there are very few votes in farming even in rural areas...
Conference season ends and I believe the unexpected happened
Kemi Badenoch delivered the best speech, rolled out an array of policies, and stamp duty the 'rabbit out of the hat'
She energised her supporters and have given them something to sell on the doorstep
And she did what I prayed she would, sent out a positive [conservative] message and barely mentioned Starmer or Farage
Labour and Farage fell into the trap of hurling insults at each other to the detriment of both
The added bonus is Jenrick is the biggest loser
I do not know how the polls will react, but today was a start on the long road to relevance
Rabbit out of a hat, or bollocks out of her arse?
Pound shop Liz Truss.
No Kemi identified welfare and spending cuts to fund her tax cut
It wasn't just welfare but cuts in climate change subsidies and increasing north sea production with associated tax income, as well as welcoming back millionaires, entrepreneurs, and wealth creators
She also will scrap IHT on farmers and abolish vat on private school fees
Add in banning doctor strikes
This is conservative policies and is a direct challenge to Labour and Reform
Scrapping IHT on farmers won't help farmers but just continue the tax dodgy of farm land being a great way of avoiding inheritance tax..
Yes but it is good politics
Yes. They've bought off pensioners, farmers, private schools and wealthy SE home owners. All just at the cost of the mentally ill, Northerners, renters, the climate, those who can't afford five figures a year for their kids' education and other people of no importance. They're putting the band back together for another Century of British growth.
Conference season ends and I believe the unexpected happened
Kemi Badenoch delivered the best speech, rolled out an array of policies, and stamp duty the 'rabbit out of the hat'
She energised her supporters and have given them something to sell on the doorstep
And she did what I prayed she would, sent out a positive [conservative] message and barely mentioned Starmer or Farage
Labour and Farage fell into the trap of hurling insults at each other to the detriment of both
The added bonus is Jenrick is the biggest loser
I do not know how the polls will react, but today was a start on the long road to relevance
Rabbit out of a hat, or bollocks out of her arse?
Pound shop Liz Truss.
No Kemi identified welfare and spending cuts to fund her tax cut
It wasn't just welfare but cuts in climate change subsidies and increasing north sea production with associated tax income, as well as welcoming back millionaires, entrepreneurs, and wealth creators
She also will scrap IHT on farmers and abolish vat on private school fees
Add in banning doctor strikes
This is conservative policies and is a direct challenge to Labour and Reform
Scrapping IHT on farmers won't help farmers but just continue the tax dodgy of farm land being a great way of avoiding inheritance tax..
Yes but it is good politics
Yes. They've bought off pensioners, farmers and wealthy SE home owners. All just at the cost of the mentally ill, Northerners, renters and the climate and other people of no merit. They're putting the band back together for another Century of British growth.
The mentally ill will be helped back to work, more apprenticeships will be available for young northerners, renters will still have homes to rent as landlords will not be hammered as Labour and the Greens plan to do
Conference season ends and I believe the unexpected happened
Kemi Badenoch delivered the best speech, rolled out an array of policies, and stamp duty the 'rabbit out of the hat'
She energised her supporters and have given them something to sell on the doorstep
And she did what I prayed she would, sent out a positive [conservative] message and barely mentioned Starmer or Farage
Labour and Farage fell into the trap of hurling insults at each other to the detriment of both
The added bonus is Jenrick is the biggest loser
I do not know how the polls will react, but today was a start on the long road to relevance
Rabbit out of a hat, or bollocks out of her arse?
Pound shop Liz Truss.
No Kemi identified welfare and spending cuts to fund her tax cut
It wasn't just welfare but cuts in climate change subsidies and increasing north sea production with associated tax income, as well as welcoming back millionaires, entrepreneurs, and wealth creators
She also will scrap IHT on farmers and abolish vat on private school fees
Add in banning doctor strikes
This is conservative policies and is a direct challenge to Labour and Reform
Scrapping IHT on farmers won't help farmers but just continue the tax dodgy of farm land being a great way of avoiding inheritance tax..
Of course it will help farmers by ensuring they can pass on the family farm to their sons rather than many having to sell up. Indeed the family farm tax is so awful that not only the Conservatives but Reform, the LDs and even the SNP have also pledged to scrap it.
Reeves could have required farmland to be actively used for livestock or crops to benefit from the agricultural property relief from inheritance tax exemption if she wanted to hit tax dodgers
Um the land is usually actively used just by a tenant farmer....
Conference season ends and I believe the unexpected happened
Kemi Badenoch delivered the best speech, rolled out an array of policies, and stamp duty the 'rabbit out of the hat'
She energised her supporters and have given them something to sell on the doorstep
And she did what I prayed she would, sent out a positive [conservative] message and barely mentioned Starmer or Farage
Labour and Farage fell into the trap of hurling insults at each other to the detriment of both
The added bonus is Jenrick is the biggest loser
I do not know how the polls will react, but today was a start on the long road to relevance
Rabbit out of a hat, or bollocks out of her arse?
Pound shop Liz Truss.
No Kemi identified welfare and spending cuts to fund her tax cut
It wasn't just welfare but cuts in climate change subsidies and increasing north sea production with associated tax income, as well as welcoming back millionaires, entrepreneurs, and wealth creators
She also will scrap IHT on farmers and abolish vat on private school fees
Add in banning doctor strikes
This is conservative policies and is a direct challenge to Labour and Reform
Scrapping IHT on farmers won't help farmers but just continue the tax dodgy of farm land being a great way of avoiding inheritance tax..
Yes but it is good politics
Yes. They've bought off pensioners, farmers and wealthy SE home owners. All just at the cost of the mentally ill, Northerners, renters and the climate and other people of no merit. They're putting the band back together for another Century of British growth.
The mentally ill will be helped back to work, more apprenticeships will be available for young northerners, renters will still have homes to rent as landlords will not be hammered as Labour and the Greens plan to do
No they won't. They weren't before. Where are the detailed plans to outline how this will happen now? And. More pertinently. Why should we be stupid enough to believe there is the will to do any of this?
Conference season ends and I believe the unexpected happened
Kemi Badenoch delivered the best speech, rolled out an array of policies, and stamp duty the 'rabbit out of the hat'
She energised her supporters and have given them something to sell on the doorstep
And she did what I prayed she would, sent out a positive [conservative] message and barely mentioned Starmer or Farage
Labour and Farage fell into the trap of hurling insults at each other to the detriment of both
The added bonus is Jenrick is the biggest loser
I do not know how the polls will react, but today was a start on the long road to relevance
Rabbit out of a hat, or bollocks out of her arse?
Pound shop Liz Truss.
No Kemi identified welfare and spending cuts to fund her tax cut
It wasn't just welfare but cuts in climate change subsidies and increasing north sea production with associated tax income, as well as welcoming back millionaires, entrepreneurs, and wealth creators
She also will scrap IHT on farmers and abolish vat on private school fees
Add in banning doctor strikes
This is conservative policies and is a direct challenge to Labour and Reform
Scrapping IHT on farmers won't help farmers but just continue the tax dodgy of farm land being a great way of avoiding inheritance tax..
Yes but it is good politics
Only for the hard of thinking - there are very few votes in farming even in rural areas...
In small hamlets and villages like where we live half the population are farmers or work on farms and in rural seats those voters can swing such seats. Hence not only rural Tory MPs but rural LD and SNP MPs and Reform oppose the hated family farm tax
Conference season ends and I believe the unexpected happened
Kemi Badenoch delivered the best speech, rolled out an array of policies, and stamp duty the 'rabbit out of the hat'
She energised her supporters and have given them something to sell on the doorstep
And she did what I prayed she would, sent out a positive [conservative] message and barely mentioned Starmer or Farage
Labour and Farage fell into the trap of hurling insults at each other to the detriment of both
The added bonus is Jenrick is the biggest loser
I do not know how the polls will react, but today was a start on the long road to relevance
Rabbit out of a hat, or bollocks out of her arse?
Pound shop Liz Truss.
No Kemi identified welfare and spending cuts to fund her tax cut
It wasn't just welfare but cuts in climate change subsidies and increasing north sea production with associated tax income, as well as welcoming back millionaires, entrepreneurs, and wealth creators
She also will scrap IHT on farmers and abolish vat on private school fees
Add in banning doctor strikes
This is conservative policies and is a direct challenge to Labour and Reform
Scrapping IHT on farmers won't help farmers but just continue the tax dodgy of farm land being a great way of avoiding inheritance tax..
Of course it will help farmers by ensuring they can pass on the family farm to their sons rather than many having to sell up. Indeed the family farm tax is so awful that not only the Conservatives but Reform, the LDs and even the SNP have also pledged to scrap it.
Reeves could have required farmland to be actively used for livestock or crops to benefit from the agricultural property relief from inheritance tax exemption if she wanted to hit tax dodgers
Um the land is usually actively used just by a tenant farmer....
So not really just a tax dodge if it is being farmed
PB Tory hyperbole back to levels not seen since the pandemic.
I thought the week belonged to Jenrick, but it seems an insanely costed positive tax cut does the trick.
Still if it keeps Farage and Jenrick in their boxes, an £11.6b tax cut with no inverse tax rise, predicated on swingeing cuts not seen between the years 2010 to 2024 and economic growth at a level several times what was seen between 2010 and 2024, I suppose we can view it as a win.
PB Tory hyperbole back to levels not seen since the pandemic.
I thought the week belonged to Jenrick, but it seems an insanely coated positive tax cut does the trick.
Still if it keeps Farage and Jenrick in their boxes, an £11.6b tax cut with no inverse tax rise, predicated on swingeing cuts not seen between the years 2010 to 2024 and economic growth at a level several times what was seen between 2010 and 2024, I suppose we can view it as a win.
The future's bright. The future's Tory. The self-evident rectitude of the One True Righteous Path only becomes blatantly obvious to our minds when we mere electors are stupid enough to doubt their Ocean of Wisdom. Our collective lack of Faith is disturbing. And we shall be duly punished as is Right and Proper. How could we mortals have not noticed Stamp Duty was the single thing holding us back before? Because we didn't believe hard enough. We dared to doubt. How silly of us.
How many of the Israeli hostages are going to be still alive? Single fingers?
Quite. Hamas are butchers, the likelihood of any more than a few hostages not having met a grisly end is remote. Netanyahu presumably knows that and is just waiting for the whole peace process to fall apart when Hamas has to admit they can only hand over bodies at best.
Badenoch’s SDLT idea is a good one. It needs to be paid for, ideally by land value taxation.
As it happens I was on a panel at the conference fringe on Monday and we were asked a question by a CIOT representative in the audience about what single revenue-neutral tax measure we would suggest to boost growth.
I said abolish SDLT and replace with land value taxation. TimSdamus. I did think the shadow treasury minister to my right looked a bit perplexed by my answer. Did he worry there was a leak?
That's the rub.
There's half a good idea here- SDLT is a bad way of taxing things- it's lumpy and deters people from moving house. But the other half of the idea is missing; the "plan" is that fairies are going to provide the money, and the effect would be to bung cash at rich southern downsizers.
As things stand, the badness of the second half (which bit of the "there's not even enough money to afford a note saying that there's no money" do the Conservatives not understand?) outweighs the virtue of the first half.
Utter garbage.
The Tories identified £47bn worth of savings. Not enough granted, but a start. They have 'spent' approximately £8bn of that in tax cuts. That makes them £39bn more responsible than your bunch of goons. As things stand, it makes them more responsible fiscally than any major party, and it isn't even close.
Your very acute case of sour grapes that the Tory conference was a success is embarrassing. I'd have a lie down and forget about it.
No it doesn’t work like that lucky. If any of the saving measures are doable, they have just been handed to Labour to play with and don’t pay for anything in the next Conservative Party budget, which is why the flagship policy announcement today is for the end of the next Conservative term in office, not the first Kings Speech. The first thing the policy would do if enacted is put up the price of all properties, and that certainly is a freebie to the property owning class like my family, we own lots of them, especially if this money is just government gift to us in terms of higher property price, not offset by another type of land or property taxation to pay for it.
People selling will obviously add the removed tax cost to the cost of their property, none of us are stupid enough not to.
Various comments tonight about how 1% annual tax on house values would let you abolish council tax, SDLT, and IHT at a stroke.
At the same time it's a policy where the average home owner will pay the same or less in tax as the current council tax bill, with almost all the incidence falling on rich people in the SE.
Tax simplification. Two fairly unpopular taxes gone, a third one effectively restructured to be considerably more progressive. No loss of tax revenue.
So - why hasn't one of the parties picked it up and run with it? OK it will make a small number of rich voters very angry, but for Reform and these days the Tories, it probably doesn't matter all that much electorally - a policy with 10 winners to every loser and with the losers geographically concentrated in places you don't win anyway, why care? They will all be ABCs in the SE who vote Lib-Dem anyway.
As you may know, AI slop and YouTube algorithms are killing YouTube channels, to the extent it's become it's own genre. Here is Kurzgesagt pointing this out
Various comments tonight about how 1% annual tax on house values would let you abolish council tax, SDLT, and IHT at a stroke.
At the same time it's a policy where the average home owner will pay the same or less in tax as the current council tax bill, with almost all the incidence falling on rich people in the SE.
Tax simplification. Two fairly unpopular taxes gone, a third one effectively restructured to be considerably more progressive. No loss of tax revenue.
So - why hasn't one of the parties picked it up and run with it? OK it will make a small number of rich voters very angry, but for Reform and these days the Tories, it probably doesn't matter all that much electorally - a policy with 10 winners to every loser and with the losers geographically concentrated in places you don't win anyway, why care? They will all be ABCs in the SE who vote Lib-Dem anyway.
I don’t think the political class is in it to make money. However, I don’t see any of them implementing a policy that would adversely affect them in such a big way. There may be votes in it but it would cost them personally.
I just watched it. Was certainly well-delivered and she seemed entirely at ease: a good sign as temperament is incredibly important in a role like that.
I keep going backwards and forwards with Kemi. She has become leader too early, perhaps fatally so, like Hague. And yet, the talent is there, and maybe a sprinkling of stardust. But the ogre of May 2026 lies in wait. I wish her luck as she could well be a good thing.
I thought the speech utterly incoherent. Actually worse than Liz Truss. The difference of course was that Truss was Prime Minister and important, while Badenoch fortunately is irrelevant.
You OK hun?
Not really politically speaking but Badenoch's dismal Conference speech has nothing to do with that. Half her speech was platitudes and insults against the other parties - mainly Labour even though Labour isn't at all the driver for the Conservatives' 16% standing in the polls. But fair enough, if a party leader can't serve platitudes and insult the other parties in a conference speech, when can they?
The other half is the problem. So she says:
[Young people] feel they are living somewhere where things never get any better. Britain is stagnating, while the world around us moves on. We are competing with restless and ambitious countries around the world. We are competing with a billion people in India striving to become middle class. We are competing with economic success stories like Poland. 15 years ago, Polish workers came here to find opportunity. Now, Poland is growing twice as fast as we are. While Britain was redefining what a woman is, China was building five nuclear reactors.
On whose watch did this happen and why? Does she think that happened entirely in the last 14 months? Actually from the rest of the speech it appears she does. But not the slightest hint of the "bold ideas", "positive vision for this country" and "plan to deliver it" in her speech.
A public sector which already every year, demands more and more and more of our money, yet services don’t get better, they get worse.
Why does she think this is? (I have a good idea and interestingly I don't think it's mainly the previous government's fault). Her solution for collapsing public services is to spend less money on them.
Her "fully costed savings" that offset mostly uncosted tax cuts
Starmer and Reeves have done far more damage to our economy with their job destroying budgets and enormous new black hole entirely made in nos 10 and 11
I blame Starmer and Reeves for not focusing on growth as they said they were going to do and have got far too much caught up in Reform's culture wars. Nevertheless economic growth so far is marginally higher than it was in the last couple of years when Badenoch was in government.
Q1/Q2 is worse under Labour than was under Tories in 2024.
The key problem is they talked a lot about needing to get growth, but had done no planning on how to do so*, and instead decided to cut spending on things that would have got some growth (only to reinstate some of those 12 months later) and of course picked the worst possible tax to rise if growth is your core aim.
* and given how hard to get significant growth since ~2005, it required really serious and wide ranging thought, not just some vague we'll try and build some houses and spend some more money on the NHS.
This really is cone hotlines stuff. We have already had loads of loosing around alcohol licensing and of course loads of clubs have gone bust because da yuff don't want to go to them, and pubs are already closing early / some nights of the week because of staff and energy costs combined with cost of living / people not drinking as much.
And "allowing petrol stations, off-licences and corner shops to sell alcohol even later into the evening, or the early hours.". Really, how many are going to be open way into the night and its only going to be a tiny number of people who are driving to the petrol station at midnight to get booze.
It isn't the lack of opportunity to go boozing that is the core problem.
This really is cone hotlines stuff. We have already had loads of loosing around alcohol licensing and of course loads of clubs have gone bust because da yuff don't want to go to them, and pubs are already closing early / some nights of the week because of staff and energy costs combined with cost of living / people not drinking as much.
It isn't the lack of opportunity to go boozing that is the core problem.
Standard opening hours isn’t the problem, it’s too expensive to go out and the venues can’t afford the staff.
And those venues that can make it work and do want to stay open longer, get objections and campaigns against them from their neighbours.
The number of Liberal Democrat party members has almost halved in the last five years, according to BBC analysis of available figures. The figure has fallen from just under 118,000 in 2020, when Sir Ed Davey became leader, to 60,000.
This really is cone hotlines stuff. We have already had loads of loosing around alcohol licensing and of course loads of clubs have gone bust because da yuff don't want to go to them, and pubs are already closing early / some nights of the week because of staff and energy costs combined with cost of living / people not drinking as much.
It isn't the lack of opportunity to go boozing that is the core problem.
Standard opening hours isn’t the problem, it’s too expensive to go out and the venues can’t afford the staff.
And those venues that can make it work and do want to stay open longer, get objections and campaigns against them from their neighbours.
I don't know if this is being repeated in the UK, but apparently in the US people are spending on average an hour a day more in their homes (not including work). COVID have changed how people live, they stay in their homes watching tv (rather than the cinema) and ordering Door Dash (rather than going to restaurants). I am sure cost of living is part of this but I see it with my friends they seem to go out far less (and they have the money to do so), they just got into this habit of staying in more.
This really is cone hotlines stuff. We have already had loads of loosing around alcohol licensing and of course loads of clubs have gone bust because da yuff don't want to go to them, and pubs are already closing early / some nights of the week because of staff and energy costs combined with cost of living / people not drinking as much.
It isn't the lack of opportunity to go boozing that is the core problem.
Standard opening hours isn’t the problem, it’s too expensive to go out and the venues can’t afford the staff.
And those venues that can make it work and do want to stay open longer, get objections and campaigns against them from their neighbours.
I don't know if this is being repeated in the UK, but apparently in the US people are spending on average an hour a day more in their homes (not including work). COVID have changed how people live, they stay in their homes watching tv (rather than the cinema) and ordering Door Dash (rather than going to restaurants). I am sure cost of living is part of this but I see it with my friends they seem to go out far less (and they have the money to do so), they just got into this habit of staying in more.
I think we learned a lot of habits during the pandemic, that are still to be un-learned.
We all have big TVs and Netflix, while there’s about three good films a year at the cinema and you have to deal with teenagers on their phones and throwing popcorn. I think we do go to the cinema about three times a year now, but make a proper date night of it, the fancy cinema with the business-class seats and table bar service. The popcorn-throwing kids aren’t paying £35 a ticket for that!
Even those who can afford to eat out every night, see that what used to cost £30 for a meal for two now costs £50, and choose to stay home instead. In the US there’s also the tipping culture that’s got way out of hand. That a lot of decent restaurants now do deliveries, gets rid of a lot of the friction involved in actually going out - dressed appropriately (especially if usually WFH), deal with traffic, parking etc.
Personally I prefer to go to the pub rather than stay home of an evening, but clearly others make different decisions.
This really is cone hotlines stuff. We have already had loads of loosing around alcohol licensing and of course loads of clubs have gone bust because da yuff don't want to go to them, and pubs are already closing early / some nights of the week because of staff and energy costs combined with cost of living / people not drinking as much.
It isn't the lack of opportunity to go boozing that is the core problem.
Standard opening hours isn’t the problem, it’s too expensive to go out and the venues can’t afford the staff.
And those venues that can make it work and do want to stay open longer, get objections and campaigns against them from their neighbours.
I don't know if this is being repeated in the UK, but apparently in the US people are spending on average an hour a day more in their homes (not including work). COVID have changed how people live, they stay in their homes watching tv (rather than the cinema) and ordering Door Dash (rather than going to restaurants). I am sure cost of living is part of this but I see it with my friends they seem to go out far less (and they have the money to do so), they just got into this habit of staying in more.
I do think covid has led to changes in habits; people simply got used to living differently, and saw some savings from things they used to pay for but then didn’t. Before Covid, after taking the dog to the park I quite often used to drop in somewhere for a tea/coffee and cake before returning home, and one of the beachfront places I was probably in there twice a week with the dog, during its opening months. During Covid I stopped, because you couldn’t; I lost a bit of weight, saved a bit of money, and simply got out of the habit. Now I simply don’t, and this year I think I have only been in there once or twice. I haven’t consciously decided not to do it; it just happened.
As you may know, AI slop and YouTube algorithms are killing YouTube channels, to the extent it's become it's own genre. Here is Kurzgesagt pointing this out
Dove instead of dived. AI or decades of America television?
ETA and 10-year anniversary rather than 10th anniversary.
Well yes, but it is a thing. There used to be four or five really good YouTubers I could go to for things like tanks, but now it's all computer-generated voices and stock footage saying things that I'm not sure are true. And that's across the board on every subject. That, and the rise of podcasts and vids where somebody talks into a mic with a neon sign in the background, makes YouTube an increasingly frustrating experience where my favourite creators are cut off by the knees and slop just keeps rising.
As you may know, AI slop and YouTube algorithms are killing YouTube channels, to the extent it's become it's own genre. Here is Kurzgesagt pointing this out
Dove instead of dived. AI or decades of America television?
ETA and 10-year anniversary rather than 10th anniversary.
Well yes, but it is a thing. There used to be four or five really good YouTubers I could go to for things like tanks, but now it's all computer-generated voices and stock footage saying things that I'm not sure are true. And that's across the board on every subject. That, and the rise of podcasts and vids where somebody talks into a mic with a neon sign in the background, makes YouTube an increasingly frustrating experience where my favourite creators are cut off by the knees and slop just keeps rising.
Indeed; there are lots of really, really poor and factually inaccurate videos out there. What gets me are that I subscribe to some really good ones - e.g. Drachinifel - and watch lots, not all, of his output. Yet over time, YouTube does not deliver his new output to my feed. Likewise other videos. If' I've subscribed recently, content is far more likely to appear.
(I haven't watched the vid above, so don't know it's precise complaints.)
As an aside, I saw a video the other day that made me feel nostalgic for ye olden days of YouTube. It was what I used to call a 'hostage video': the presenter standing in front of a wall talking in a monotone voice, with poor camerawork. Not that I would do any better...
Oh, and another channel I watch, "not a pound for air to ground" (an aviation channel) was threatened for removal by YouTube this week for being AI content.
As you may know, AI slop and YouTube algorithms are killing YouTube channels, to the extent it's become it's own genre. Here is Kurzgesagt pointing this out
Dove instead of dived. AI or decades of America television?
ETA and 10-year anniversary rather than 10th anniversary.
Well yes, but it is a thing. There used to be four or five really good YouTubers I could go to for things like tanks, but now it's all computer-generated voices and stock footage saying things that I'm not sure are true. And that's across the board on every subject. That, and the rise of podcasts and vids where somebody talks into a mic with a neon sign in the background, makes YouTube an increasingly frustrating experience where my favourite creators are cut off by the knees and slop just keeps rising.
Indeed; there are lots of really, really poor and factually inaccurate videos out there. What gets me are that I subscribe to some really good ones - e.g. Drachinifel - and watch lots, not all, of his output. Yet over time, YouTube does not deliver his new output to my feed. Likewise other videos. If' I've subscribed recently, content is far more likely to appear.
(I haven't watched the vid above, so don't know it's precise complaints.)
As an aside, I saw a video the other day that made me feel nostalgic for ye olden days of YouTube. It was what I used to call a 'hostage video': the presenter standing in front of a wall talking in a monotone voice, with poor camerawork. Not that I would do any better...
Yeah, that's a thing. Apparently two things happened
* Vids more likely to be classed as restricted * Algorithm skewed to prefer (very) short form stuff suitable for tiktok and phones
As a result the feeds are ignoring real people in favour of slop, AI and low effort stuff. Even big creators like RedLetterMedia are affected, and subject matter experts like Drachinifel and TheChieftain are sidelined.
As you may know, AI slop and YouTube algorithms are killing YouTube channels, to the extent it's become it's own genre. Here is Kurzgesagt pointing this out
Dove instead of dived. AI or decades of America television?
ETA and 10-year anniversary rather than 10th anniversary.
Well yes, but it is a thing. There used to be four or five really good YouTubers I could go to for things like tanks, but now it's all computer-generated voices and stock footage saying things that I'm not sure are true. And that's across the board on every subject. That, and the rise of podcasts and vids where somebody talks into a mic with a neon sign in the background, makes YouTube an increasingly frustrating experience where my favourite creators are cut off by the knees and slop just keeps rising.
Ukraine war Youtube is a lot like that, there’s so many videos that are just a computer voice reading a bad translation of a Telegram or Reddit thread, with stock footage in the background that roughly matches the words. These seem to regularly get hundreds of thousand of views in a few hours, despite the fact that it’s unwatchable and repetitive.
Meanwhile, independent journalists and OSINT guys, many of whom are actually in Ukraine, who do their research and use mapping tools, clearly putting half a day’s work into a 10m video, are getting only tens of thousands of views for it and are obviously not making any money. I’m sure many of them aren’t doing it for the money, rather to draw international attention to the plight of their country, but it does seem that the rewards are not going the right way.
British benefits for British people may run foul of the ECHR but there is already a version of it in the NRPF legislation. But it most likely will run into a problem with the Withdrawal agreement. But to give it its due, someone like Danny Kruger has been sifting through the legislation to check on this. Would be amusing if this was a Danny Kruger idea that has been rushed out before he could use his new Reform platform.
Oh, and another channel I watch, "not a pound for air to ground" (an aviation channel) was threatened for removal by YouTube this week for being AI content.
I really doubt it is.
Good grief, really? I wouldn't have pegged it for such.
As you may know, AI slop and YouTube algorithms are killing YouTube channels, to the extent it's become it's own genre. Here is Kurzgesagt pointing this out
Dove instead of dived. AI or decades of America television?
ETA and 10-year anniversary rather than 10th anniversary.
Well yes, but it is a thing. There used to be four or five really good YouTubers I could go to for things like tanks, but now it's all computer-generated voices and stock footage saying things that I'm not sure are true. And that's across the board on every subject. That, and the rise of podcasts and vids where somebody talks into a mic with a neon sign in the background, makes YouTube an increasingly frustrating experience where my favourite creators are cut off by the knees and slop just keeps rising.
Indeed; there are lots of really, really poor and factually inaccurate videos out there. What gets me are that I subscribe to some really good ones - e.g. Drachinifel - and watch lots, not all, of his output. Yet over time, YouTube does not deliver his new output to my feed. Likewise other videos. If' I've subscribed recently, content is far more likely to appear.
(I haven't watched the vid above, so don't know it's precise complaints.)
As an aside, I saw a video the other day that made me feel nostalgic for ye olden days of YouTube. It was what I used to call a 'hostage video': the presenter standing in front of a wall talking in a monotone voice, with poor camerawork. Not that I would do any better...
Yeah, that's a thing. Apparently two things happened
* Vids more likely to be classed as restricted * Algorithm skewed to prefer (very) short form stuff suitable for tiktok and phones
As a result the feeds are ignoring real people in favour of slop, AI and low effort stuff. Even big creators like RedLetterMedia are affected, and subject matter experts like Drachinifel and TheChieftain are sidelined.
Another side effect is that hour-long interviews or podcasts are clipped up into 90-second shorts.
Various comments tonight about how 1% annual tax on house values would let you abolish council tax, SDLT, and IHT at a stroke.
At the same time it's a policy where the average home owner will pay the same or less in tax as the current council tax bill, with almost all the incidence falling on rich people in the SE.
Tax simplification. Two fairly unpopular taxes gone, a third one effectively restructured to be considerably more progressive. No loss of tax revenue.
So - why hasn't one of the parties picked it up and run with it? OK it will make a small number of rich voters very angry, but for Reform and these days the Tories, it probably doesn't matter all that much electorally - a policy with 10 winners to every loser and with the losers geographically concentrated in places you don't win anyway, why care? They will all be ABCs in the SE who vote Lib-Dem anyway.
It can (and should) also discourage second ownership of homes, and also wealthy foreigners owning homes in the UK they barely use.
The value of UK residential property is 9 trillion. Only about 3.5% of this changes hands every year, so to replace stamp duty alone would just require a 0.12% annual charge. But if you made it 1% for homes occupied less than 180 days a year, and 2.5% for those occupied less than 90 days, then you could make the annual charge to replace stamp duty just 0.05% per year, which is nothing.
If we wanted to replace Council Tax (which is no bad thing), you would probably need a number more like 0.75% (residents), 1.5% (less than 180 days), 3% (less than 90 days). That would be positive for the majority of voters, would increase labour mobility, increase housing availability (and probably building too), and a large chunk of the receipts would be paid for by people who don't even live in the UK full time.
As you say, it's insane that none of the major parties have proposed it.
Putin’s big bet on gold pays off as price tops $4,000 As the Kremlin’s war with Ukraine wages on, a stockpile of bullion has helped keep Russia afloat ... Russia’s central bank switched from being a net seller of gold to a net buyer in 2006 and has amassed one of the largest stockpiles in the world. The gold reserves are part of Putin’s plan to construct a “fortress Russia” economy impervious to sanctions.
British benefits for British people may run foul of the ECHR but there is already a version of it in the NRPF legislation. But it most likely will run into a problem with the Withdrawal agreement. But to give it its due, someone like Danny Kruger has been sifting through the legislation to check on this. Would be amusing if this was a Danny Kruger idea that has been rushed out before he could use his new Reform platform.
The Motability thing is already bullshit, you need higher rate mobility on your PIP to get it, it is not for people with Adhd. I have never seen anyone whose mobility is affected by a neurodivergency getting more than lower rate mobility
As you may know, AI slop and YouTube algorithms are killing YouTube channels, to the extent it's become it's own genre. Here is Kurzgesagt pointing this out
Dove instead of dived. AI or decades of America television?
ETA and 10-year anniversary rather than 10th anniversary.
Well yes, but it is a thing. There used to be four or five really good YouTubers I could go to for things like tanks, but now it's all computer-generated voices and stock footage saying things that I'm not sure are true. And that's across the board on every subject. That, and the rise of podcasts and vids where somebody talks into a mic with a neon sign in the background, makes YouTube an increasingly frustrating experience where my favourite creators are cut off by the knees and slop just keeps rising.
Ukraine war Youtube is a lot like that, there’s so many videos that are just a computer voice reading a bad translation of a Telegram or Reddit thread, with stock footage in the background that roughly matches the words. These seem to regularly get hundreds of thousand of views in a few hours, despite the fact that it’s unwatchable and repetitive.
Meanwhile, independent journalists and OSINT guys, many of whom are actually in Ukraine, who do their research and use mapping tools, clearly putting half a day’s work into a 10m video, are getting only tens of thousands of views for it and are obviously not making any money. I’m sure many of them aren’t doing it for the money, rather to draw international attention to the plight of their country, but it does seem that the rewards are not going the right way.
Times Radio and Daily Telegraph also have regular podcasts which are worth a listen.
The trouble with the Ukraine coverage is that even the genuine ones have to rely heavily on stock footage or homemade graphics, as they’re reporting on recent stuff for which video obviously isn’t available. As I recall the RFU one is mostly graphics and the Military Show is just head and shoulders or stock footage? Understandable, but it makes the AI ones less distinctive. In Health & Fitness there seem to be tons of AI generated ones, read out in a monotone voice with strange mid-sentence pauses that are clearly AI; is being AI generated a reportable offence on YouTube?
Various comments tonight about how 1% annual tax on house values would let you abolish council tax, SDLT, and IHT at a stroke.
At the same time it's a policy where the average home owner will pay the same or less in tax as the current council tax bill, with almost all the incidence falling on rich people in the SE.
Tax simplification. Two fairly unpopular taxes gone, a third one effectively restructured to be considerably more progressive. No loss of tax revenue.
So - why hasn't one of the parties picked it up and run with it? OK it will make a small number of rich voters very angry, but for Reform and these days the Tories, it probably doesn't matter all that much electorally - a policy with 10 winners to every loser and with the losers geographically concentrated in places you don't win anyway, why care? They will all be ABCs in the SE who vote Lib-Dem anyway.
I don’t think the political class is in it to make money. However, I don’t see any of them implementing a policy that would adversely affect them in such a big way. There may be votes in it but it would cost them personally.
Actually, I don't think that's it.
Losers complain more than winners cheer. The losers would blame the government. The winners wouldn't thank them.
And there would be a lot of losers - either wealthy homeoweners in the South East (LibDem or Conservative voters) or people in Central London (Labour voters).
On YouTube, I don't watch much science (the odd Kyle Hill video) but AI voices and copying content has become a problem there too.
Edit: btw, apparently the 'hype' button (just coming in, not always visible) actually does work to help improve video/channel visibility so if you like a video then be sure to click that.
British benefits for British people may run foul of the ECHR but there is already a version of it in the NRPF legislation. But it most likely will run into a problem with the Withdrawal agreement. But to give it its due, someone like Danny Kruger has been sifting through the legislation to check on this. Would be amusing if this was a Danny Kruger idea that has been rushed out before he could use his new Reform platform.
Even as someone who has researched these things more than most for personal reasons, I was shocked and surprised to learn a couple of weeks ago that non-citizens were entitled to claim benefits at all.
Would be really interesting to see some polling on this.
The Motobility cars has been a real eye-opener, 20% of new car sales in the country being covered at least in part by the scheme.
As you may know, AI slop and YouTube algorithms are killing YouTube channels, to the extent it's become it's own genre. Here is Kurzgesagt pointing this out
Dove instead of dived. AI or decades of America television?
ETA and 10-year anniversary rather than 10th anniversary.
Well yes, but it is a thing. There used to be four or five really good YouTubers I could go to for things like tanks, but now it's all computer-generated voices and stock footage saying things that I'm not sure are true. And that's across the board on every subject. That, and the rise of podcasts and vids where somebody talks into a mic with a neon sign in the background, makes YouTube an increasingly frustrating experience where my favourite creators are cut off by the knees and slop just keeps rising.
Ukraine war Youtube is a lot like that, there’s so many videos that are just a computer voice reading a bad translation of a Telegram or Reddit thread, with stock footage in the background that roughly matches the words. These seem to regularly get hundreds of thousand of views in a few hours, despite the fact that it’s unwatchable and repetitive.
Meanwhile, independent journalists and OSINT guys, many of whom are actually in Ukraine, who do their research and use mapping tools, clearly putting half a day’s work into a 10m video, are getting only tens of thousands of views for it and are obviously not making any money. I’m sure many of them aren’t doing it for the money, rather to draw international attention to the plight of their country, but it does seem that the rewards are not going the right way.
Conference season ends and I believe the unexpected happened
Kemi Badenoch delivered the best speech, rolled out an array of policies, and stamp duty the 'rabbit out of the hat'
She energised her supporters and have given them something to sell on the doorstep
And she did what I prayed she would, sent out a positive [conservative] message and barely mentioned Starmer or Farage
Labour and Farage fell into the trap of hurling insults at each other to the detriment of both
The added bonus is Jenrick is the biggest loser
I do not know how the polls will react, but today was a start on the long road to relevance
Rabbit out of a hat, or bollocks out of her arse?
Pound shop Liz Truss.
No Kemi identified welfare and spending cuts to fund her tax cut
It wasn't just welfare but cuts in climate change subsidies and increasing north sea production with associated tax income, as well as welcoming back millionaires, entrepreneurs, and wealth creators
She also will scrap IHT on farmers and abolish vat on private school fees
Add in banning doctor strikes
This is conservative policies and is a direct challenge to Labour and Reform
This is pennies BigG. No spending cuts plan is credible without some sort of control on pensioner benefits and health spending. They are are growing so quickly - from a very high base - that any other cut or even steady economic growth is completely overwhelmed by them. Literally by design in the case of the triple lock.
Labour haven't set out a plan either but let's not pretend the Conservative plan is fiscally prudent. DavidL's take on this is correct.
Various comments tonight about how 1% annual tax on house values would let you abolish council tax, SDLT, and IHT at a stroke.
At the same time it's a policy where the average home owner will pay the same or less in tax as the current council tax bill, with almost all the incidence falling on rich people in the SE.
Tax simplification. Two fairly unpopular taxes gone, a third one effectively restructured to be considerably more progressive. No loss of tax revenue.
So - why hasn't one of the parties picked it up and run with it? OK it will make a small number of rich voters very angry, but for Reform and these days the Tories, it probably doesn't matter all that much electorally - a policy with 10 winners to every loser and with the losers geographically concentrated in places you don't win anyway, why care? They will all be ABCs in the SE who vote Lib-Dem anyway.
I don’t think the political class is in it to make money. However, I don’t see any of them implementing a policy that would adversely affect them in such a big way. There may be votes in it but it would cost them personally.
Actually, I don't think that's it.
Losers complain more than winners cheer. The losers would blame the government. The winners wouldn't thank them.
And there would be a lot of losers - either wealthy homeoweners in the South East (LibDem or Conservative voters) or people in Central London (Labour voters).
Ukraine have reported, and shown video (though I can't identify artillery pieces) of the destruction of a Russian ML-20 howitzer. These artillery pieces were produced in the USSR before WWII.
Although drones are taking over to an extent, earlier in the war a majority of Ukrainian casualties were caused by Russian artillery, so Ukrainian counter-battery operations succeeding in forcing Russia to put pre-WWII relics back into service indicates Ukraine coming close to winning the artillery war, which could make a big difference to the future of the war.
Comments
Which suggests it was briefed as a major initiative.
It's small potatoes (or beer).
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/meze-mangal-london-lewisham-restaurant-kitchen-fan-council-planning-rules-b1251616.html
Pound shop Liz Truss.
I'm pretty sure your suits are better tailored.
As it happens I was on a panel at the conference fringe on Monday and we were asked a question by a CIOT representative in the audience about what single revenue-neutral tax measure we would suggest to boost growth.
I said abolish SDLT and replace with land value taxation. TimSdamus. I did think the shadow treasury minister to my right looked a bit perplexed by my answer. Did he worry there was a leak?
That doesn't mean I want taxes that cause collateral damage to the economy of (checks estimate) 75p for every £ they raise.
A property tax instead of council tax would be a huge win here and everywhere else in the Red Wall. Labour have a majority of 150. Rachel? Rachel?
My favourite, recently, was the opposition of the police to a jazz venue in Covent Garden. Which would lead to crime, according to the police.
No, they didn’t think that black musicians would be encouraging the smoking of The Demon Weed.
They said that it would encourage muggers and pickpockets to target the clientele….
Kemi Badenoch stamps her authority and gets the crowd on its feet
She pulled it off. She marched from the stage in a vague sense of triumph. There were chants of “Kemi! Kemi! Kemi!”. They may have been more than a little underwhelming, but they happened. On her way out of the hall she shook hands with a young man who appeared at first sight to be standing on the safety barrier but was, in fact, merely the tallest person anyone present had ever seen, seven feet at a minimum.
Her first ever conference speech had been a success. If the Tories have any desire to be taken even remotely seriously ever again, they may wish to consider resisting the temptation to make it her last.
https://www.thetimes.com/article/88da6c7a-50b0-4c9a-a0f0-381082113622?shareToken=4e1c782b35704a9fa65fde12e395f60a
ICE is really upset that local businesses in Chicago and Seattle won’t let them use the potty and I just have to admit, I apologize to the 3rd Amendment for previously underestimating its importance
https://x.com/lydiakauppi/status/1975749485192999086
There's half a good idea here- SDLT is a bad way of taxing things- it's lumpy and deters people from moving house. But the other half of the idea is missing; the "plan" is that fairies are going to provide the money, and the effect would be to bung cash at rich southern downsizers.
As things stand, the badness of the second half (which bit of the "there's not even enough money to afford a note saying that there's no money" do the Conservatives not understand?) outweighs the virtue of the first half.
https://xcancel.com/natehiggins/status/1974406058341982356#m
And they have been so electorally hefty that politicians have had little choice but to dance to their tune.
The Tories identified £47bn worth of savings. Not enough granted, but a start. They have 'spent' approximately £8bn of that in tax cuts. That makes them £39bn more responsible than your bunch of goons. As things stand, it makes them more responsible fiscally than any major party, and it isn't even close.
Your very acute case of sour grapes that the Tory conference was a success is embarrassing. I'd have a lie down and forget about it.
They sound selfish bastards.
Sources close to Hamas telling me a deal is done between Israel and Hamas on #Gaza. “Now for the hard work” he added. Announcement could come as soon as tonight.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio whispers in the ear of President Donald Trump after handing him a note about a Middle East deal saying “Very close. We need you to approve a Truth Social post soon so you can announce deal first”
https://x.com/evanvucci/status/1976040805677867015
Furthermore it will be excellent for growth
She is not speaking to the tribal opposition but laying out a path to a recovering party
Reeves has done far more damage to our economy than the 6 weeks of Truss evidenced by higher bond rates today
I was wondering what you thought of the speech, and it's nice to be aligned for once.
But it will grab them some positive headlines in their lickspittle press.
She has a mountain to climb but she started today and best of all the loser is Jenrick
The money saved will generate a lot of growth in the economy to pay towards public services and pay down debt
Remember Reform found a whole set of cuts at Kent County Council - supposedly enough that next years council tax increase was cancelled.
Now 4 months later it's looking like another 5% increase to council tax in Kent...
She also will scrap IHT on farmers and abolish vat on private school fees
Add in banning doctor strikes
This is conservative policies and is a direct challenge to Labour and Reform
The other half is the problem. So she says:
[Young people] feel they are living somewhere where things never get any better. Britain is stagnating, while the world around us moves on. We are competing with restless and ambitious countries around the world. We are competing with a billion people in India striving to become middle class. We are competing with economic success stories like Poland. 15 years ago, Polish workers came here to find opportunity. Now, Poland is growing twice as fast as we are. While Britain was redefining what a woman is, China was building five nuclear reactors.
On whose watch did this happen and why? Does she think that happened entirely in the last 14 months? Actually from the rest of the speech it appears she does. But not the slightest hint of the "bold ideas", "positive vision for this country" and "plan to deliver it" in her speech.
A public sector which already every year, demands more and more and more of our money, yet services don’t get better, they get worse.
Why does she think this is? (I have a good idea and interestingly I don't think it's mainly the previous government's fault). Her solution for collapsing public services is to spend less money on them.
Her "fully costed savings" that offset uncosted tax cuts
Give them time and they may.
But it's a colossal leap of magical thinking to imagine they've undone 14 years in 14 months.
Reeves could have required farmland to be actively used for livestock or crops to benefit from the agricultural property relief from inheritance tax exemption if she wanted to hit tax dodgers
All just at the cost of the mentally ill, Northerners, renters, the climate, those who can't afford five figures a year for their kids' education and other people of no importance.
They're putting the band back together for another Century of British growth.
They weren't before. Where are the detailed plans to outline how this will happen now?
And. More pertinently. Why should we be stupid enough to believe there is the will to do any of this?
If the eating is half as good ...
Then maybe he'll deserve the Nobel Prize.
I thought the week belonged to Jenrick, but it seems an insanely costed positive tax cut does the trick.
Still if it keeps Farage and Jenrick in their boxes, an £11.6b tax cut with no inverse tax rise, predicated on swingeing cuts not seen between the years 2010 to 2024 and economic growth at a level several times what was seen between 2010 and 2024, I suppose we can view it as a win.
https://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=730194
The self-evident rectitude of the One True Righteous Path only becomes blatantly obvious to our minds when we mere electors are stupid enough to doubt their Ocean of Wisdom.
Our collective lack of Faith is disturbing.
And we shall be duly punished as is Right and Proper.
How could we mortals have not noticed Stamp Duty was the single thing holding us back before?
Because we didn't believe hard enough. We dared to doubt.
How silly of us.
People selling will obviously add the removed tax cost to the cost of their property, none of us are stupid enough not to.
At the same time it's a policy where the average home owner will pay the same or less in tax as the current council tax bill, with almost all the incidence falling on rich people in the SE.
Tax simplification. Two fairly unpopular taxes gone, a third one effectively restructured to be considerably more progressive. No loss of tax revenue.
So - why hasn't one of the parties picked it up and run with it? OK it will make a small number of rich voters very angry, but for Reform and these days the Tories, it probably doesn't matter all that much electorally - a policy with 10 winners to every loser and with the losers geographically concentrated in places you don't win anyway, why care? They will all be ABCs in the SE who vote Lib-Dem anyway.
ETA and 10-year anniversary rather than 10th anniversary.
https://x.com/igorsushko/status/1976092598306836486
They really need to be more careful with their cigarettes.
The key problem is they talked a lot about needing to get growth, but had done no planning on how to do so*, and instead decided to cut spending on things that would have got some growth (only to reinstate some of those 12 months later) and of course picked the worst possible tax to rise if growth is your core aim.
* and given how hard to get significant growth since ~2005, it required really serious and wide ranging thought, not just some vague we'll try and build some houses and spend some more money on the NHS.
I bet they still use long ladders to change light bulbs on high ceilings.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2025/oct/08/pub-opening-hours-in-england-and-wales-could-be-extended
This really is cone hotlines stuff. We have already had loads of loosing around alcohol licensing and of course loads of clubs have gone bust because da yuff don't want to go to them, and pubs are already closing early / some nights of the week because of staff and energy costs combined with cost of living / people not drinking as much.
And "allowing petrol stations, off-licences and corner shops to sell alcohol even later into the evening, or the early hours.". Really, how many are going to be open way into the night and its only going to be a tiny number of people who are driving to the petrol station at midnight to get booze.
It isn't the lack of opportunity to go boozing that is the core problem.
And those venues that can make it work and do want to stay open longer, get objections and campaigns against them from their neighbours.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy5069p70x2o
We all have big TVs and Netflix, while there’s about three good films a year at the cinema and you have to deal with teenagers on their phones and throwing popcorn. I think we do go to the cinema about three times a year now, but make a proper date night of it, the fancy cinema with the business-class seats and table bar service. The popcorn-throwing kids aren’t paying £35 a ticket for that!
Even those who can afford to eat out every night, see that what used to cost £30 for a meal for two now costs £50, and choose to stay home instead. In the US there’s also the tipping culture that’s got way out of hand. That a lot of decent restaurants now do deliveries, gets rid of a lot of the friction involved in actually going out - dressed appropriately (especially if usually WFH), deal with traffic, parking etc.
Personally I prefer to go to the pub rather than stay home of an evening, but clearly others make different decisions.
https://x.com/the_real_itdude/status/1976006185397666266
(No it’s not a collapse - yet - it’s only 2% down on the week).
Edit: but look back a little, and it’s 15% down in last two months, apparently on fears of the war not ending any time soon.
https://x.com/bricktop_nafo/status/1976026917250998346
(I haven't watched the vid above, so don't know it's precise complaints.)
As an aside, I saw a video the other day that made me feel nostalgic for ye olden days of YouTube. It was what I used to call a 'hostage video': the presenter standing in front of a wall talking in a monotone voice, with poor camerawork. Not that I would do any better...
I really doubt it is.
* Vids more likely to be classed as restricted
* Algorithm skewed to prefer (very) short form stuff suitable for tiktok and phones
As a result the feeds are ignoring real people in favour of slop, AI and low effort stuff. Even big creators like RedLetterMedia are affected, and subject matter experts like Drachinifel and TheChieftain are sidelined.
Meanwhile, independent journalists and OSINT guys, many of whom are actually in Ukraine, who do their research and use mapping tools, clearly putting half a day’s work into a 10m video, are getting only tens of thousands of views for it and are obviously not making any money. I’m sure many of them aren’t doing it for the money, rather to draw international attention to the plight of their country, but it does seem that the rewards are not going the right way.
Good ones to follow:
https://www.youtube.com/@RFU
https://www.youtube.com/@AnnafromUkraine
https://www.youtube.com/@presidentsdailybrief
https://www.youtube.com/@TheMilitaryShow
https://www.youtube.com/@DenysDavydov
Times Radio and Daily Telegraph also have regular podcasts which are worth a listen.
British benefits for British people may run foul of the ECHR but there is already a version of it in the NRPF legislation. But it most likely will run into a problem with the Withdrawal agreement. But to give it its due, someone like Danny Kruger has been sifting through the legislation to check on this. Would be amusing if this was a Danny Kruger idea that has been rushed out before he could use his new Reform platform.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15173435/Kemi-Badenoch-sets-23bn-cuts-Britains-welfare-bill-vows-tougher-rules-Motability-vehicles-benefits-UK-citizens-only.html
The value of UK residential property is 9 trillion. Only about 3.5% of this changes hands every year, so to replace stamp duty alone would just require a 0.12% annual charge. But if you made it 1% for homes occupied less than 180 days a year, and 2.5% for those occupied less than 90 days, then you could make the annual charge to replace stamp duty just 0.05% per year, which is nothing.
If we wanted to replace Council Tax (which is no bad thing), you would probably need a number more like 0.75% (residents), 1.5% (less than 180 days), 3% (less than 90 days). That would be positive for the majority of voters, would increase labour mobility, increase housing availability (and probably building too), and a large chunk of the receipts would be paid for by people who don't even live in the UK full time.
As you say, it's insane that none of the major parties have proposed it.
As the Kremlin’s war with Ukraine wages on, a stockpile of bullion has helped keep Russia afloat
...
Russia’s central bank switched from being a net seller of gold to a net buyer in 2006 and has amassed one of the largest stockpiles in the world. The gold reserves are part of Putin’s plan to construct a “fortress Russia” economy impervious to sanctions.
Putin’s ploy has paid off handsomely in recent weeks after a surge in the price of bullion. Gold surged past $4,000 an ounce for the first time on Wednesday, taking its gains so far this year over 50pc. The rally values Russia’s 2,326.5-tonne hoard at just over $302bn (£225bn).
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/10/08/russias-big-bet-on-gold-pays-off-as-price-tops-4k-for-first/ (£££)
Losers complain more than winners cheer. The losers would blame the government. The winners wouldn't thank them.
And there would be a lot of losers - either wealthy homeoweners in the South East (LibDem or Conservative voters) or people in Central London (Labour voters).
On YouTube, I don't watch much science (the odd Kyle Hill video) but AI voices and copying content has become a problem there too.
Edit: btw, apparently the 'hype' button (just coming in, not always visible) actually does work to help improve video/channel visibility so if you like a video then be sure to click that.
Would be really interesting to see some polling on this.
The Motobility cars has been a real eye-opener, 20% of new car sales in the country being covered at least in part by the scheme.
Labour haven't set out a plan either but let's not pretend the Conservative plan is fiscally prudent. DavidL's take on this is correct.
Ukraine have reported, and shown video (though I can't identify artillery pieces) of the destruction of a Russian ML-20 howitzer. These artillery pieces were produced in the USSR before WWII.
Although drones are taking over to an extent, earlier in the war a majority of Ukrainian casualties were caused by Russian artillery, so Ukrainian counter-battery operations succeeding in forcing Russia to put pre-WWII relics back into service indicates Ukraine coming close to winning the artillery war, which could make a big difference to the future of the war.
https://t.me/noel_reports/35344