Skip to content

If you ever wanted to see what a push poll looks like – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,754
edited 4:05PM in General
If you ever wanted to see what a push poll looks like – politicalbetting.com

TSE

Read the full story here

«1

Comments

  • DumbosaurusDumbosaurus Posts: 899
    First. Legalise Drugs.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 30,430
    edited 4:11PM
    2nd.

    FPT :frowning:

    I think we have a new Crossing the Floor World Record. Not Agent Anderson, but Alan Amos.

    Conservative Councillor, Enfield. 197x to 1985.
    Conservative MP, Hexham 1987-1992.
    Labour Candidate, Hitchin and Harpenden 2001.
    Labour Councillor, Tower Hamlets, 2002.
    Labour Councillor, Worcester City Council, 2008-2014.
    Independent Councillor, Worcester City Council, 2014.
    Mayor of Worcester, nominated by Conservatives, 2014.
    Mayor of Worcester, joined the Conservatives, 2015.
    Conservative Councillor, Worcester City Council, 2024. Last Con standing.
    Independent Councillor, Worcester City Council, 2025.
    Reform Councillor, Worcester City Council, 2025 (from April).
    Reform Councillor, Worcestershire County Council, 2025 (elected May).

    There are a lot of interesting statements, but I'll leave those to lie.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Amos

    (Bray is in Berkshire, not Enfield, Tower Hamlets, or Worcestershire.)
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 124,502
    MattW said:

    2nd.

    FPT :frowning:

    I think we have a new Crossing the Floor World Record. Not Agent Anderson, but Alan Amos.

    Conservative Councillor, Enfield. 197x to 1985.
    Conservative MP, Hexham 1987-1992.
    Labour Candidate, Hitchin and Harpenden 2001.
    Labour Councillor, Tower Hamlets, 2002.
    Labour Councillor, Worcester City Council, 2008-2014.
    Independent Councillor, Worcester City Council, 2014.
    Mayor of Worcester, nominated by Conservatives, 2014.
    Mayor of Worcester, joined the Conservatives, 2015.
    Conservative Councillor, Worcester City Council, 2024. Last Con standing.
    Independent Councillor, Worcester City Council, 2025.
    Reform Councillor, Worcester City Council, 2025 (from April).
    Reform Councillor, Worcestershire County Council, 2025 (elected May).

    There are a lot of interesting statements, but I'll leave those to lie.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Amos

    (Bray is in Berkshire, not Enfield, Tower Hamlets, or Worcestershire.)

    Winston McKenzie laughs at Alan Amos.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 124,502
    FPT
    Cyclefree said:

    Nigelb said:

    AnneJGP said:

    Being so late to the thread, has anyone come up with any brilliant ideas to solve the problem?

    TSE wants to repeal the Forfeiture Act and bring back bills of attainder, along with hanging, drawing and quartering.
    Well if @TSE wants to add in the bureaucrat, who has moved @David L's trial tomorrow from Edinburgh to Glasgow so that I will be deprived of the opportunity to tease the charming David about coffee, chocolate, cakes and sundry other important matters, to his list of Attaindees, he's very welcome to do so.
    Yesterday I was getting hard stares for proposing bills of attainder and now you're an enthusiastic supporter.

    My powers of persuasion are unmatched.
  • isamisam Posts: 42,894
    Farage on Pochin:

    "The way she put it, the way she worded it was wrong and was ugly.

    If I thought the intention behind it was racist, I would have taken more action than I have taken today."


    https://x.com/tomhfh/status/1982815805520679110?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
  • BattlebusBattlebus Posts: 1,834
    isam said:

    Farage on Pochin:

    "The way she put it, the way she worded it was wrong and was ugly.

    If I thought the intention behind it was racist, I would have taken more action than I have taken today."


    https://x.com/tomhfh/status/1982815805520679110?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    Pochin apologist - or is it Putin?
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 45,648
    isam said:

    Farage on Pochin:

    "The way she put it, the way she worded it was wrong and was ugly.

    If I thought the intention behind it was racist, I would have taken more action than I have taken today."


    https://x.com/tomhfh/status/1982815805520679110?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    Is ugly but not racist Reform’s new mission statement?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 82,588
    Battlebus said:

    isam said:

    Farage on Pochin:

    "The way she put it, the way she worded it was wrong and was ugly.

    If I thought the intention behind it was racist, I would have taken more action than I have taken today."


    https://x.com/tomhfh/status/1982815805520679110?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    Pochin apologist - or is it Putin?
    Yes.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 30,430

    MattW said:

    2nd.

    FPT :frowning:

    I think we have a new Crossing the Floor World Record. Not Agent Anderson, but Alan Amos.

    Conservative Councillor, Enfield. 197x to 1985.
    Conservative MP, Hexham 1987-1992.
    Labour Candidate, Hitchin and Harpenden 2001.
    Labour Councillor, Tower Hamlets, 2002.
    Labour Councillor, Worcester City Council, 2008-2014.
    Independent Councillor, Worcester City Council, 2014.
    Mayor of Worcester, nominated by Conservatives, 2014.
    Mayor of Worcester, joined the Conservatives, 2015.
    Conservative Councillor, Worcester City Council, 2024. Last Con standing.
    Independent Councillor, Worcester City Council, 2025.
    Reform Councillor, Worcester City Council, 2025 (from April).
    Reform Councillor, Worcestershire County Council, 2025 (elected May).

    There are a lot of interesting statements, but I'll leave those to lie.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Amos

    (Bray is in Berkshire, not Enfield, Tower Hamlets, or Worcestershire.)

    Winston McKenzie laughs at Alan Amos.
    Most of us laugh at Alan Amos, and he's quite the character.

    I'll add up Winston at some point.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 82,588
    Notable stat of the day.

    In the 90s, Pakistan had 50% higher GDP per capita than India, but now it’s only half as large as India’s
    https://x.com/StefanFSchubert/status/1982591263838027832
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 20,879
    isam said:

    Farage on Pochin:

    "The way she put it, the way she worded it was wrong and was ugly.

    If I thought the intention behind it was racist, I would have taken more action than I have taken today."


    https://x.com/tomhfh/status/1982815805520679110?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    I think its tricky. Its a bit odd when 4% of British people are black that over half of adverts feature black people. But its obvious why - its advertisers selling stuff and optimising who they appeal to.

    But we have an issue in this country with Reform and people voting for them. What drives someone to think that the county has far more people from ethnic minority backgrounds than is the case? This is something we know - if you ask people to estimate the proportions that are black, asian etc the norm is to vastly overstate the numbers. Well just maybe having the adverts like this plays a part?

    But what realistically would be done, even if you wanted to do something? How would you ensure a set of adverts has the approved ethnic make up? You can't - its stupid to even try.

    But maybe all those who wonder why people are pushed to Reform should reflect a bit when people tell them why.
  • eekeek Posts: 31,645

    isam said:

    Farage on Pochin:

    "The way she put it, the way she worded it was wrong and was ugly.

    If I thought the intention behind it was racist, I would have taken more action than I have taken today."


    https://x.com/tomhfh/status/1982815805520679110?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    I think its tricky. Its a bit odd when 4% of British people are black that over half of adverts feature black people. But its obvious why - its advertisers selling stuff and optimising who they appeal to.

    But we have an issue in this country with Reform and people voting for them. What drives someone to think that the county has far more people from ethnic minority backgrounds than is the case? This is something we know - if you ask people to estimate the proportions that are black, asian etc the norm is to vastly overstate the numbers. Well just maybe having the adverts like this plays a part?

    But what realistically would be done, even if you wanted to do something? How would you ensure a set of adverts has the approved ethnic make up? You can't - its stupid to even try.

    But maybe all those who wonder why people are pushed to Reform should reflect a bit when people tell them why.
    My viewpoint is that they’ve been continually asked questions like the survey above to the point that their viewpoint of reality doesn’t match the real one
  • BlancheLivermoreBlancheLivermore Posts: 6,864
    I spent a little while yesterday trying to come up with a better play on "Don't Cry For Me Argentina", than the thread header

    I remembered a joke from Frasier, when they're considering Tina and Archie as guests to a dinner party and Frasier says "Don't cry for me Arch and Tina". I found a song by and Tina Turner from her 3rd solo album written by an Archie (Jones, i think), but couldn't develop it into either an amusing or even interesting play on words

    I persisted on the Archibald searches, and stumbled on an Archibald Butt. He was a probably gay American soldier who became military aide to Presidents Taft and Roosevelt. He died on the Titanic, with his his supposed partner https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archibald_Butt

    More interesting than him though, was the note that Australian born Scot and future British diplomat extraordinaire Archibald Clark Kerr, Baron Inverchapel, had stayed with him on his first visit to DC

    Kerr is probably best known for his infamous 1943 missive to a friend while stationed in Moscow:

    "My Dear Reggie,

    In these dark days man tends to look for little shafts of light that spill from Heaven. My days are probably darker than yours, and I need, my God I do, all the light I can get. But I am a decent fellow, and I do not want to be mean and selfish about what little brightness is shed upon me from time to time. So I propose to share with you a tiny flash that has illuminated my sombre life and tell you that God has given me a new Turkish colleague whose card tells me that he is called Mustapha Kunt.

    We all feel like that, Reggie, now and then, especially when Spring is upon us, but few of us would care to put it on our cards. It takes a Turk to do that.

    Sir Archibald Clerk Kerr,

    H.M. Ambassador"


    1/2
  • isamisam Posts: 42,894

    isam said:

    Farage on Pochin:

    "The way she put it, the way she worded it was wrong and was ugly.

    If I thought the intention behind it was racist, I would have taken more action than I have taken today."


    https://x.com/tomhfh/status/1982815805520679110?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    I think its tricky. Its a bit odd when 4% of British people are black that over half of adverts feature black people. But its obvious why - its advertisers selling stuff and optimising who they appeal to.

    But we have an issue in this country with Reform and people voting for them. What drives someone to think that the county has far more people from ethnic minority backgrounds than is the case? This is something we know - if you ask people to estimate the proportions that are black, asian etc the norm is to vastly overstate the numbers. Well just maybe having the adverts like this plays a part?

    But what realistically would be done, even if you wanted to do something? How would you ensure a set of adverts has the approved ethnic make up? You can't - its stupid to even try.

    But maybe all those who wonder why people are pushed to Reform should reflect a bit when people tell them why.
    An astute observation, I hadn’t thought of that.

    People are mocked for assuming the non white population is larger than it is, but who can blame them when the media show a completely unrealistic version of the demographic?
  • FossFoss Posts: 1,908
    edited 4:36PM

    isam said:

    Farage on Pochin:

    "The way she put it, the way she worded it was wrong and was ugly.

    If I thought the intention behind it was racist, I would have taken more action than I have taken today."


    https://x.com/tomhfh/status/1982815805520679110?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    I think its tricky. Its a bit odd when 4% of British people are black that over half of adverts feature black people. But its obvious why - its advertisers selling stuff and optimising who they appeal to.

    But we have an issue in this country with Reform and people voting for them. What drives someone to think that the county has far more people from ethnic minority backgrounds than is the case? This is something we know - if you ask people to estimate the proportions that are black, asian etc the norm is to vastly overstate the numbers. Well just maybe having the adverts like this plays a part?

    But what realistically would be done, even if you wanted to do something? How would you ensure a set of adverts has the approved ethnic make up? You can't - its stupid to even try.

    But maybe all those who wonder why people are pushed to Reform should reflect a bit when people tell them why.
    It's likely we'll reach a point where in a post broadcast tv, streaming only world adverts are generated in various combinations of colour, class, accent, creed, etc and you'll end up with the version the ad brokers think will best sell a product to you. And then this issue goes away.
  • BattlebusBattlebus Posts: 1,834
    Some political news. One of Labour's major bills, Renters’ Rights Act, has received its Royal Assent. Only taken 18 months and leans heavily on the previous work done in the last Parliament. Slow and steady seems to be the mantra despite all the buffeting that goes on day to day.

    Next up will be the Employment Rights Bill.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 26,066
    Battlebus said:

    Some political news. One of Labour's major bills, Renters’ Rights Act, has received its Royal Assent. Only taken 18 months and leans heavily on the previous work done in the last Parliament. Slow and steady seems to be the mantra despite all the buffeting that goes on day to day.

    Next up will be the Employment Rights Bill.

    Battlebus said:

    Some political news. One of Labour's major bills, Renters’ Rights Act, has received its Royal Assent. Only taken 18 months and leans heavily on the previous work done in the last Parliament. Slow and steady seems to be the mantra despite all the buffeting that goes on day to day.

    Next up will be the Employment Rights Bill.

    Another fk up
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 40,673
    Foss said:

    It's likely we'll reach a point where in a post broadcast tv, streaming only world adverts are generated in various combinations of colour, class, accent, creed, etc and you'll end up with the version the ad brokers think will best sell a product to you. And then this issue goes away.

    We are today at the point where we end up with the version the ad brokers think will best sell a product to you

    They are not casting ethnic minorities to piss people off, or to meet a quota.

    They are casting actors to sell shit. And it's working.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 17,146

    isam said:

    Farage on Pochin:

    "The way she put it, the way she worded it was wrong and was ugly.

    If I thought the intention behind it was racist, I would have taken more action than I have taken today."


    https://x.com/tomhfh/status/1982815805520679110?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    I think its tricky. Its a bit odd when 4% of British people are black that over half of adverts feature black people. But its obvious why - its advertisers selling stuff and optimising who they appeal to.

    But we have an issue in this country with Reform and people voting for them. What drives someone to think that the county has far more people from ethnic minority backgrounds than is the case? This is something we know - if you ask people to estimate the proportions that are black, asian etc the norm is to vastly overstate the numbers. Well just maybe having the adverts like this plays a part?

    But what realistically would be done, even if you wanted to do something? How would you ensure a set of adverts has the approved ethnic make up? You can't - its stupid to even try.

    But maybe all those who wonder why people are pushed to Reform should reflect a bit when people tell them why.
    What's the solution here? Racial quotas for the advertising industry? Perhaps a new quango to administer it (OFCOLOUR?)
    I love how the right is embracing everything it claims to hate (identity politics, the nanny state) as it slowly loses its collective mind. Guys, seeing people of colour on the TV is not going to kill you! There is no conspiracy! It's just people trying to sell stuff.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 21,097
    I wonder if Trump will try to annex Venezuela into the USA. He's a legacy man and that would certainly go down in the history books.
  • PhilPhil Posts: 2,984
    Battlebus said:

    Some political news. One of Labour's major bills, Renters’ Rights Act, has received its Royal Assent. Only taken 18 months and leans heavily on the previous work done in the last Parliament. Slow and steady seems to be the mantra despite all the buffeting that goes on day to day.

    Next up will be the Employment Rights Bill.

    Odds on both of these bills screwing up their target constituencies even more than they are already?

    I have a nasty feeling that the changes in the Renter’s Rights Bill will result in even more property being taken off the rental market & rents climbing ever higher as a result.

    The Employment Bill is going to completely screw over anyone with a spotty work history. All those people who have been out of work with anxiety / actual long covid / heart issues etc etc since 2020? Good luck getting them into work if their prospective employer can’t sack them within a six month probationary period. Why would any employer take the risk of employing them in a soft jobs market where they have other options?
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 21,097

    isam said:

    Farage on Pochin:

    "The way she put it, the way she worded it was wrong and was ugly.

    If I thought the intention behind it was racist, I would have taken more action than I have taken today."


    https://x.com/tomhfh/status/1982815805520679110?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    I think its tricky. Its a bit odd when 4% of British people are black that over half of adverts feature black people. But its obvious why - its advertisers selling stuff and optimising who they appeal to.

    But we have an issue in this country with Reform and people voting for them. What drives someone to think that the county has far more people from ethnic minority backgrounds than is the case? This is something we know - if you ask people to estimate the proportions that are black, asian etc the norm is to vastly overstate the numbers. Well just maybe having the adverts like this plays a part?

    But what realistically would be done, even if you wanted to do something? How would you ensure a set of adverts has the approved ethnic make up? You can't - its stupid to even try.

    But maybe all those who wonder why people are pushed to Reform should reflect a bit when people tell them why.
    What's the solution here? Racial quotas for the advertising industry? Perhaps a new quango to administer it (OFCOLOUR?)
    I love how the right is embracing everything it claims to hate (identity politics, the nanny state) as it slowly loses its collective mind. Guys, seeing people of colour on the TV is not going to kill you! There is no conspiracy! It's just people trying to sell stuff.
    Ironically these adverts are generally made by London-based media companies where the demographics are roughly correct.
  • FossFoss Posts: 1,908
    Scott_xP said:

    Foss said:

    It's likely we'll reach a point where in a post broadcast tv, streaming only world adverts are generated in various combinations of colour, class, accent, creed, etc and you'll end up with the version the ad brokers think will best sell a product to you. And then this issue goes away.

    We are today at the point where we end up with the version the ad brokers think will best sell a product to you

    They are not casting ethnic minorities to piss people off, or to meet a quota.

    They are casting actors to sell shit. And it's working.
    Expensive adverts with physical actors not procedurally generated lifelike 'animations'. Wide scoped not micro targeted. And we know micro targeting works; Brexit and Obama taught us that.

    Now streaming radio already delivers custom localised adverts mentioning stores in the direct (<5 mile) local area - do you think that's not going to continue to evolve?
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 17,146

    isam said:

    Farage on Pochin:

    "The way she put it, the way she worded it was wrong and was ugly.

    If I thought the intention behind it was racist, I would have taken more action than I have taken today."


    https://x.com/tomhfh/status/1982815805520679110?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    I think its tricky. Its a bit odd when 4% of British people are black that over half of adverts feature black people. But its obvious why - its advertisers selling stuff and optimising who they appeal to.

    But we have an issue in this country with Reform and people voting for them. What drives someone to think that the county has far more people from ethnic minority backgrounds than is the case? This is something we know - if you ask people to estimate the proportions that are black, asian etc the norm is to vastly overstate the numbers. Well just maybe having the adverts like this plays a part?

    But what realistically would be done, even if you wanted to do something? How would you ensure a set of adverts has the approved ethnic make up? You can't - its stupid to even try.

    But maybe all those who wonder why people are pushed to Reform should reflect a bit when people tell them why.
    What's the solution here? Racial quotas for the advertising industry? Perhaps a new quango to administer it (OFCOLOUR?)
    I love how the right is embracing everything it claims to hate (identity politics, the nanny state) as it slowly loses its collective mind. Guys, seeing people of colour on the TV is not going to kill you! There is no conspiracy! It's just people trying to sell stuff.
    Ironically these adverts are generally made by London-based media companies where the demographics are roughly correct.
    We're in a kind of Scroedingers minorities world where there are simultaneously so many ethnic minority people that they pose a mortal threat to our national identity and so few that is an aberration to see so many of them on TV.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 20,355
    Scott_xP said:

    Foss said:

    It's likely we'll reach a point where in a post broadcast tv, streaming only world adverts are generated in various combinations of colour, class, accent, creed, etc and you'll end up with the version the ad brokers think will best sell a product to you. And then this issue goes away.

    We are today at the point where we end up with the version the ad brokers think will best sell a product to you

    They are not casting ethnic minorities to piss people off, or to meet a quota.

    They are casting actors to sell shit. And it's working.
    Though at the moment, that calculation has to be at least a bit collective- what version of this advert sells the most and annoys the fewest number of people. One of the factors driving populism is some people's frustration that their views no longer seem to matter. Well, in this case, they are right about that. But it's nothing personal, just business. And one of the strands of right wing populism is that business should be allowed to get on with things without interference.

    We may get to a point soon where it's viable to show us personalised versions of the same advert, designed to tickle our individual prejudices. I'm not totally convinced that this will be a good thing for our common life.

    (One other, purely practical, thing about all these adverts showing too many minorities. When my place does photos of students doing science for publicity, they definitely include more girls than is numerically accurate. But if you were to try to have accurate photos, the number would often round down to zero, which would be inaccurate in another, and I think worse, way.)
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 57,875
    Nigelb said:

    Notable stat of the day.

    In the 90s, Pakistan had 50% higher GDP per capita than India, but now it’s only half as large as India’s
    https://x.com/StefanFSchubert/status/1982591263838027832

    Which is why a chunk of the Pakistani elite got paranoid about the rise of India and tried weaponising Islam as counter. So they created and funded a variety of interesting organisations. Such as the one that got off the leash and attacked Mumbai.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 16,641

    isam said:

    Farage on Pochin:

    "The way she put it, the way she worded it was wrong and was ugly.

    If I thought the intention behind it was racist, I would have taken more action than I have taken today."


    https://x.com/tomhfh/status/1982815805520679110?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    I think its tricky. Its a bit odd when 4% of British people are black that over half of adverts feature black people. But its obvious why - its advertisers selling stuff and optimising who they appeal to.

    But we have an issue in this country with Reform and people voting for them. What drives someone to think that the county has far more people from ethnic minority backgrounds than is the case? This is something we know - if you ask people to estimate the proportions that are black, asian etc the norm is to vastly overstate the numbers. Well just maybe having the adverts like this plays a part?

    But what realistically would be done, even if you wanted to do something? How would you ensure a set of adverts has the approved ethnic make up? You can't - its stupid to even try.

    But maybe all those who wonder why people are pushed to Reform should reflect a bit when people tell them why.
    The phenomenon of people overestimating the proportion of the population who are Black is seen for numerous other groups and in different countries, so I think it's largely something more generic than the demography of people seen in adverts. One key effect may be that people judge the frequency of a group based on how easily examples from that group come to mind. As Kardosh et al. (2022) write:

    Our minds are tuned to the uncommon or unexpected in our environment. In most environments, members of minority groups are just that—uncommon. Therefore, the cognitive system is tuned to spotting their presence. Our results indicate that individuals from minority groups are salient in perception, memory, and visual awareness. As a result, we consistently overestimate their presence—leading to an illusion of diversity: the environment seems to be more diverse than it actually is, decreasing our support for diversity-promoting measures. As we try to make equitable decisions, it is important that private individuals and decision-makers alike become aware of this biased perception. While these sorts of biases can be counteracted, one must first be aware of the bias.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 53,741
    edited 5:04PM
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 16,641

    I wonder if Trump will try to annex Venezuela into the USA. He's a legacy man and that would certainly go down in the history books.

    Much easier to invade Panama from Venezuela.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 131,074
    This looks like the infamous push poll the George W Bush campaign ran against John McCain in 2000 in the South Carolina GOP primary.

    New York city is overwhelmingly Democrat though unlike South Carolina. Mamdani is also likely ahead of Cuomo and even more the GOP candidate for it to make little difference
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 38,224
    isam said:

    Farage on Pochin:

    "The way she put it, the way she worded it was wrong and was ugly.

    If I thought the intention behind it was racist, I would have taken more action than I have taken today."


    https://x.com/tomhfh/status/1982815805520679110?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    Is this Farage's attempt to tack to the centre?
  • isamisam Posts: 42,894

    isam said:

    Farage on Pochin:

    "The way she put it, the way she worded it was wrong and was ugly.

    If I thought the intention behind it was racist, I would have taken more action than I have taken today."


    https://x.com/tomhfh/status/1982815805520679110?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    I think its tricky. Its a bit odd when 4% of British people are black that over half of adverts feature black people. But its obvious why - its advertisers selling stuff and optimising who they appeal to.

    But we have an issue in this country with Reform and people voting for them. What drives someone to think that the county has far more people from ethnic minority backgrounds than is the case? This is something we know - if you ask people to estimate the proportions that are black, asian etc the norm is to vastly overstate the numbers. Well just maybe having the adverts like this plays a part?

    But what realistically would be done, even if you wanted to do something? How would you ensure a set of adverts has the approved ethnic make up? You can't - its stupid to even try.

    But maybe all those who wonder why people are pushed to Reform should reflect a bit when people tell them why.
    What's the solution here? Racial quotas for the advertising industry? Perhaps a new quango to administer it (OFCOLOUR?)
    I love how the right is embracing everything it claims to hate (identity politics, the nanny state) as it slowly loses its collective mind. Guys, seeing people of colour on the TV is not going to kill you! There is no conspiracy! It's just people trying to sell stuff.
    The only people suggesting quotas are lefties arguing in bad faith. Pochin, and others, just noted eggs is happening.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 23,705
    Greetings from Cumbria, where an Air Ambulance has just used the grounds of our hotel as a helipad.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 82,588
    Phil said:

    Battlebus said:

    Some political news. One of Labour's major bills, Renters’ Rights Act, has received its Royal Assent. Only taken 18 months and leans heavily on the previous work done in the last Parliament. Slow and steady seems to be the mantra despite all the buffeting that goes on day to day.

    Next up will be the Employment Rights Bill.

    Odds on both of these bills screwing up their target constituencies even more than they are already?

    I have a nasty feeling that the changes in the Renter’s Rights Bill will result in even more property being taken off the rental market & rents climbing ever higher as a result.

    The Employment Bill is going to completely screw over anyone with a spotty work history. All those people who have been out of work with anxiety / actual long covid / heart issues etc etc since 2020? Good luck getting them into work if their prospective employer can’t sack them within a six month probationary period. Why would any employer take the risk of employing them in a soft jobs market where they have other options?
    Both bills display some ignorance of incentives, and indeed history.
    Rent controls have screwed up the housing market pretty well everywhere they've been tried.

    I've long been a critic of using "virtue signalling" as an insult, but this has me sorely tempted.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 82,588
    HYUFD said:

    This looks like the infamous push poll the George W Bush campaign ran against John McCain in 2000 in the South Carolina GOP primary.

    New York city is overwhelmingly Democrat though unlike South Carolina. Mamdani is also likely ahead of Cuomo and even more the GOP candidate for it to make little difference

    Also, there's a week to go until the election.
    Mamdani is pretty good at getting a message across, and this just gives him a target to debunk. They should have released it a bit closer to the poll.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 82,588
    .

    I wonder if Trump will try to annex Venezuela into the USA. He's a legacy man and that would certainly go down in the history books.

    He could be known as President Caracas.
    He has been for quite a while.
    He should visit Egypt, and then could be known President See Nile too.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 82,588

    Nigelb said:

    Notable stat of the day.

    In the 90s, Pakistan had 50% higher GDP per capita than India, but now it’s only half as large as India’s
    https://x.com/StefanFSchubert/status/1982591263838027832

    Which is why a chunk of the Pakistani elite got paranoid about the rise of India and tried weaponising Islam as counter. So they created and funded a variety of interesting organisations. Such as the one that got off the leash and attacked Mumbai.
    Not really addressing their domestic problem, is it ?
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,820

    FPT

    Cyclefree said:

    Nigelb said:

    AnneJGP said:

    Being so late to the thread, has anyone come up with any brilliant ideas to solve the problem?

    TSE wants to repeal the Forfeiture Act and bring back bills of attainder, along with hanging, drawing and quartering.
    Well if @TSE wants to add in the bureaucrat, who has moved @David L's trial tomorrow from Edinburgh to Glasgow so that I will be deprived of the opportunity to tease the charming David about coffee, chocolate, cakes and sundry other important matters, to his list of Attaindees, he's very welcome to do so.
    Yesterday I was getting hard stares for proposing bills of attainder and now you're an enthusiastic supporter.

    My powers of persuasion are unmatched.
    I am a woman. I can change my mind, especially for those who cross me. Anyway, as you will have noticed, I left it entirely up to you if you continue with your colourable proposal. I reserve the right to give both you and the snivelling bureaucrat a hard stare.

    I now have a late afternoon to do something exciting in Edinburgh before dinner. Husband will have gone off to some gallery or other or to climb hundreds of stairs up a castle or something.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 82,588
    "Up to" are potent weasel words.
    But it is a significant deal.

    The United Kingdom and Turkey have signed a deal worth up to £8 billion for 20 Typhoon fighter jets, securing around 20,000 British jobs and the largest UK fighter export in nearly two decades.
    https://x.com/UKDefJournal/status/1982843713274466800
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 53,741
    Cyclefree said:

    FPT

    Cyclefree said:

    Nigelb said:

    AnneJGP said:

    Being so late to the thread, has anyone come up with any brilliant ideas to solve the problem?

    TSE wants to repeal the Forfeiture Act and bring back bills of attainder, along with hanging, drawing and quartering.
    Well if @TSE wants to add in the bureaucrat, who has moved @David L's trial tomorrow from Edinburgh to Glasgow so that I will be deprived of the opportunity to tease the charming David about coffee, chocolate, cakes and sundry other important matters, to his list of Attaindees, he's very welcome to do so.
    Yesterday I was getting hard stares for proposing bills of attainder and now you're an enthusiastic supporter.

    My powers of persuasion are unmatched.
    I am a woman. I can change my mind, especially for those who cross me. Anyway, as you will have noticed, I left it entirely up to you if you continue with your colourable proposal. I reserve the right to give both you and the snivelling bureaucrat a hard stare.

    I now have a late afternoon to do something exciting in Edinburgh before dinner. Husband will have gone off to some gallery or other or to climb hundreds of stairs up a castle or something.
    Maybe @Eabhal could arrange a @cyclefree tour...
  • BlancheLivermoreBlancheLivermore Posts: 6,864
    I skipped breakfast today

    Tomorrow I've decided to splash out and spend £22.50 on it, just to celebrate the fleeting existence of the £450 per month Breakfast Club
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 4,212
    Cyclefree said:

    FPT

    Cyclefree said:

    Nigelb said:

    AnneJGP said:

    Being so late to the thread, has anyone come up with any brilliant ideas to solve the problem?

    TSE wants to repeal the Forfeiture Act and bring back bills of attainder, along with hanging, drawing and quartering.
    Well if @TSE wants to add in the bureaucrat, who has moved @David L's trial tomorrow from Edinburgh to Glasgow so that I will be deprived of the opportunity to tease the charming David about coffee, chocolate, cakes and sundry other important matters, to his list of Attaindees, he's very welcome to do so.
    Yesterday I was getting hard stares for proposing bills of attainder and now you're an enthusiastic supporter.

    My powers of persuasion are unmatched.
    I am a woman. I can change my mind, especially for those who cross me. Anyway, as you will have noticed, I left it entirely up to you if you continue with your colourable proposal. I reserve the right to give both you and the snivelling bureaucrat a hard stare.

    I now have a late afternoon to do something exciting in Edinburgh before dinner. Husband will have gone off to some gallery or other or to climb hundreds of stairs up a castle or something.
    I used to lose hours in old book shops. Rarely bought anything much, just loved the old books. Not exciting at all, just my idea of heaven.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 16,641

    I skipped breakfast today

    Tomorrow I've decided to splash out and spend £22.50 on it, just to celebrate the fleeting existence of the £450 per month Breakfast Club

    Do we need to pay someone to look after you?
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,820
    Foxy said:

    Cyclefree said:

    FPT

    Cyclefree said:

    Nigelb said:

    AnneJGP said:

    Being so late to the thread, has anyone come up with any brilliant ideas to solve the problem?

    TSE wants to repeal the Forfeiture Act and bring back bills of attainder, along with hanging, drawing and quartering.
    Well if @TSE wants to add in the bureaucrat, who has moved @David L's trial tomorrow from Edinburgh to Glasgow so that I will be deprived of the opportunity to tease the charming David about coffee, chocolate, cakes and sundry other important matters, to his list of Attaindees, he's very welcome to do so.
    Yesterday I was getting hard stares for proposing bills of attainder and now you're an enthusiastic supporter.

    My powers of persuasion are unmatched.
    I am a woman. I can change my mind, especially for those who cross me. Anyway, as you will have noticed, I left it entirely up to you if you continue with your colourable proposal. I reserve the right to give both you and the snivelling bureaucrat a hard stare.

    I now have a late afternoon to do something exciting in Edinburgh before dinner. Husband will have gone off to some gallery or other or to climb hundreds of stairs up a castle or something.
    Maybe @Eabhal could arrange a @cyclefree tour...
    PB morphing into a Tinder for sick old ladies on their holibobs .....

  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 17,146
    isam said:

    isam said:

    Farage on Pochin:

    "The way she put it, the way she worded it was wrong and was ugly.

    If I thought the intention behind it was racist, I would have taken more action than I have taken today."


    https://x.com/tomhfh/status/1982815805520679110?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    I think its tricky. Its a bit odd when 4% of British people are black that over half of adverts feature black people. But its obvious why - its advertisers selling stuff and optimising who they appeal to.

    But we have an issue in this country with Reform and people voting for them. What drives someone to think that the county has far more people from ethnic minority backgrounds than is the case? This is something we know - if you ask people to estimate the proportions that are black, asian etc the norm is to vastly overstate the numbers. Well just maybe having the adverts like this plays a part?

    But what realistically would be done, even if you wanted to do something? How would you ensure a set of adverts has the approved ethnic make up? You can't - its stupid to even try.

    But maybe all those who wonder why people are pushed to Reform should reflect a bit when people tell them why.
    What's the solution here? Racial quotas for the advertising industry? Perhaps a new quango to administer it (OFCOLOUR?)
    I love how the right is embracing everything it claims to hate (identity politics, the nanny state) as it slowly loses its collective mind. Guys, seeing people of colour on the TV is not going to kill you! There is no conspiracy! It's just people trying to sell stuff.
    The only people suggesting quotas are lefties arguing in bad faith. Pochin, and others, just noted eggs is happening.
    It's no yolk.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 38,224
    For the first time Labour is averaging less than 20% in the "latest 10 opinion polls average".

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#2025
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 56,378
    edited 5:30PM

    I skipped breakfast today

    Tomorrow I've decided to splash out and spend £22.50 on it, just to celebrate the fleeting existence of the £450 per month Breakfast Club

    "Don't you forget about me."
  • Nigelb said:

    "Up to" are potent weasel words.
    But it is a significant deal.

    The United Kingdom and Turkey have signed a deal worth up to £8 billion for 20 Typhoon fighter jets, securing around 20,000 British jobs and the largest UK fighter export in nearly two decades.
    https://x.com/UKDefJournal/status/1982843713274466800

    A Typhoon reportedly costs around £70-75m per airframe, so there must be an awful lot of training and maintenance in that contract. Or the £8bn is a large portion of wishful thinking.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 82,588
    .

    Nigelb said:

    "Up to" are potent weasel words.
    But it is a significant deal.

    The United Kingdom and Turkey have signed a deal worth up to £8 billion for 20 Typhoon fighter jets, securing around 20,000 British jobs and the largest UK fighter export in nearly two decades.
    https://x.com/UKDefJournal/status/1982843713274466800

    A Typhoon reportedly costs around £70-75m per airframe, so there must be an awful lot of training and maintenance in that contract. Or the £8bn is a large portion of wishful thinking.
    There will presumably also be some refitting of the 30 airframes they're buying from ME airforces.
    Plus weapons etc.
    And the contract will cover a decade or more.

    Also ..."up to".
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 46,125

    Nigelb said:

    "Up to" are potent weasel words.
    But it is a significant deal.

    The United Kingdom and Turkey have signed a deal worth up to £8 billion for 20 Typhoon fighter jets, securing around 20,000 British jobs and the largest UK fighter export in nearly two decades.
    https://x.com/UKDefJournal/status/1982843713274466800

    A Typhoon reportedly costs around £70-75m per airframe, so there must be an awful lot of training and maintenance in that contract. Or the £8bn is a large portion of wishful thinking.
    Bits that go bang? Spares? Engines (not part of an airframe, strictly speaking)?
  • BlancheLivermoreBlancheLivermore Posts: 6,864

    I skipped breakfast today

    Tomorrow I've decided to splash out and spend £22.50 on it, just to celebrate the fleeting existence of the £450 per month Breakfast Club

    Do we need to pay someone to look after you?
    I'd divert the money to the feeble minded who decided that £450 per month was fair beans when the childcare was included
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 38,224
    Andy_JS said:

    For the first time Labour is averaging less than 20% in the "latest 10 opinion polls average".

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#2025

    4 of the 10 have Labour on less than 20% and a further 3 have them on 20%.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 57,875

    Nigelb said:

    "Up to" are potent weasel words.
    But it is a significant deal.

    The United Kingdom and Turkey have signed a deal worth up to £8 billion for 20 Typhoon fighter jets, securing around 20,000 British jobs and the largest UK fighter export in nearly two decades.
    https://x.com/UKDefJournal/status/1982843713274466800

    A Typhoon reportedly costs around £70-75m per airframe, so there must be an awful lot of training and maintenance in that contract. Or the £8bn is a large portion of wishful thinking.
    Support costs/spares while they are in service. Remember the vast deals with the Saudis in the 80s?

    In fact, as I understand it, the manufacturers often try and reduce the headline cost per airframe to a bare minimum - and make their profit on the support. Bit like printers, really.
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 8,296
    So I guess where I stand on AdvertGate is that I don't think it's controversial to note that representation on adverts is out of whack with society at large (for reasons we can debate).

    This leads on to two questions:

    1) Should it be? and
    2) If it shouldn't, how do you enforce it?

    Surely it is unenforceable, or at least the options for enforcing it are highly undesirable.

    My last thought on this is that we so clearly have much more important issues facing the country right now than who appears on our TV adverts. Is there a vague underlying identity-politics-wokeist influence in all this? Plausibly. Do I think this should be a high priority as a political debate when the country is facing serious headwinds? No.

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 82,588
    Carnyx said:

    Nigelb said:

    "Up to" are potent weasel words.
    But it is a significant deal.

    The United Kingdom and Turkey have signed a deal worth up to £8 billion for 20 Typhoon fighter jets, securing around 20,000 British jobs and the largest UK fighter export in nearly two decades.
    https://x.com/UKDefJournal/status/1982843713274466800

    A Typhoon reportedly costs around £70-75m per airframe, so there must be an awful lot of training and maintenance in that contract. Or the £8bn is a large portion of wishful thinking.
    Bits that go bang? Spares? Engines (not part of an airframe, strictly speaking)?
    Yes - apparently the £8bn also includes work on the second hand airframes from Qatar and Oman, training and logistics support, and an "MBDA weapons package".
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 25,504
    Phil said:

    Battlebus said:

    Some political news. One of Labour's major bills, Renters’ Rights Act, has received its Royal Assent. Only taken 18 months and leans heavily on the previous work done in the last Parliament. Slow and steady seems to be the mantra despite all the buffeting that goes on day to day.

    Next up will be the Employment Rights Bill.

    Odds on both of these bills screwing up their target constituencies even more than they are already?

    I have a nasty feeling that the changes in the Renter’s Rights Bill will result in even more property being taken off the rental market & rents climbing ever higher as a result.

    The Employment Bill is going to completely screw over anyone with a spotty work history. All those people who have been out of work with anxiety / actual long covid / heart issues etc etc since 2020? Good luck getting them into work if their prospective employer can’t sack them within a six month probationary period. Why would any employer take the risk of employing them in a soft jobs market where they have other options?
    2 years is too long to get normal employment rights, but why go from 2 years to first day? I think either six months, or a phased in approach with some at 3 months and the rest after a year, would be about right, but even if they made it 1 month it would give employers a chance to make a risky employment decision. Instead it will all end up with temp agencies instead, how is that better?
  • isamisam Posts: 42,894

    isam said:

    isam said:

    Farage on Pochin:

    "The way she put it, the way she worded it was wrong and was ugly.

    If I thought the intention behind it was racist, I would have taken more action than I have taken today."


    https://x.com/tomhfh/status/1982815805520679110?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    I think its tricky. Its a bit odd when 4% of British people are black that over half of adverts feature black people. But its obvious why - its advertisers selling stuff and optimising who they appeal to.

    But we have an issue in this country with Reform and people voting for them. What drives someone to think that the county has far more people from ethnic minority backgrounds than is the case? This is something we know - if you ask people to estimate the proportions that are black, asian etc the norm is to vastly overstate the numbers. Well just maybe having the adverts like this plays a part?

    But what realistically would be done, even if you wanted to do something? How would you ensure a set of adverts has the approved ethnic make up? You can't - its stupid to even try.

    But maybe all those who wonder why people are pushed to Reform should reflect a bit when people tell them why.
    What's the solution here? Racial quotas for the advertising industry? Perhaps a new quango to administer it (OFCOLOUR?)
    I love how the right is embracing everything it claims to hate (identity politics, the nanny state) as it slowly loses its collective mind. Guys, seeing people of colour on the TV is not going to kill you! There is no conspiracy! It's just people trying to sell stuff.
    The only people suggesting quotas are lefties arguing in bad faith. Pochin, and others, just noted eggs is happening.
    It's no yolk.
    Sure my iPhone is deliberately putting me away with these auto corrects ever since I went sim only!
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 53,741
    Cyclefree said:

    Foxy said:

    Cyclefree said:

    FPT

    Cyclefree said:

    Nigelb said:

    AnneJGP said:

    Being so late to the thread, has anyone come up with any brilliant ideas to solve the problem?

    TSE wants to repeal the Forfeiture Act and bring back bills of attainder, along with hanging, drawing and quartering.
    Well if @TSE wants to add in the bureaucrat, who has moved @David L's trial tomorrow from Edinburgh to Glasgow so that I will be deprived of the opportunity to tease the charming David about coffee, chocolate, cakes and sundry other important matters, to his list of Attaindees, he's very welcome to do so.
    Yesterday I was getting hard stares for proposing bills of attainder and now you're an enthusiastic supporter.

    My powers of persuasion are unmatched.
    I am a woman. I can change my mind, especially for those who cross me. Anyway, as you will have noticed, I left it entirely up to you if you continue with your colourable proposal. I reserve the right to give both you and the snivelling bureaucrat a hard stare.

    I now have a late afternoon to do something exciting in Edinburgh before dinner. Husband will have gone off to some gallery or other or to climb hundreds of stairs up a castle or something.
    Maybe @Eabhal could arrange a @cyclefree tour...
    PB morphing into a Tinder for sick old ladies on their holibobs .....

    I was thinking more a feeble pun on two wheeled transport!

  • StockyStocky Posts: 10,447
    Nigelb said:

    Sultana is proper bonkers.

    .."Putin is a dictator, a gangster, and there are war crimes that have been committed, but Zelenskyy isn't a friend of the working class either."..
    https://x.com/PoliticsJOE_UK/status/1982768825444553056

    I haven't come across quite such nonsense since I was a student.

    I cannot begin to understand the tortuousness of her mind.
  • bobbobbobbob Posts: 136
    Putting blacks and asians in adverts makes them stand out more which is why they do it imo. The brain is wired to notice differences
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 26,370

    isam said:

    isam said:

    Farage on Pochin:

    "The way she put it, the way she worded it was wrong and was ugly.

    If I thought the intention behind it was racist, I would have taken more action than I have taken today."


    https://x.com/tomhfh/status/1982815805520679110?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    I think its tricky. Its a bit odd when 4% of British people are black that over half of adverts feature black people. But its obvious why - its advertisers selling stuff and optimising who they appeal to.

    But we have an issue in this country with Reform and people voting for them. What drives someone to think that the county has far more people from ethnic minority backgrounds than is the case? This is something we know - if you ask people to estimate the proportions that are black, asian etc the norm is to vastly overstate the numbers. Well just maybe having the adverts like this plays a part?

    But what realistically would be done, even if you wanted to do something? How would you ensure a set of adverts has the approved ethnic make up? You can't - its stupid to even try.

    But maybe all those who wonder why people are pushed to Reform should reflect a bit when people tell them why.
    What's the solution here? Racial quotas for the advertising industry? Perhaps a new quango to administer it (OFCOLOUR?)
    I love how the right is embracing everything it claims to hate (identity politics, the nanny state) as it slowly loses its collective mind. Guys, seeing people of colour on the TV is not going to kill you! There is no conspiracy! It's just people trying to sell stuff.
    The only people suggesting quotas are lefties arguing in bad faith. Pochin, and others, just noted eggs is happening.
    It's no yolk.
    It's enoeuf

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 56,722
    Stocky said:

    Nigelb said:

    Sultana is proper bonkers.

    .."Putin is a dictator, a gangster, and there are war crimes that have been committed, but Zelenskyy isn't a friend of the working class either."..
    https://x.com/PoliticsJOE_UK/status/1982768825444553056

    I haven't come across quite such nonsense since I was a student.

    I cannot begin to understand the tortuousness of her mind.
    It is seriously not worth the effort.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 25,504

    So I guess where I stand on AdvertGate is that I don't think it's controversial to note that representation on adverts is out of whack with society at large (for reasons we can debate).

    This leads on to two questions:

    1) Should it be? and
    2) If it shouldn't, how do you enforce it?

    Surely it is unenforceable, or at least the options for enforcing it are highly undesirable.

    My last thought on this is that we so clearly have much more important issues facing the country right now than who appears on our TV adverts. Is there a vague underlying identity-politics-wokeist influence in all this? Plausibly. Do I think this should be a high priority as a political debate when the country is facing serious headwinds? No.

    10 years ago minority groups complained that they were underrepresented in adverts and its led to a big shift. What would happen if this was addressed differently and instead of moaning about the race of the current actors, instead the plea was for more WWC actors to be given a chance and to portray themselves as working class rather than middle class.

    I think it would get a lot more sympathy from the decision makers, although might not work as middle class households spend more on tat being advertised than working class ones.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 25,504
    viewcode said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    Farage on Pochin:

    "The way she put it, the way she worded it was wrong and was ugly.

    If I thought the intention behind it was racist, I would have taken more action than I have taken today."


    https://x.com/tomhfh/status/1982815805520679110?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    I think its tricky. Its a bit odd when 4% of British people are black that over half of adverts feature black people. But its obvious why - its advertisers selling stuff and optimising who they appeal to.

    But we have an issue in this country with Reform and people voting for them. What drives someone to think that the county has far more people from ethnic minority backgrounds than is the case? This is something we know - if you ask people to estimate the proportions that are black, asian etc the norm is to vastly overstate the numbers. Well just maybe having the adverts like this plays a part?

    But what realistically would be done, even if you wanted to do something? How would you ensure a set of adverts has the approved ethnic make up? You can't - its stupid to even try.

    But maybe all those who wonder why people are pushed to Reform should reflect a bit when people tell them why.
    What's the solution here? Racial quotas for the advertising industry? Perhaps a new quango to administer it (OFCOLOUR?)
    I love how the right is embracing everything it claims to hate (identity politics, the nanny state) as it slowly loses its collective mind. Guys, seeing people of colour on the TV is not going to kill you! There is no conspiracy! It's just people trying to sell stuff.
    The only people suggesting quotas are lefties arguing in bad faith. Pochin, and others, just noted eggs is happening.
    It's no yolk.
    It's enoeuf

    These puns are starting to scramble my brain.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 20,355

    I skipped breakfast today

    Tomorrow I've decided to splash out and spend £22.50 on it, just to celebrate the fleeting existence of the £450 per month Breakfast Club

    Do we need to pay someone to look after you?
    I'd divert the money to the feeble minded who decided that £450 per month was fair beans when the childcare was included
    It's not about whether it's fair beans or not, it's about how much existing providers charge.

    It's the little spoken-of twin of housing costs for the young. Older relatives say "HOW MUCH?" in a shocked voice, young families say "that much'.

    (£5.50 per child per day seems to be the going rate in Romford. Three kids at just over £7 a day hits the magic number. Maybe it shouldn't, but it does. There's a reason young working families are narked right now.)
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 11,494
    Fpt
    Foss said:

    MattW said:

    viewcode said:

    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree ghost-writing for Robert? :lol:

    Um, good, well-argued article, BTW.

    It's an excellent article. @rcs1000 describes one of the bottlenecks very well.

    Why has it arisen? I'll tell you why - and it is exactly the same reason as I said in August 2019 -

    "The legal system has few friends. There is an assumption that it mostly deals with the criminal and the feckless. Few politicians care about them. It has no “Aaah” factor. Most people hope never to encounter it. Those who are caught up in it are generally appalled by the experience. It has been in recent years put in the care, if that is the word, of politicians with little knowledge about it and little willingness to learn, let alone to fight to make it better.

    For 6 years from 2012 to 2018, no lawyer was deemed worthy to be Minister of Justice, the choice instead falling on Chris Grayling and Liz Truss, about whom the word “second-rate” would be an undeserved compliment. Michael Gove spent much of his time undoing the damage caused by his predecessor. Few Ministers lasted more than a year. And who was responsible for the police? Well, one Mrs May, followed by Amber Rudd and Sajid Javid. Enough said.

    Lawyers, however eloquent they may be on behalf of their clients, are generally hopeless at explaining why law and justice matter to anyone other than fellow lawyers. But our legal system does matter, very much indeed. There is no more important function of the state than the maintenance of law and order.

    Crucial to that are a competent police force, a legal system which works and in which equality under the law and access to justice are not simply empty phrases, prisons which are something other than a breeding ground of violence and hopelessness and a probation service which works. All these aspects matter not just one of them.

    The rule of law is not simply an airy phrase: it is the reality of a state able to keep its citizens safe, a state able to apprehend criminals, a state able to dispense justice, a state able find the right balance between the rights of the innocent and the guilty, a state able to enforce its laws, a state able to punish fairly and provide the hope of rehabilitation for those who have paid their dues. ........

    The rule of law in its widest sense is something of which Britain ought to be proud; it has probably had a greater claim than the NHS to be considered “the envy of the world“. But for too long it has been neglected, downgraded, ignored and managed by penny pinchers who know the price of everything and the value of nothing. Futile as this plea may be, it is long past the time for this to stop.
    "

    (https://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2019/08/11/blind-to-justice/)

    I'll be naughty and repost this.


    Of course you're right, Ms Cyclefree. But the apparently impossible question is... how to fix it?

    We are in a society that likes penny-pinching, because it assumes that frees up pennies for sweeties now. As for future us, they're in the future, so serves them right.
    One of our problems derives from Mrs Thatcher's views. I recall her saying something like her preferring that the best minds from Oxford and Cambridge (I know, I know) should go into the City rather than public service. Up until then very bright students would include public service, as Civil Servants in their career options. After that, not so much.
    This allows me to get back on my hobby horse of calling the big change of UK society and the divisions over the past 40 years. Before Fatch indeed bright young things would go into all kinds of occupations - doctors, civil servants, yes finance, but that was only one of several options. All paid roughly the same, perhaps the City a smidge more.

    Then Big Bang happened, the US banks took over the UK merchant banks and began to pay megabucks for the people to work there (or at "their" bank, rather than another one). City salaries skyrocketed and hence any sensible grad, Oxbridge or not, would likely try to get a job in finance, rather than become a doctor or a civil servant, etc.
    And linked to that, it means that the elite has lost a lot of its sense of the long term.

    My Jenny-come-lately Cambridge College is over 150 years old. The British Army is 350 years old, depending on when you start counting. The Church of England, 450 years (same Ts and C's). All institutions that were around long before me, and intend to be around long after me. It ties in with that old Tory thing of inheritance as a duty.

    High finance seems to think it's doing well with a ten year horizon. No wonder so much of the country gets sold off for parts.
    Those are tiny numbers! You need bigger numbers! My school is 460 years old. My first degree was at a university 814 years old. My third was at a university approaching 1000. My city is approaching 2000.
    Just the three degrees then...

    :):):):):)
    At the risk of generating a swirling rabbit hole of argument, the Church of England is AD597 officially.

    All we did was chuck out the tyrannical foreign management - in Tony Benn's words, we nationalised it.
    But the Celtic church was earlier, no? I recall a Council of Whitby but forget what was discussed!
    As I recal it was over Irish or Roman rites.
    Also over tonsures. The romans liked their monks bald, while the Irish wanted them furry
  • BlancheLivermoreBlancheLivermore Posts: 6,864
    edited 6:02PM

    I skipped breakfast today

    Tomorrow I've decided to splash out and spend £22.50 on it, just to celebrate the fleeting existence of the £450 per month Breakfast Club

    Do we need to pay someone to look after you?
    I'd divert the money to the feeble minded who decided that £450 per month was fair beans when the childcare was included
    It's not about whether it's fair beans or not, it's about how much existing providers charge.

    It's the little spoken-of twin of housing costs for the young. Older relatives say "HOW MUCH?" in a shocked voice, young families say "that much'.

    (£5.50 per child per day seems to be the going rate in Romford. Three kids at just over £7 a day hits the magic number. Maybe it shouldn't, but it does. There's a reason young working families are narked right now.)
    So why is it now £450 a year in parents' pockets?

    The Labour Party tweeter made the defenders of the erroneous tweet look bloody ridiculous in fairly short order

    And yet they double down..
  • BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 3,242
    AnneJGP said:

    Cyclefree said:

    FPT

    Cyclefree said:

    Nigelb said:

    AnneJGP said:

    Being so late to the thread, has anyone come up with any brilliant ideas to solve the problem?

    TSE wants to repeal the Forfeiture Act and bring back bills of attainder, along with hanging, drawing and quartering.
    Well if @TSE wants to add in the bureaucrat, who has moved @David L's trial tomorrow from Edinburgh to Glasgow so that I will be deprived of the opportunity to tease the charming David about coffee, chocolate, cakes and sundry other important matters, to his list of Attaindees, he's very welcome to do so.
    Yesterday I was getting hard stares for proposing bills of attainder and now you're an enthusiastic supporter.

    My powers of persuasion are unmatched.
    I am a woman. I can change my mind, especially for those who cross me. Anyway, as you will have noticed, I left it entirely up to you if you continue with your colourable proposal. I reserve the right to give both you and the snivelling bureaucrat a hard stare.

    I now have a late afternoon to do something exciting in Edinburgh before dinner. Husband will have gone off to some gallery or other or to climb hundreds of stairs up a castle or something.
    I used to lose hours in old book shops. Rarely bought anything much, just loved the old books. Not exciting at all, just my idea of heaven.
    There is (or was) a cluster of second-hand bookshops on and around West Port, below the old town. If you're so inclined, a good place to wile away a few hours.
  • eekeek Posts: 31,645

    Phil said:

    Battlebus said:

    Some political news. One of Labour's major bills, Renters’ Rights Act, has received its Royal Assent. Only taken 18 months and leans heavily on the previous work done in the last Parliament. Slow and steady seems to be the mantra despite all the buffeting that goes on day to day.

    Next up will be the Employment Rights Bill.

    Odds on both of these bills screwing up their target constituencies even more than they are already?

    I have a nasty feeling that the changes in the Renter’s Rights Bill will result in even more property being taken off the rental market & rents climbing ever higher as a result.

    The Employment Bill is going to completely screw over anyone with a spotty work history. All those people who have been out of work with anxiety / actual long covid / heart issues etc etc since 2020? Good luck getting them into work if their prospective employer can’t sack them within a six month probationary period. Why would any employer take the risk of employing them in a soft jobs market where they have other options?
    2 years is too long to get normal employment rights, but why go from 2 years to first day? I think either six months, or a phased in approach with some at 3 months and the rest after a year, would be about right, but even if they made it 1 month it would give employers a chance to make a risky employment decision. Instead it will all end up with temp agencies instead, how is that better?
    The employment bill isn't going to instantly create first day rights - the problem is no-one has a clear where the compromise will be placed..
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 15,734

    Fpt

    Foss said:

    MattW said:

    viewcode said:

    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree ghost-writing for Robert? :lol:

    Um, good, well-argued article, BTW.

    It's an excellent article. @rcs1000 describes one of the bottlenecks very well.

    Why has it arisen? I'll tell you why - and it is exactly the same reason as I said in August 2019 -

    "The legal system has few friends. There is an assumption that it mostly deals with the criminal and the feckless. Few politicians care about them. It has no “Aaah” factor. Most people hope never to encounter it. Those who are caught up in it are generally appalled by the experience. It has been in recent years put in the care, if that is the word, of politicians with little knowledge about it and little willingness to learn, let alone to fight to make it better.

    For 6 years from 2012 to 2018, no lawyer was deemed worthy to be Minister of Justice, the choice instead falling on Chris Grayling and Liz Truss, about whom the word “second-rate” would be an undeserved compliment. Michael Gove spent much of his time undoing the damage caused by his predecessor. Few Ministers lasted more than a year. And who was responsible for the police? Well, one Mrs May, followed by Amber Rudd and Sajid Javid. Enough said.

    Lawyers, however eloquent they may be on behalf of their clients, are generally hopeless at explaining why law and justice matter to anyone other than fellow lawyers. But our legal system does matter, very much indeed. There is no more important function of the state than the maintenance of law and order.

    Crucial to that are a competent police force, a legal system which works and in which equality under the law and access to justice are not simply empty phrases, prisons which are something other than a breeding ground of violence and hopelessness and a probation service which works. All these aspects matter not just one of them.

    The rule of law is not simply an airy phrase: it is the reality of a state able to keep its citizens safe, a state able to apprehend criminals, a state able to dispense justice, a state able find the right balance between the rights of the innocent and the guilty, a state able to enforce its laws, a state able to punish fairly and provide the hope of rehabilitation for those who have paid their dues. ........

    The rule of law in its widest sense is something of which Britain ought to be proud; it has probably had a greater claim than the NHS to be considered “the envy of the world“. But for too long it has been neglected, downgraded, ignored and managed by penny pinchers who know the price of everything and the value of nothing. Futile as this plea may be, it is long past the time for this to stop.
    "

    (https://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2019/08/11/blind-to-justice/)

    I'll be naughty and repost this.


    Of course you're right, Ms Cyclefree. But the apparently impossible question is... how to fix it?

    We are in a society that likes penny-pinching, because it assumes that frees up pennies for sweeties now. As for future us, they're in the future, so serves them right.
    One of our problems derives from Mrs Thatcher's views. I recall her saying something like her preferring that the best minds from Oxford and Cambridge (I know, I know) should go into the City rather than public service. Up until then very bright students would include public service, as Civil Servants in their career options. After that, not so much.
    This allows me to get back on my hobby horse of calling the big change of UK society and the divisions over the past 40 years. Before Fatch indeed bright young things would go into all kinds of occupations - doctors, civil servants, yes finance, but that was only one of several options. All paid roughly the same, perhaps the City a smidge more.

    Then Big Bang happened, the US banks took over the UK merchant banks and began to pay megabucks for the people to work there (or at "their" bank, rather than another one). City salaries skyrocketed and hence any sensible grad, Oxbridge or not, would likely try to get a job in finance, rather than become a doctor or a civil servant, etc.
    And linked to that, it means that the elite has lost a lot of its sense of the long term.

    My Jenny-come-lately Cambridge College is over 150 years old. The British Army is 350 years old, depending on when you start counting. The Church of England, 450 years (same Ts and C's). All institutions that were around long before me, and intend to be around long after me. It ties in with that old Tory thing of inheritance as a duty.

    High finance seems to think it's doing well with a ten year horizon. No wonder so much of the country gets sold off for parts.
    Those are tiny numbers! You need bigger numbers! My school is 460 years old. My first degree was at a university 814 years old. My third was at a university approaching 1000. My city is approaching 2000.
    Just the three degrees then...

    :):):):):)
    At the risk of generating a swirling rabbit hole of argument, the Church of England is AD597 officially.

    All we did was chuck out the tyrannical foreign management - in Tony Benn's words, we nationalised it.
    But the Celtic church was earlier, no? I recall a Council of Whitby but forget what was discussed!
    As I recal it was over Irish or Roman rites.
    Also over tonsures. The romans liked their monks bald, while the Irish wanted them furry

    Yes. Despite the rhetoric about 597 and Augustine of Canterbury, in the west and north there is a decent degree of Christian continuity from around the time of Constantine. But not in the south east where it had mostly vanished. Charles Thomas is the classic work on this, but more up to date is Robin Fleming: Britain After Rome, Penguin 2011, especially the excellent chapter 5. A bishop of York is recorded in 314, nearly 300 years before Canterbury.

    The ancient Irish/Welsh/British church met the Roman innovators and there was a good degree of mutual incomprehension. Rome won the day (how to date Easter, liturgical matters, haircuts for religious) at the Synod of Whitby, 664.

    In Cumberland where I live there is almost certainly Christian continuity for 1700 years, and continuing.

    The lack of knowledge in the UK about the extraordinary history is remarkable.
  • isamisam Posts: 42,894
    HYUFD said:

    We had a small funeral for Theo today which at least gave us some closure. He came in to Song for Athene and went out to One Sweet Day by Mariah Carey and Boyz II Men

    So sorry. Hope you and your wife are coping well
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 57,875
    DavidL said:

    Stocky said:

    Nigelb said:

    Sultana is proper bonkers.

    .."Putin is a dictator, a gangster, and there are war crimes that have been committed, but Zelenskyy isn't a friend of the working class either."..
    https://x.com/PoliticsJOE_UK/status/1982768825444553056

    I haven't come across quite such nonsense since I was a student.

    I cannot begin to understand the tortuousness of her mind.
    It is seriously not worth the effort.
    Actually, it is.

    Zelensky wants to build Ukraine into a modern, Western, Social Democratic state. A part of the European Union.

    To the Fruit & Nuts, this is creating another Western Imperialist Capitalist Enemy.

    The fact that he is doing so on *their* sacred ground - the soil of the former Soviet Union - is to them, an added insult.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 25,504
    edited 6:10PM

    I skipped breakfast today

    Tomorrow I've decided to splash out and spend £22.50 on it, just to celebrate the fleeting existence of the £450 per month Breakfast Club

    Do we need to pay someone to look after you?
    I'd divert the money to the feeble minded who decided that £450 per month was fair beans when the childcare was included
    It's not about whether it's fair beans or not, it's about how much existing providers charge.

    It's the little spoken-of twin of housing costs for the young. Older relatives say "HOW MUCH?" in a shocked voice, young families say "that much'.

    (£5.50 per child per day seems to be the going rate in Romford. Three kids at just over £7 a day hits the magic number. Maybe it shouldn't, but it does. There's a reason young working families are narked right now.)
    So why is it now £450 a year in parents' pockets?

    The Labour Party tweeter made the defenders of the erroneous tweet look bloody ridiculous in fairly short order

    And yet they double down..
    Right. This conversation is annoying me for some reason.

    School breakfast clubs typically range from about £2.50 - £5.50. There are 190 school days in the year. At the lower end that gives £475 per year per child. I suspect that is where the government get their £450 number per year in the official release. At the upper end in it would be £1,045 per child.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/news/free-breakfast-clubs-roll-out-as-costs-for-families-cut-by-8000

    The £450 on twatter is imo "probably" used monthly when it should be annually.

    However, the wider saving including the ability to work extra hours and other new extra childcare could easily be more than £450 per month for a family with 3 school age kids.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 20,355

    I skipped breakfast today

    Tomorrow I've decided to splash out and spend £22.50 on it, just to celebrate the fleeting existence of the £450 per month Breakfast Club

    Do we need to pay someone to look after you?
    I'd divert the money to the feeble minded who decided that £450 per month was fair beans when the childcare was included
    It's not about whether it's fair beans or not, it's about how much existing providers charge.

    It's the little spoken-of twin of housing costs for the young. Older relatives say "HOW MUCH?" in a shocked voice, young families say "that much'.

    (£5.50 per child per day seems to be the going rate in Romford. Three kids at just over £7 a day hits the magic number. Maybe it shouldn't, but it does. There's a reason young working families are narked right now.)
    So why is it now £450 a year in parents' pockets?

    The Labour Party tweeter made the defenders of the erroneous tweet look bloody ridiculous in fairly short order

    And yet they double down..
    You'd have to ask Labour's social media team that.

    But as someone who has only fairly recently escaped from paying for that sort of thing, £450 a month is high, but I can see where it could come from. Especially if you are paying for multiple kids at once. £450 a year is suspiciously low.

    (If it turns out that half the Labour SM team has taken the week off because their children are on half term, and it has been changed by someone childless who couldn't believe the figure either, I wouldn't be that surprised.)
  • BlancheLivermoreBlancheLivermore Posts: 6,864

    I skipped breakfast today

    Tomorrow I've decided to splash out and spend £22.50 on it, just to celebrate the fleeting existence of the £450 per month Breakfast Club

    Do we need to pay someone to look after you?
    I'd divert the money to the feeble minded who decided that £450 per month was fair beans when the childcare was included
    It's not about whether it's fair beans or not, it's about how much existing providers charge.

    It's the little spoken-of twin of housing costs for the young. Older relatives say "HOW MUCH?" in a shocked voice, young families say "that much'.

    (£5.50 per child per day seems to be the going rate in Romford. Three kids at just over £7 a day hits the magic number. Maybe it shouldn't, but it does. There's a reason young working families are narked right now.)
    So why is it now £450 a year in parents' pockets?

    The Labour Party tweeter made the defenders of the erroneous tweet look bloody ridiculous in fairly short order

    And yet they double down..
    Right. This conversation is annoying me for some reason.

    School breakfast clubs typically range from about £2.50 - £5.50. There are 190 school days in the year. At the lower end that gives £475 per year per child. I suspect that is where the government get their £450 number per year in the official release. At the upper end in it would be £1,045 per child.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/news/free-breakfast-clubs-roll-out-as-costs-for-families-cut-by-8000

    The £450 on twatter is imo "probably" used monthly when it should be annually.

    However, the wider saving including the ability to work extra hours and other new extra childcare could easily be more than £450 per month for a family with 3 school age kids.
    Take it up with the Labour Party
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 26,370

    viewcode said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    Farage on Pochin:

    "The way she put it, the way she worded it was wrong and was ugly.

    If I thought the intention behind it was racist, I would have taken more action than I have taken today."


    https://x.com/tomhfh/status/1982815805520679110?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    I think its tricky. Its a bit odd when 4% of British people are black that over half of adverts feature black people. But its obvious why - its advertisers selling stuff and optimising who they appeal to.

    But we have an issue in this country with Reform and people voting for them. What drives someone to think that the county has far more people from ethnic minority backgrounds than is the case? This is something we know - if you ask people to estimate the proportions that are black, asian etc the norm is to vastly overstate the numbers. Well just maybe having the adverts like this plays a part?

    But what realistically would be done, even if you wanted to do something? How would you ensure a set of adverts has the approved ethnic make up? You can't - its stupid to even try.

    But maybe all those who wonder why people are pushed to Reform should reflect a bit when people tell them why.
    What's the solution here? Racial quotas for the advertising industry? Perhaps a new quango to administer it (OFCOLOUR?)
    I love how the right is embracing everything it claims to hate (identity politics, the nanny state) as it slowly loses its collective mind. Guys, seeing people of colour on the TV is not going to kill you! There is no conspiracy! It's just people trying to sell stuff.
    The only people suggesting quotas are lefties arguing in bad faith. Pochin, and others, just noted eggs is happening.
    It's no yolk.
    It's enoeuf

    These puns are starting to scramble my brain.
    eggsactly
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 25,504

    I skipped breakfast today

    Tomorrow I've decided to splash out and spend £22.50 on it, just to celebrate the fleeting existence of the £450 per month Breakfast Club

    Do we need to pay someone to look after you?
    I'd divert the money to the feeble minded who decided that £450 per month was fair beans when the childcare was included
    It's not about whether it's fair beans or not, it's about how much existing providers charge.

    It's the little spoken-of twin of housing costs for the young. Older relatives say "HOW MUCH?" in a shocked voice, young families say "that much'.

    (£5.50 per child per day seems to be the going rate in Romford. Three kids at just over £7 a day hits the magic number. Maybe it shouldn't, but it does. There's a reason young working families are narked right now.)
    So why is it now £450 a year in parents' pockets?

    The Labour Party tweeter made the defenders of the erroneous tweet look bloody ridiculous in fairly short order

    And yet they double down..
    Right. This conversation is annoying me for some reason.

    School breakfast clubs typically range from about £2.50 - £5.50. There are 190 school days in the year. At the lower end that gives £475 per year per child. I suspect that is where the government get their £450 number per year in the official release. At the upper end in it would be £1,045 per child.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/news/free-breakfast-clubs-roll-out-as-costs-for-families-cut-by-8000

    The £450 on twatter is imo "probably" used monthly when it should be annually.

    However, the wider saving including the ability to work extra hours and other new extra childcare could easily be more than £450 per month for a family with 3 school age kids.
    Take it up with the Labour Party
    Why? Its not a big deal to me. Someone has "probably" typed monthly instead of annually, happens all the time. As a result it still isnt particularly misleading as the wording uses "up to" and the official government version has used the lowest end of breakfast club rates.
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 4,245
    viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    Farage on Pochin:

    "The way she put it, the way she worded it was wrong and was ugly.

    If I thought the intention behind it was racist, I would have taken more action than I have taken today."


    https://x.com/tomhfh/status/1982815805520679110?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    I think its tricky. Its a bit odd when 4% of British people are black that over half of adverts feature black people. But its obvious why - its advertisers selling stuff and optimising who they appeal to.

    But we have an issue in this country with Reform and people voting for them. What drives someone to think that the county has far more people from ethnic minority backgrounds than is the case? This is something we know - if you ask people to estimate the proportions that are black, asian etc the norm is to vastly overstate the numbers. Well just maybe having the adverts like this plays a part?

    But what realistically would be done, even if you wanted to do something? How would you ensure a set of adverts has the approved ethnic make up? You can't - its stupid to even try.

    But maybe all those who wonder why people are pushed to Reform should reflect a bit when people tell them why.
    What's the solution here? Racial quotas for the advertising industry? Perhaps a new quango to administer it (OFCOLOUR?)
    I love how the right is embracing everything it claims to hate (identity politics, the nanny state) as it slowly loses its collective mind. Guys, seeing people of colour on the TV is not going to kill you! There is no conspiracy! It's just people trying to sell stuff.
    The only people suggesting quotas are lefties arguing in bad faith. Pochin, and others, just noted eggs is happening.
    It's no yolk.
    It's enoeuf

    These puns are starting to scramble my brain.
    eggsactly
    People keep poaching all the good ones.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 131,074
    isam said:

    HYUFD said:

    We had a small funeral for Theo today which at least gave us some closure. He came in to Song for Athene and went out to One Sweet Day by Mariah Carey and Boyz II Men

    So sorry. Hope you and your wife are coping well
    Thanks Islam, yes as well as we can
  • BlancheLivermoreBlancheLivermore Posts: 6,864

    I skipped breakfast today

    Tomorrow I've decided to splash out and spend £22.50 on it, just to celebrate the fleeting existence of the £450 per month Breakfast Club

    Do we need to pay someone to look after you?
    I'd divert the money to the feeble minded who decided that £450 per month was fair beans when the childcare was included
    It's not about whether it's fair beans or not, it's about how much existing providers charge.

    It's the little spoken-of twin of housing costs for the young. Older relatives say "HOW MUCH?" in a shocked voice, young families say "that much'.

    (£5.50 per child per day seems to be the going rate in Romford. Three kids at just over £7 a day hits the magic number. Maybe it shouldn't, but it does. There's a reason young working families are narked right now.)
    So why is it now £450 a year in parents' pockets?

    The Labour Party tweeter made the defenders of the erroneous tweet look bloody ridiculous in fairly short order

    And yet they double down..
    Right. This conversation is annoying me for some reason.

    School breakfast clubs typically range from about £2.50 - £5.50. There are 190 school days in the year. At the lower end that gives £475 per year per child. I suspect that is where the government get their £450 number per year in the official release. At the upper end in it would be £1,045 per child.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/news/free-breakfast-clubs-roll-out-as-costs-for-families-cut-by-8000

    The £450 on twatter is imo "probably" used monthly when it should be annually.

    However, the wider saving including the ability to work extra hours and other new extra childcare could easily be more than £450 per month for a family with 3 school age kids.
    Take it up with the Labour Party
    Why? Its not a big deal to me. Someone has "probably" typed monthly instead of annually, happens all the time. As a result it still isnt particularly misleading as the wording uses "up to" and the official government version has used the lowest end of breakfast club rates.
    It's annoying you for some reason

    I got snidey, oh so clever criticism from various people on here when I questioned the monthly figure

    Labour corrected the record and they all ran away

    But some people are STILL doubling down on defending the obvious mistake, rather than saying oops aren't I a tit for buying that

    I imagine it really grinds some people's gears that I'm occasionally quite astute for a poster on here, not just for a postie
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 25,504
    eek said:

    Phil said:

    Battlebus said:

    Some political news. One of Labour's major bills, Renters’ Rights Act, has received its Royal Assent. Only taken 18 months and leans heavily on the previous work done in the last Parliament. Slow and steady seems to be the mantra despite all the buffeting that goes on day to day.

    Next up will be the Employment Rights Bill.

    Odds on both of these bills screwing up their target constituencies even more than they are already?

    I have a nasty feeling that the changes in the Renter’s Rights Bill will result in even more property being taken off the rental market & rents climbing ever higher as a result.

    The Employment Bill is going to completely screw over anyone with a spotty work history. All those people who have been out of work with anxiety / actual long covid / heart issues etc etc since 2020? Good luck getting them into work if their prospective employer can’t sack them within a six month probationary period. Why would any employer take the risk of employing them in a soft jobs market where they have other options?
    2 years is too long to get normal employment rights, but why go from 2 years to first day? I think either six months, or a phased in approach with some at 3 months and the rest after a year, would be about right, but even if they made it 1 month it would give employers a chance to make a risky employment decision. Instead it will all end up with temp agencies instead, how is that better?
    The employment bill isn't going to instantly create first day rights - the problem is no-one has a clear where the compromise will be placed..
    Interesting. So although the government are using the word day one rights, they don't actually mean that. And it wont happen til 2027, if at all. Typical UK politics.

    https://www.acas.org.uk/employment-rights-bill

    "Unfair dismissal day one right
    It's expected that protection from unfair dismissal will become a right from the first day of employment. Currently, someone must have worked for their employer for 2 years before they can claim unfair dismissal. Expected in 2027."

    -------

    https://www.pinsentmasons.com/out-law/analysis/employment-rights-bill-timeline-autumn-2025-onwards

    "The government wants to make the right to raise a claim for unfair dismissal a ‘day one’ right. Under its plans, the unfair dismissal right will be subject to the ability to dismiss during a probationary period if a “lighter-touch” process is followed by the employer. This is an area for consultation, including the length of that initial statutory probation period. The government has stated its preference in this regard is nine months.

    In contrast, the position taken by the Lords is that the right to claim unfair dismissal should only take effect after employees have completed at least six months’ service."
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 11,494

    Pochin in her own words:

    It drives me mad when I see adverts full of black people, full of Asian people.

    Now call me woke, but I don't think it's a stretch at all to see those words as the expression of a full-blown racist.

    Being 'driven mad' by seeing black and Asian people in adverts is a far cry from a measured discussion about whether advertisers have got matters of representation right. And her wiggling about it being 'poorly phrased' is just bollocks. She said it as she sees it.

    Not if you listen to the rest of the paragraph
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 25,504

    I skipped breakfast today

    Tomorrow I've decided to splash out and spend £22.50 on it, just to celebrate the fleeting existence of the £450 per month Breakfast Club

    Do we need to pay someone to look after you?
    I'd divert the money to the feeble minded who decided that £450 per month was fair beans when the childcare was included
    It's not about whether it's fair beans or not, it's about how much existing providers charge.

    It's the little spoken-of twin of housing costs for the young. Older relatives say "HOW MUCH?" in a shocked voice, young families say "that much'.

    (£5.50 per child per day seems to be the going rate in Romford. Three kids at just over £7 a day hits the magic number. Maybe it shouldn't, but it does. There's a reason young working families are narked right now.)
    So why is it now £450 a year in parents' pockets?

    The Labour Party tweeter made the defenders of the erroneous tweet look bloody ridiculous in fairly short order

    And yet they double down..
    Right. This conversation is annoying me for some reason.

    School breakfast clubs typically range from about £2.50 - £5.50. There are 190 school days in the year. At the lower end that gives £475 per year per child. I suspect that is where the government get their £450 number per year in the official release. At the upper end in it would be £1,045 per child.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/news/free-breakfast-clubs-roll-out-as-costs-for-families-cut-by-8000

    The £450 on twatter is imo "probably" used monthly when it should be annually.

    However, the wider saving including the ability to work extra hours and other new extra childcare could easily be more than £450 per month for a family with 3 school age kids.
    Take it up with the Labour Party
    Why? Its not a big deal to me. Someone has "probably" typed monthly instead of annually, happens all the time. As a result it still isnt particularly misleading as the wording uses "up to" and the official government version has used the lowest end of breakfast club rates.
    It's annoying you for some reason

    I got snidey, oh so clever criticism from various people on here when I questioned the monthly figure

    Labour corrected the record and they all ran away

    But some people are STILL doubling down on defending the obvious mistake, rather than saying oops aren't I a tit for buying that

    I imagine it really grinds some people's gears that I'm occasionally quite astute for a poster on here, not just for a postie
    Both sides have valid points to make but are talking past each other when it is trivial to get to the bottom of it. That is what was annoying me.
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 7,527
  • eekeek Posts: 31,645

    eek said:

    Phil said:

    Battlebus said:

    Some political news. One of Labour's major bills, Renters’ Rights Act, has received its Royal Assent. Only taken 18 months and leans heavily on the previous work done in the last Parliament. Slow and steady seems to be the mantra despite all the buffeting that goes on day to day.

    Next up will be the Employment Rights Bill.

    Odds on both of these bills screwing up their target constituencies even more than they are already?

    I have a nasty feeling that the changes in the Renter’s Rights Bill will result in even more property being taken off the rental market & rents climbing ever higher as a result.

    The Employment Bill is going to completely screw over anyone with a spotty work history. All those people who have been out of work with anxiety / actual long covid / heart issues etc etc since 2020? Good luck getting them into work if their prospective employer can’t sack them within a six month probationary period. Why would any employer take the risk of employing them in a soft jobs market where they have other options?
    2 years is too long to get normal employment rights, but why go from 2 years to first day? I think either six months, or a phased in approach with some at 3 months and the rest after a year, would be about right, but even if they made it 1 month it would give employers a chance to make a risky employment decision. Instead it will all end up with temp agencies instead, how is that better?
    The employment bill isn't going to instantly create first day rights - the problem is no-one has a clear where the compromise will be placed..
    Interesting. So although the government are using the word day one rights, they don't actually mean that. And it wont happen til 2027, if at all. Typical UK politics.

    https://www.acas.org.uk/employment-rights-bill

    "Unfair dismissal day one right
    It's expected that protection from unfair dismissal will become a right from the first day of employment. Currently, someone must have worked for their employer for 2 years before they can claim unfair dismissal. Expected in 2027."

    -------

    https://www.pinsentmasons.com/out-law/analysis/employment-rights-bill-timeline-autumn-2025-onwards

    "The government wants to make the right to raise a claim for unfair dismissal a ‘day one’ right. Under its plans, the unfair dismissal right will be subject to the ability to dismiss during a probationary period if a “lighter-touch” process is followed by the employer. This is an area for consultation, including the length of that initial statutory probation period. The government has stated its preference in this regard is nine months.

    In contrast, the position taken by the Lords is that the right to claim unfair dismissal should only take effect after employees have completed at least six months’ service."
    It's the typical issue of political ideals hitting reality
  • eekeek Posts: 31,645
    So the OBR have knocked £20bn off their budget forecast as the economy isn't seeing the productivity gains they had previously expected

    Reeves faces £20bn hit to UK public finances from productivity downgrade

    https://www.ft.com/content/0e2de708-f7b5-470d-a716-93eb3b1ac174
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 15,734

    Fpt

    Foss said:

    MattW said:

    viewcode said:

    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree ghost-writing for Robert? :lol:

    Um, good, well-argued article, BTW.

    It's an excellent article. @rcs1000 describes one of the bottlenecks very well.

    Why has it arisen? I'll tell you why - and it is exactly the same reason as I said in August 2019 -

    "The legal system has few friends. There is an assumption that it mostly deals with the criminal and the feckless. Few politicians care about them. It has no “Aaah” factor. Most people hope never to encounter it. Those who are caught up in it are generally appalled by the experience. It has been in recent years put in the care, if that is the word, of politicians with little knowledge about it and little willingness to learn, let alone to fight to make it better.

    For 6 years from 2012 to 2018, no lawyer was deemed worthy to be Minister of Justice, the choice instead falling on Chris Grayling and Liz Truss, about whom the word “second-rate” would be an undeserved compliment. Michael Gove spent much of his time undoing the damage caused by his predecessor. Few Ministers lasted more than a year. And who was responsible for the police? Well, one Mrs May, followed by Amber Rudd and Sajid Javid. Enough said.

    Lawyers, however eloquent they may be on behalf of their clients, are generally hopeless at explaining why law and justice matter to anyone other than fellow lawyers. But our legal system does matter, very much indeed. There is no more important function of the state than the maintenance of law and order.

    Crucial to that are a competent police force, a legal system which works and in which equality under the law and access to justice are not simply empty phrases, prisons which are something other than a breeding ground of violence and hopelessness and a probation service which works. All these aspects matter not just one of them.

    The rule of law is not simply an airy phrase: it is the reality of a state able to keep its citizens safe, a state able to apprehend criminals, a state able to dispense justice, a state able find the right balance between the rights of the innocent and the guilty, a state able to enforce its laws, a state able to punish fairly and provide the hope of rehabilitation for those who have paid their dues. ........

    The rule of law in its widest sense is something of which Britain ought to be proud; it has probably had a greater claim than the NHS to be considered “the envy of the world“. But for too long it has been neglected, downgraded, ignored and managed by penny pinchers who know the price of everything and the value of nothing. Futile as this plea may be, it is long past the time for this to stop.
    "

    (https://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2019/08/11/blind-to-justice/)

    I'll be naughty and repost this.


    Of course you're right, Ms Cyclefree. But the apparently impossible question is... how to fix it?

    We are in a society that likes penny-pinching, because it assumes that frees up pennies for sweeties now. As for future us, they're in the future, so serves them right.
    One of our problems derives from Mrs Thatcher's views. I recall her saying something like her preferring that the best minds from Oxford and Cambridge (I know, I know) should go into the City rather than public service. Up until then very bright students would include public service, as Civil Servants in their career options. After that, not so much.
    This allows me to get back on my hobby horse of calling the big change of UK society and the divisions over the past 40 years. Before Fatch indeed bright young things would go into all kinds of occupations - doctors, civil servants, yes finance, but that was only one of several options. All paid roughly the same, perhaps the City a smidge more.

    Then Big Bang happened, the US banks took over the UK merchant banks and began to pay megabucks for the people to work there (or at "their" bank, rather than another one). City salaries skyrocketed and hence any sensible grad, Oxbridge or not, would likely try to get a job in finance, rather than become a doctor or a civil servant, etc.
    And linked to that, it means that the elite has lost a lot of its sense of the long term.

    My Jenny-come-lately Cambridge College is over 150 years old. The British Army is 350 years old, depending on when you start counting. The Church of England, 450 years (same Ts and C's). All institutions that were around long before me, and intend to be around long after me. It ties in with that old Tory thing of inheritance as a duty.

    High finance seems to think it's doing well with a ten year horizon. No wonder so much of the country gets sold off for parts.
    Those are tiny numbers! You need bigger numbers! My school is 460 years old. My first degree was at a university 814 years old. My third was at a university approaching 1000. My city is approaching 2000.
    Just the three degrees then...

    :):):):):)
    At the risk of generating a swirling rabbit hole of argument, the Church of England is AD597 officially.

    All we did was chuck out the tyrannical foreign management - in Tony Benn's words, we nationalised it.
    But the Celtic church was earlier, no? I recall a Council of Whitby but forget what was discussed!
    As I recal it was over Irish or Roman rites.
    Also over tonsures. The romans liked their monks bald, while the Irish wanted them furry
    Not great but readable and fun are the detective stories of the 7th century (Synod of Whitby period) by Peter Tremayne, who is a respectable historian as well; the tec being an Irish nun, Sister Fidelma. IIRC one is set around the Synod of Whitby itself. Most set in Ireland. Much easier reading than the Irish historians, who are not for the faint hearted.

Sign In or Register to comment.