Skip to content

Green policies are popular – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 13,174
edited April 18 in General
Green policies are popular – politicalbetting.com

The Greens have proposed capping top wages in a company at 10x the level of the lowest wages – a move that 65% of Britons would supportStrongly support: 41%Somewhat support: 24%Somewhat oppose: 10%Strongly oppose: 7%yougov.com/en-gb/daily-…

Read the full story here

«1345

Comments

  • TazTaz Posts: 28,195
    Popular until they’re tried.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 22,877
    Taz said:

    Popular until they’re tried.

    Often popular even after they have been tried and found to fail. The failure will be because the politicians didn't do it properly.
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 4,849
    Let's ask a related but different question as well.

    Is there a multiplicative factor at which anyone thinks the answer would change in their head? i.e. I wouldn't support that at 10x, but maybe at 1000x or whatever. Or is it a blanket no never no?
  • TazTaz Posts: 28,195
    ‘ Populism on the left is as dangerous on the right.“

    This is absolutely right and something I, and IIRC Luckyguy, have warned.

    But too many people seem to regard the greens as warm, cuddly, friends, and as long as they oppose reform they’re okay.

    They’re not.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 64,515

    Taz said:

    Popular until they’re tried.

    Often popular even after they have been tried and found to fail. The failure will be because the politicians didn't do it properly.
    See also rent controls.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 25,472
    Of course greedy fuckers taking home wheelbarrows full of cash would come up with dodgy means to bend the rules.

    It's what they do.
  • TazTaz Posts: 28,195

    Taz said:

    Popular until they’re tried.

    Often popular even after they have been tried and found to fail. The failure will be because the politicians didn't do it properly.
    Like socialism.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 103,814
    edited April 18

    Taz said:

    Popular until they’re tried.

    Often popular even after they have been tried and found to fail. The failure will be because the politicians didn't do it properly.
    What surprised me recently about social media ban policies is that people support then even if they also don't think they will work.

    Someone argued that because of how potentially damaging social media can be it is worth trying even if you don't think it will definitely work, but that seems so reckless to me, to take forward something even if you don't think it will address the problem.

    I'd say that is worse than taking something forward that doesn't work - and many people said it would not work - because you at least believe it will.
  • BattlebusBattlebus Posts: 3,268
    There's a difference between paid and rewarded. Private Equity backed companies tend to be mean with salaries but massive potential for earn outs (at 28% tax rather than 40%-45%). The earnouts focus the mind on costs/profit somewhat.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 17,434
    There are certain respects in which In would quite like to live in a society operating more along those lines though I don't think it can happen easily. The worst of all worlds is for it to be legislated for but easily evaded and avoided by everyone who felt like it.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 22,877
    rcs1000 said:

    Taz said:

    Popular until they’re tried.

    Often popular even after they have been tried and found to fail. The failure will be because the politicians didn't do it properly.
    See also rent controls.
    Taz said:

    Taz said:

    Popular until they’re tried.

    Often popular even after they have been tried and found to fail. The failure will be because the politicians didn't do it properly.
    Like socialism.
    Or this polling here, that we discussed earlier in the week:
    https://bsky.app/profile/luketryl.bsky.social/post/3mjfro2plme2p

  • BlancheLivermoreBlancheLivermore Posts: 7,937

    Roger said:

    The claim that nobody at the heart of government — ie close to Starmer — knew Mandelson had flunked his security vetting is unravelling at a rate of knots.
    Starmer’s head of comms was alerted by the media last September.
    Sources tell me multiple folks in the Cabinet Office (where the UK Security Vetting unit is based) had known for quite some time.
    Cat Little, Cabinet Office Permanent Secretary, even had a copy of the UK Sec Vet January 2025 document concluding Mandelson was unfit to be US ambassador.
    She informed the new cabinet secretary Antonia Romeo.
    Soon there were about a dozen lawyers and officials crawling all over it.
    Such matters don’t stay secret for long in the upper echelons of Whitehall.
    But it seems the PM was still in the dark … until last Tuesday.
    Mmmmmm

    https://x.com/afneil/status/2045458264645660906?s=20

    I thought this was supposed to be so top top top top secret, that literally nobody had access to it outside Robbins, and even then the way it has been reported they made it sound like you had to go into a deep air gapped bunker in order to read it.

    This draws it closer to Starmer because, if dozens of lawyers are involved, then it is inconceivable the Attorney General was not involved

    One Richard Hermer, Starmer's close ally
    Get some fresh air. Take a walk on the pier. I can hardly face your disappointment when this whole edifice collapses. Listen to Any Questions and add a little of your own common sense and you'll find yourself much further on than AF Neil and his turgid tittle tattle
    I know these are difficuit days for you but that is politics.

    We are witnessing a Johnson style fall from grace for Starmer
    Starmer is inept and rubbish ( except the international stuff) and Starmer has **** the bed over Mandelson but despite what you and the Tory media tell us Starmer has as far as I am aware:

    a) Not lied to the Queen
    b) Not prorogued Parliament
    c) Not attended drinks and sh*gging parties whilst COVID lockdown was in full swing, including allowing civil service people to bring alcohol onto the premises by suitcase.
    d) Not put the son of a KGB agent into the HoL
    e) Or as Foreign Secretary not thrown off his minders to attend a weekend party with alcohol and alleged call girls hosted by the aforementioned KGB agent.

    I could go on...

    Putting a Chinese adjacent political appointee and friend of Epstein, with a track record of Johnsonian dodginess, on the other hand, into the post of US Ambassador deserves a resignation for being so crassly stupid.
    One of your best whataboutery but it is irrelevant to the peril Starmer is in

    Johnson paid the price as has his party
    How is my post "whataboutery" when I have directly addressed your point that "we are witnessing a Johnson type fall from grace from Starmer".
    You did invent a shagging party that Boris attended during Covid, and point out that Starmer hasn’t lied to a dead Queen
    The sh*gging parties were well documented. Little Wilf's garden swing being a casualty as I recall. I am not for one moment suggesting Johnson was directly involved with the sh*gging element. I believe he had already left when such high jinks took place.
    So you did invent a shagging party attended by Boris. I’m glad you’ve clarified in your weaselly way
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 59,886
    algarkirk said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Have I got this right?

    Ollie Robbins did not tell the PM anything about the vetting because this was in accordance with the rules.

    He was then sacked by the PM because of this.

    I know we have a problem with people being held accountable for misbehaviour but we now seem to have jumped that issue entirely by sacking people who do follow the rules. Why? Isn't that the question for the PM?

    Or have I missed something?

    About right but there are options, to repeat a bit from earlier:

    Did Starmer:

    Know something he should not have known and lied about it
    Not know something he should have known and lied about it
    Not know something he should not have known and lied about it and sacked the man who didn't and shouldn't have told him
    Know something he should have known and lied about it and sacked the man who did and should tell him.

    I am sure other option are available, but the path by which Starmer has at no point done anything at all wrong is a so narrow that I can't see it without assistance.
    Starmer should use his statement on Monday to do a Reverse Rumsfeld:

    We know that there are unknown unknowns; there are things we don't know that we don't know. You're on safe ground with those.

    We also know there are unknown knowns; that is to say there are some things that are known, but that we haven't been told about. You're usually in the clear with those.

    But there are also known knowns—the ones that are known and that we have also been told about. Avoid these at all costs because these are the ones that risk getting you into trouble.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 17,434
    kle4 said:

    Taz said:

    Popular until they’re tried.

    Often popular even after they have been tried and found to fail. The failure will be because the politicians didn't do it properly.
    What surprised me recently about social media ban policies is that people support then even if they also don't think they will work.

    Someone argued that because of how potentially damaging social media can be it is worth trying even if you don't think it will definitely work, but that seems so reckless to me, to take forward something even if you don't think it will address the problem.

    I'd say that is worse than taking something forward that doesn't work - and many people said it would not work - because you at least believe it will.
    Most people support our failed and hugely damaging 'war on drugs' policy. With its combined effects of: killing people, enriching bad people, filling prisons, wasting police and court time and encouraging vast amounts of petty crime. So much so that a sane policy is beyond possible implementation

  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 36,366

    Graeme Downie for PM.

    A Labour backbencher has called for the pension triple lock to be reformed to help fund a rise in defence spending

    @GraemeDownieMP wrote in The House this weekend that the government should be brave enough to ask older people who "benefited financially from peace" to make a greater contribution to future national security


    https://x.com/politicshome/status/2045404479185404105

    What does Graeme Downie MP think about reducing MP's pensions to help fund a rise in defence spending?
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 39,828
    edited April 18
    Taz said:

    ‘ Populism on the left is as dangerous on the right.“

    This is absolutely right and something I, and IIRC Luckyguy, have warned.

    But too many people seem to regard the greens as warm, cuddly, friends, and as long as they oppose reform they’re okay.

    They’re not.

    Do Greens ever operate a disappearance scheme using green Ford Falcons or a systematic industrial scale execution mechanism for people they don't like?
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 4,849

    algarkirk said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Have I got this right?

    Ollie Robbins did not tell the PM anything about the vetting because this was in accordance with the rules.

    He was then sacked by the PM because of this.

    I know we have a problem with people being held accountable for misbehaviour but we now seem to have jumped that issue entirely by sacking people who do follow the rules. Why? Isn't that the question for the PM?

    Or have I missed something?

    About right but there are options, to repeat a bit from earlier:

    Did Starmer:

    Know something he should not have known and lied about it
    Not know something he should have known and lied about it
    Not know something he should not have known and lied about it and sacked the man who didn't and shouldn't have told him
    Know something he should have known and lied about it and sacked the man who did and should tell him.

    I am sure other option are available, but the path by which Starmer has at no point done anything at all wrong is a so narrow that I can't see it without assistance.
    Starmer should use his statement on Monday to do a Reverse Rumsfeld:

    We know that there are unknown unknowns; there are things we don't know that we don't know. You're on safe ground with those.

    We also know there are unknown knowns; that is to say there are some things that are known, but that we haven't been told about. You're usually in the clear with those.

    But there are also known knowns—the ones that are known and that we have also been told about. Avoid these at all costs because these are the ones that risk getting you into trouble.
    The Starmer defence of "buuurrrrhhhh, I'm just the PM, no-one tells me anything" is a bold one.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 89,694
    I'm almost coming round to the view that we need a spell of the Greens in government to educate the electorate.

    I'm just not entirely sure that, on top of the economic shocks the country has endured over the last decade, we'd ever recover from it.
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 5,447
    I thought all the entry-level (=low paid) jobs were destined to become AI?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 89,694
    So the Buy American Act is fine, but no one else is allowed to do it.
    Trump's US wants both to abandon any commitment to Europe, and to continue to impose its will on us.
    While using our bases at will.

    The United States opposes any efforts to incorporate European preference in the EU Defense Procurement Directive. We fully support European rearmament and a revitalization of the European defense industrial base. However, European preference in the Directive would undermine member state flexibility to make national procurement purchases, hinder European rearmament efforts, create barriers for Allies reaching NATO capability targets, and run counter to European commitments in the 2025 U.S.-EU Joint Statement on trade and Reciprocal Defense Procurement Agreements.
    https://x.com/USAmbEU/status/2024890708985880654
  • BlancheLivermoreBlancheLivermore Posts: 7,937
    edited April 18
    Do football clubs have to pay all their stewards at 10% of their highest paid player’s wages?

  • isamisam Posts: 44,230
    edited April 18
    Cyclefree said:

    Have I got this right?

    Ollie Robbins did not tell the PM anything about the vetting because this was in accordance with the rules.

    He was then sacked by the PM because of this.

    I know we have a problem with people being held accountable for misbehaviour but we now seem to have jumped that issue entirely by sacking people who do follow the rules. Why? Isn't that the question for the PM?

    Or have I missed something?

    Loads of people told Sir Keir not to appoint "to us he's just... Peter", but he ignored them.

    Olly Robbins has now been sacked for not telling him; he was not allowed to tell him according to the rules, but Mr Rules sacked him anyway
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 35,251
    Taz said:

    ‘ Populism on the left is as dangerous on the right.“

    This is absolutely right and something I, and IIRC Luckyguy, have warned.

    But too many people seem to regard the greens as warm, cuddly, friends, and as long as they oppose reform they’re okay.

    They’re not.

    I don't think I would concur with this statement.

    I do think the agenda of the current Green Party in the UK is sheer lunacy. But I cannot put this down to a general fault with 'populism' - which I think is just an insulting term for 'popular'.

    We are constantly being told how awful and dangerous it would be if the great unwashed should get their way, but I think this is rubbish. It is put about by corrupt people who want to extract an awful lot of money, and claim that in so doing they are helping the world.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 9,355
    Taz said:

    ‘ Populism on the left is as dangerous on the right.“

    This is absolutely right and something I, and IIRC Luckyguy, have warned.

    But too many people seem to regard the greens as warm, cuddly, friends, and as long as they oppose reform they’re okay.

    They’re not.

    Nah, Greens getting in would be chaotic, bad for the economy... Reform getting in would be... well we can see it over in the US.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 22,035

    Do football clubs have to pay all their stewards at 10% of their highest paid player’s wages?

    It’s all the Toon players deserve at the moment
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 63,554
    algarkirk said:

    kle4 said:

    Taz said:

    Popular until they’re tried.

    Often popular even after they have been tried and found to fail. The failure will be because the politicians didn't do it properly.
    What surprised me recently about social media ban policies is that people support then even if they also don't think they will work.

    Someone argued that because of how potentially damaging social media can be it is worth trying even if you don't think it will definitely work, but that seems so reckless to me, to take forward something even if you don't think it will address the problem.

    I'd say that is worse than taking something forward that doesn't work - and many people said it would not work - because you at least believe it will.
    Most people support our failed and hugely damaging 'war on drugs' policy. With its combined effects of: killing people, enriching bad people, filling prisons, wasting police and court time and encouraging vast amounts of petty crime. So much so that a sane policy is beyond possible implementation

    I propose a new War On Drugs.

    HMG will enter the market as protecting the growers, refiners, suppliers and distributors. Start our own cartel.

    The Armed forces will be the enforcers - the money raised will be used to improve the defence budget.

    Suitably managed, we can go world wide and improve the balance of payments as well.

    {I went to school with scions of the Keswick family from Hong Kong}
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 72,388
    So much winning latest...


    The Kobeissi Letter
    @KobeissiLetter

    BREAKING: The US military is preparing to board Iran-linked oil tankers and seize commercial ships in international waters, per WSJ.


    https://x.com/KobeissiLetter/status/2045523520860418505
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 13,466
    That this policy is unworkable and will have unintended consequences I have no doubt. The more important question those of us that cling to the Tories, Labour, and LDs must ask is this - what has led such a significant number of people to these conclusions? If it's their education, then our parties have been in charge of the education system. If it's economics, then our parties have been in charge of the economy. If it's the media landscape, then we've always held sway over that too.

    Physician heal thyself as they say.
  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 4,519

    Do football clubs have to pay all their stewards at 10% of their highest paid player’s wages?

    Listen I’d collect gate money at Manchester City for 10% of Haaland’s wages. Should be about £2.5m?
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 19,661
    Is this a "royal they" from the former Conservative Home Secretary who was in charge of immigration (twice):

    I will never ever trust the Conservative Party again.

    I will never forget how they failed the British people on immigration.


    https://x.com/SuellaBraverman/status/2044425985504735524#m
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 28,797
    edited April 18

    Another related question.

    That this terrible idea is so popular (majority support even from Conservative voters) is pointing to something being perceived as wrong with the current economic order.

    So what is that something, and what is the small-c-conservative-reform-to-avoid-revolution policy that improves that wrong?

    I don't know. I'm quite a fan of the Minimum Necessary Change (and associated concepts like the Minimum Viable Product) so what is it in this case?

    Corporatism solutions don't work in the 2020s because the nation-state is fucked. Neoliberalism solutions don't work in the 2020s because we are knee-deep in debt and cannot match taxes and benefits, in part because the nation-state is fucked. So we need to rebuild the nation-state, not in a Faragist flags-and-parades way, but as a functioning entity. So
    • 1: take control of the borders. Yes that does mean turning back the boats and imposing customs barriers at the NI/IRE border. And if the IRA version whatever kicks off, deal with it. Allow inward migration to those who can pay for it.
    • 2: impose export controls. Tax people who leave the country to live, confiscate assets and businesses taken abroad, impose "golden shares" to stop them being taken abroad
    • 3: create British versions of Facebook, Google, Twitter, etc. Then tax the US versions if they want to access the UK
    In short, everything that crosses the border, in either direction, gets taxed. When you have done that, then you can work out what to do.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 26,274
    isam said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Have I got this right?

    Ollie Robbins did not tell the PM anything about the vetting because this was in accordance with the rules.

    He was then sacked by the PM because of this.

    I know we have a problem with people being held accountable for misbehaviour but we now seem to have jumped that issue entirely by sacking people who do follow the rules. Why? Isn't that the question for the PM?

    Or have I missed something?

    Loads of people told Sir Keir not to appoint "to us he's just... Peter", but he ignored them.

    Olly Robbins has now been sacked for not telling him; he was not allowed to tell him according to the rules, but Mr Rules sacked him anyway
    Presumably Mr Robbins is spending his weekend with his lawyer and/or literary agent or both.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 36,366
    Cyclefree said:

    It's a policy which is superficially attractive. There are far too many people overpaid despite being neither use nor ornament.

    However it would be trivially easy to get round. And, frankly, it's all the rest of their policies and the far too many utterly nasty fruitloops they have representing them which are the problem.

    Anyway since we are into green matters and before TSE revokes my license to derail every thread into CycleFree's Big Gardening Adventure, here is my crag. This may not look like much now but imagine pretty much this entire area covered in nettles and brambles and me manfully hacking away at it all (90% of it done).





    I do quite a lot of the less glamorous gardening work first thing in my nightie and if anyone is tempted to do the same and nettles and brambles are involved, remember to wear pants. This, I will confidently say, is the most useful advice you will receive on this thread. Why I have not been made Starmer's special advisor I cannot imagine. The poor man looks like he has got nettles permanently in his pants.

    Now I have the pleasure of creating an alpine rockery and herb garden. The photo was taken ca an hour or so ago. This is, by the way, less than 20% of the entire garden. I really need to get someone to help me because my increasingly dodgy and often painful pelvis stops me doing hard physical work for hours at a time.

    Eldest Son tells me I should find a Village Boy to help me, as if I lived in a world made of Miss Marples and Obliging Youths on Bicycles. Or, more likely, entering my Margaret Rutherford years.

    PS Montbretia - or crocosmia - is like a weed here. I could never grow it successfully in London. But here it takes over if given half a chance. Lovely plant but a thug.

    It would have been a damn sight easier (as well as more in tune with the zeitgeist) to leave the brambles and nettles in place and post a photo showing how you are rewilding your garden.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 17,434
    FF43 said:

    Is this a "royal they" from the former Conservative Home Secretary who was in charge of immigration (twice):

    I will never ever trust the Conservative Party again.

    I will never forget how they failed the British people on immigration.


    https://x.com/SuellaBraverman/status/2044425985504735524#m

    Wikipedia puts it in more sober language but I am sure the meaning is the same as Suella's little rant about her family:

    Braverman was born on 3 April 1980 in Harrow, London, and raised in Wembley. She is the daughter of Uma (née Mootien-Pillay) and Christie Fernandes, both of Indian origin, who immigrated to Britain in the 1960s from Mauritius and Kenya respectively.
  • theProletheProle Posts: 1,954

    Let's ask a related but different question as well.

    Is there a multiplicative factor at which anyone thinks the answer would change in their head? i.e. I wouldn't support that at 10x, but maybe at 1000x or whatever. Or is it a blanket no never no?

    Doesn't this just create loads of perverse incentives to outsource everything at the bottom of the income scale?

    If you want to pay your CEO more than x times min wage, you sack all the cleaners and receptionists, use some sort of outsourcing agency, and bingo your wage ratio is back in spec.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 26,274

    Cyclefree said:

    It's a policy which is superficially attractive. There are far too many people overpaid despite being neither use nor ornament.

    However it would be trivially easy to get round. And, frankly, it's all the rest of their policies and the far too many utterly nasty fruitloops they have representing them which are the problem.

    Anyway since we are into green matters and before TSE revokes my license to derail every thread into CycleFree's Big Gardening Adventure, here is my crag. This may not look like much now but imagine pretty much this entire area covered in nettles and brambles and me manfully hacking away at it all (90% of it done).





    I do quite a lot of the less glamorous gardening work first thing in my nightie and if anyone is tempted to do the same and nettles and brambles are involved, remember to wear pants. This, I will confidently say, is the most useful advice you will receive on this thread. Why I have not been made Starmer's special advisor I cannot imagine. The poor man looks like he has got nettles permanently in his pants.

    Now I have the pleasure of creating an alpine rockery and herb garden. The photo was taken ca an hour or so ago. This is, by the way, less than 20% of the entire garden. I really need to get someone to help me because my increasingly dodgy and often painful pelvis stops me doing hard physical work for hours at a time.

    Eldest Son tells me I should find a Village Boy to help me, as if I lived in a world made of Miss Marples and Obliging Youths on Bicycles. Or, more likely, entering my Margaret Rutherford years.

    PS Montbretia - or crocosmia - is like a weed here. I could never grow it successfully in London. But here it takes over if given half a chance. Lovely plant but a thug.

    It would have been a damn sight easier (as well as more in tune with the zeitgeist) to leave the brambles and nettles in place and post a photo showing how you are rewilding your garden.
    The wild meadow will be on the other side. Along with an orchard, potager and flower beds. Plus a beehive, bug houses and trees - of which I have l ready planted a dozen or so. We have swifts, house martins, and lots of other birds, and a hedgehog. Most of the land is either rock or invasive weeds so it needs work. And I plan on growing food to eat - beyond the fruit trees there are already. There is plenty of wild land around here (though a lot of the zeitgeist chat about rewilding is, frankly, ignorant bollocks).
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 63,554
    theProle said:

    Let's ask a related but different question as well.

    Is there a multiplicative factor at which anyone thinks the answer would change in their head? i.e. I wouldn't support that at 10x, but maybe at 1000x or whatever. Or is it a blanket no never no?

    Doesn't this just create loads of perverse incentives to outsource everything at the bottom of the income scale?

    If you want to pay your CEO more than x times min wage, you sack all the cleaners and receptionists, use some sort of outsourcing agency, and bingo your wage ratio is back in spec.
    In the bank I work for, we have no cleaners or security guards etc.

    They are employed by the building management company. We just rent space from them.

    We don’t have secretaries anymore. A couple of our own receptionists.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 91,960
    Cyclefree said:

    isam said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Have I got this right?

    Ollie Robbins did not tell the PM anything about the vetting because this was in accordance with the rules.

    He was then sacked by the PM because of this.

    I know we have a problem with people being held accountable for misbehaviour but we now seem to have jumped that issue entirely by sacking people who do follow the rules. Why? Isn't that the question for the PM?

    Or have I missed something?

    Loads of people told Sir Keir not to appoint "to us he's just... Peter", but he ignored them.

    Olly Robbins has now been sacked for not telling him; he was not allowed to tell him according to the rules, but Mr Rules sacked him anyway
    Presumably Mr Robbins is spending his weekend with his lawyer and/or literary agent or both.
    Also squeezing in estate agent and boat salesman about upgrades?
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 3,878
    From previous thread: Abraham Lincoln had about 2 or 3 years of formal education -- and then taught himself to be, first a surveyor, and then a lawyer. He seems to have worked out OK as a leader, in spite of not spending any time in a private school, or even much time in a public school.
  • FossFoss Posts: 2,726

    theProle said:

    Let's ask a related but different question as well.

    Is there a multiplicative factor at which anyone thinks the answer would change in their head? i.e. I wouldn't support that at 10x, but maybe at 1000x or whatever. Or is it a blanket no never no?

    Doesn't this just create loads of perverse incentives to outsource everything at the bottom of the income scale?

    If you want to pay your CEO more than x times min wage, you sack all the cleaners and receptionists, use some sort of outsourcing agency, and bingo your wage ratio is back in spec.
    In the bank I work for, we have no cleaners or security guards etc.

    They are employed by the building management company. We just rent space from them.

    We don’t have secretaries anymore. A couple of our own receptionists.
    It’s the same with my non-banking $bigcorp.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 63,554
    algarkirk said:

    FF43 said:

    Is this a "royal they" from the former Conservative Home Secretary who was in charge of immigration (twice):

    I will never ever trust the Conservative Party again.

    I will never forget how they failed the British people on immigration.


    https://x.com/SuellaBraverman/status/2044425985504735524#m

    Wikipedia puts it in more sober language but I am sure the meaning is the same as Suella's little rant about her family:

    Braverman was born on 3 April 1980 in Harrow, London, and raised in Wembley. She is the daughter of Uma (née Mootien-Pillay) and Christie Fernandes, both of Indian origin, who immigrated to Britain in the 1960s from Mauritius and Kenya respectively.
    I’ve met 2 actual members of Restore. Paid up and everything.

    Both first generation immigrants. Yeah, indeed.

    Their reason - they are both women and don’t like a certain kind of immigration.

    Maybe it’s not knowing enough of the gammon types - but this certainly surprised me.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 89,694
    FF43 said:

    Is this a "royal they" from the former Conservative Home Secretary who was in charge of immigration (twice):

    I will never ever trust the Conservative Party again.

    I will never forget how they failed the British people on immigration.


    https://x.com/SuellaBraverman/status/2044425985504735524#m

    Well she is certainly qualified to have a view.
    Not so much to recommend herself as an improvement.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 91,960
    edited April 18

    algarkirk said:

    FF43 said:

    Is this a "royal they" from the former Conservative Home Secretary who was in charge of immigration (twice):

    I will never ever trust the Conservative Party again.

    I will never forget how they failed the British people on immigration.


    https://x.com/SuellaBraverman/status/2044425985504735524#m

    Wikipedia puts it in more sober language but I am sure the meaning is the same as Suella's little rant about her family:

    Braverman was born on 3 April 1980 in Harrow, London, and raised in Wembley. She is the daughter of Uma (née Mootien-Pillay) and Christie Fernandes, both of Indian origin, who immigrated to Britain in the 1960s from Mauritius and Kenya respectively.
    I’ve met 2 actual members of Restore. Paid up and everything.

    Both first generation immigrants. Yeah, indeed.

    Their reason - they are both women and don’t like a certain kind of immigration.

    Maybe it’s not knowing enough of the gammon types - but this certainly surprised me.
    I get confused, which one is Restore...there is Reform, Advance, Restore, Reclaim, Your Party, My Party, Lets All Have a Party...
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 59,886

    algarkirk said:

    FF43 said:

    Is this a "royal they" from the former Conservative Home Secretary who was in charge of immigration (twice):

    I will never ever trust the Conservative Party again.

    I will never forget how they failed the British people on immigration.


    https://x.com/SuellaBraverman/status/2044425985504735524#m

    Wikipedia puts it in more sober language but I am sure the meaning is the same as Suella's little rant about her family:

    Braverman was born on 3 April 1980 in Harrow, London, and raised in Wembley. She is the daughter of Uma (née Mootien-Pillay) and Christie Fernandes, both of Indian origin, who immigrated to Britain in the 1960s from Mauritius and Kenya respectively.
    I’ve met 2 actual members of Restore. Paid up and everything.

    Both first generation immigrants. Yeah, indeed.

    Their reason - they are both women and don’t like a certain kind of immigration.

    Maybe it’s not knowing enough of the gammon types - but this certainly surprised me.
    Were they from Eastern Europe?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 63,554
    Foss said:

    theProle said:

    Let's ask a related but different question as well.

    Is there a multiplicative factor at which anyone thinks the answer would change in their head? i.e. I wouldn't support that at 10x, but maybe at 1000x or whatever. Or is it a blanket no never no?

    Doesn't this just create loads of perverse incentives to outsource everything at the bottom of the income scale?

    If you want to pay your CEO more than x times min wage, you sack all the cleaners and receptionists, use some sort of outsourcing agency, and bingo your wage ratio is back in spec.
    In the bank I work for, we have no cleaners or security guards etc.

    They are employed by the building management company. We just rent space from them.

    We don’t have secretaries anymore. A couple of our own receptionists.
    It’s the same with my non-banking $bigcorp.
    I talked about this before - there seems to be four kinds of employment

    1) Gig economy. Hand to mouth. Barely minimum wage.
    2) Blue collar skilled jobs. Plumbers. Ranged from poor to self employed and doing well.
    3) Low end white collar. Shitty offices, pay, prospects & treatment.
    4) High end white collar. Shiny office, Herman Miller chairs. Treatment is good - not so much because of morals as HR is professional and follow the law exactly to minimise liability.

    The world of 4 isn’t directly connected to the other layers. The days of vast conglomerates that encompassed all the layers are long gone. Each layer buys services from the others.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 63,554

    algarkirk said:

    FF43 said:

    Is this a "royal they" from the former Conservative Home Secretary who was in charge of immigration (twice):

    I will never ever trust the Conservative Party again.

    I will never forget how they failed the British people on immigration.


    https://x.com/SuellaBraverman/status/2044425985504735524#m

    Wikipedia puts it in more sober language but I am sure the meaning is the same as Suella's little rant about her family:

    Braverman was born on 3 April 1980 in Harrow, London, and raised in Wembley. She is the daughter of Uma (née Mootien-Pillay) and Christie Fernandes, both of Indian origin, who immigrated to Britain in the 1960s from Mauritius and Kenya respectively.
    I’ve met 2 actual members of Restore. Paid up and everything.

    Both first generation immigrants. Yeah, indeed.

    Their reason - they are both women and don’t like a certain kind of immigration.

    Maybe it’s not knowing enough of the gammon types - but this certainly surprised me.
    Were they from Eastern Europe?
    One Eastern Europe, one South America.

    One had been radicalised by living in Tower Hamlets - there, if you are not part of the corrupt political machine and are poor, you are given the shitty end of the stick by local government. Who are quite upfront about it.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 25,472

    algarkirk said:

    FF43 said:

    Is this a "royal they" from the former Conservative Home Secretary who was in charge of immigration (twice):

    I will never ever trust the Conservative Party again.

    I will never forget how they failed the British people on immigration.


    https://x.com/SuellaBraverman/status/2044425985504735524#m

    Wikipedia puts it in more sober language but I am sure the meaning is the same as Suella's little rant about her family:

    Braverman was born on 3 April 1980 in Harrow, London, and raised in Wembley. She is the daughter of Uma (née Mootien-Pillay) and Christie Fernandes, both of Indian origin, who immigrated to Britain in the 1960s from Mauritius and Kenya respectively.
    I’ve met 2 actual members of Restore. Paid up and everything.

    Both first generation immigrants. Yeah, indeed.

    Their reason - they are both women and don’t like a certain kind of immigration.

    Maybe it’s not knowing enough of the gammon types - but this certainly surprised me.
    I get confused, which one is Restore...there is Reform, Advance, Restore, Reclaim, Your Party, My Party, Lets All Have a Party...
    Your Party should rebrand as Refrain, since they refrain from standing in elections.

    The Greens could become Revert.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 89,694
    viewcode said:

    Another related question.

    That this terrible idea is so popular (majority support even from Conservative voters) is pointing to something being perceived as wrong with the current economic order.

    So what is that something, and what is the small-c-conservative-reform-to-avoid-revolution policy that improves that wrong?

    I don't know. I'm quite a fan of the Minimum Necessary Change (and associated concepts like the Minimum Viable Product) so what is it in this case?

    Corporatism solutions don't work in the 2020s because the nation-state is fucked. Neoliberalism solutions don't work in the 2020s because we are knee-deep in debt and cannot match taxes and benefits, in part because the nation-state is fucked. So we need to rebuild the nation-state, not in a Faragist flags-and-parades way, but as a functioning entity. So
    • 1: take control of the borders. Yes that does mean turning back the boats and imposing customs barriers at the NI/IRE border. And if the IRA version whatever kicks off, deal with it. Allow inward migration to those who can pay for it.
    • 2: impose export controls. Tax people who leave the country to live, confiscate assets and businesses taken abroad, impose "golden shares" to stop them being taken abroad
    • 3: create British versions of Facebook, Google, Twitter, etc. Then tax the US versions if they want to access the UK
    In short, everything that crosses the border, in either direction, gets taxed. When you have done that, then you can work out what to do.
    That would, of course, invite retaliation, and trade barriers would rapidly mount, with the usual effects.
    The US can get away with that stuff, just about, but we're both too much dependant on trade, and have insufficient size and influence to do the same.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 136,924
    edited April 18
    Some Green policies like taxing the rich more and capping the wages of the highest earners, scrapping leasehold and rent controls and stopping building on greenbelt land and an elected upper house are popular with the average voter, even if they would be mostly economically damaging. Others like default plant based school dinners, legalising all drugs, scrapping the monarchy and increasing immigration with a UBI for all migrants rather less so.

    So it depends on the policy asked about
  • Leon_VotedForStarmerLeon_VotedForStarmer Posts: 69,000
    edited April 18
    I am walking in the mountains of Mourne, in the springtime sunshine. The birdsong is like trickling music. Cows snooze in the April warmth. The wildflowers adorn the meadows and the dew makes tiny diamonds

    Northern Ireland is a majestic part of the world. Despite the rain. And the troubled history has spared it from ravaging mass tourism

    I always lazily presumed the Elizabethans settled this part of Ireland because it was the nearest. Now I suspect they did it because it is the most desirable
  • boulayboulay Posts: 8,924

    algarkirk said:

    kle4 said:

    Taz said:

    Popular until they’re tried.

    Often popular even after they have been tried and found to fail. The failure will be because the politicians didn't do it properly.
    What surprised me recently about social media ban policies is that people support then even if they also don't think they will work.

    Someone argued that because of how potentially damaging social media can be it is worth trying even if you don't think it will definitely work, but that seems so reckless to me, to take forward something even if you don't think it will address the problem.

    I'd say that is worse than taking something forward that doesn't work - and many people said it would not work - because you at least believe it will.
    Most people support our failed and hugely damaging 'war on drugs' policy. With its combined effects of: killing people, enriching bad people, filling prisons, wasting police and court time and encouraging vast amounts of petty crime. So much so that a sane policy is beyond possible implementation

    I propose a new War On Drugs.

    HMG will enter the market as protecting the growers, refiners, suppliers and distributors. Start our own cartel.

    The Armed forces will be the enforcers - the money raised will be used to improve the defence budget.

    Suitably managed, we can go world wide and improve the balance of payments as well.

    {I went to school with scions of the Keswick family from Hong Kong}
    Love The War on Drugs.

    https://open.spotify.com/track/3ZATMtNpzBKCLwE07hwgPc?si=NKnh9Y-nS_OAwtaR2jgrzA
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 39,828
    HYUFD said:

    Some Green policies like taxing the rich more and capping the wages of the highest earners, scrapping leasehold and rent controls and stopping building on greenbelt land and an elected upper house are popular with the average voter, even if they would be mostly economically damaging. Others like default plant based school dinners, scrapping the monarchy and increasing immigration with a UBI for all migrants rather less so.

    So it depends on the policy asked about

    Thanks HY. That does sound tempting compared to Red Conservatism.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 63,554

    algarkirk said:

    FF43 said:

    Is this a "royal they" from the former Conservative Home Secretary who was in charge of immigration (twice):

    I will never ever trust the Conservative Party again.

    I will never forget how they failed the British people on immigration.


    https://x.com/SuellaBraverman/status/2044425985504735524#m

    Wikipedia puts it in more sober language but I am sure the meaning is the same as Suella's little rant about her family:

    Braverman was born on 3 April 1980 in Harrow, London, and raised in Wembley. She is the daughter of Uma (née Mootien-Pillay) and Christie Fernandes, both of Indian origin, who immigrated to Britain in the 1960s from Mauritius and Kenya respectively.
    I’ve met 2 actual members of Restore. Paid up and everything.

    Both first generation immigrants. Yeah, indeed.

    Their reason - they are both women and don’t like a certain kind of immigration.

    Maybe it’s not knowing enough of the gammon types - but this certainly surprised me.
    I get confused, which one is Restore...there is Reform, Advance, Restore, Reclaim, Your Party, My Party, Lets All Have a Party...
    Your Party should rebrand as Refrain, since they refrain from standing in elections.

    The Greens could become Revert.
    I’ve started Revive. Major policy - instantly expel everyone from the country.

    So we can’t be outflanked on immigration.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 39,828

    algarkirk said:

    FF43 said:

    Is this a "royal they" from the former Conservative Home Secretary who was in charge of immigration (twice):

    I will never ever trust the Conservative Party again.

    I will never forget how they failed the British people on immigration.


    https://x.com/SuellaBraverman/status/2044425985504735524#m

    Wikipedia puts it in more sober language but I am sure the meaning is the same as Suella's little rant about her family:

    Braverman was born on 3 April 1980 in Harrow, London, and raised in Wembley. She is the daughter of Uma (née Mootien-Pillay) and Christie Fernandes, both of Indian origin, who immigrated to Britain in the 1960s from Mauritius and Kenya respectively.
    I’ve met 2 actual members of Restore. Paid up and everything.

    Both first generation immigrants. Yeah, indeed.

    Their reason - they are both women and don’t like a certain kind of immigration.

    Maybe it’s not knowing enough of the gammon types - but this certainly surprised me.
    I get confused, which one is Restore...there is Reform, Advance, Restore, Reclaim, Your Party, My Party, Lets All Have a Party...
    Your Party should rebrand as Refrain, since they refrain from standing in elections.

    The Greens could become Revert.
    I’ve started Revive. Major policy - instantly expel everyone from the country.

    So we can’t be outflanked on immigration.
    Can I be exiled to somewhere sunny please?
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 9,355
    isam said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Have I got this right?

    Ollie Robbins did not tell the PM anything about the vetting because this was in accordance with the rules.

    He was then sacked by the PM because of this.

    I know we have a problem with people being held accountable for misbehaviour but we now seem to have jumped that issue entirely by sacking people who do follow the rules. Why? Isn't that the question for the PM?

    Or have I missed something?

    Loads of people told Sir Keir not to appoint "to us he's just... Peter", but he ignored them.

    Olly Robbins has now been sacked for not telling him; he was not allowed to tell him according to the rules, but Mr Rules sacked him anyway
    How can it be against the rules to inform your boss of the outcome of vetting? Surely the whole point of vetting is to tell the decision maker, actually do not hire this person, or do so against our advice.

    My suspicion is that civil service under Johnson and others got used to operating in a much more political way at the top and ignoring their code. And so we now have a cadre of senior leadership that have forgotten their responsibilities.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 27,866
    Carrying on from the yesterday's spring pictures. The Valley Garden at Virginia Water was looking splendid this morning:




  • algarkirk said:

    FF43 said:

    Is this a "royal they" from the former Conservative Home Secretary who was in charge of immigration (twice):

    I will never ever trust the Conservative Party again.

    I will never forget how they failed the British people on immigration.


    https://x.com/SuellaBraverman/status/2044425985504735524#m

    Wikipedia puts it in more sober language but I am sure the meaning is the same as Suella's little rant about her family:

    Braverman was born on 3 April 1980 in Harrow, London, and raised in Wembley. She is the daughter of Uma (née Mootien-Pillay) and Christie Fernandes, both of Indian origin, who immigrated to Britain in the 1960s from Mauritius and Kenya respectively.
    I’ve met 2 actual members of Restore. Paid up and everything.

    Both first generation immigrants. Yeah, indeed.

    Their reason - they are both women and don’t like a certain kind of immigration.

    Maybe it’s not knowing enough of the gammon types - but this certainly surprised me.
    Were they from Eastern Europe?
    One Eastern Europe, one South America.

    One had been radicalised by living in Tower Hamlets - there, if you are not part of the corrupt political machine and are poor, you are given the shitty end of the stick by local government. Who are quite upfront about it.
    Was the other Venezuelan? Venezuelan women are the most right wing people I’ve ever met. They’ve seen lunatic socialism in action very recently and they loathe it with a violent passion.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 103,814

    algarkirk said:

    FF43 said:

    Is this a "royal they" from the former Conservative Home Secretary who was in charge of immigration (twice):

    I will never ever trust the Conservative Party again.

    I will never forget how they failed the British people on immigration.


    https://x.com/SuellaBraverman/status/2044425985504735524#m

    Wikipedia puts it in more sober language but I am sure the meaning is the same as Suella's little rant about her family:

    Braverman was born on 3 April 1980 in Harrow, London, and raised in Wembley. She is the daughter of Uma (née Mootien-Pillay) and Christie Fernandes, both of Indian origin, who immigrated to Britain in the 1960s from Mauritius and Kenya respectively.
    I’ve met 2 actual members of Restore. Paid up and everything.

    Both first generation immigrants. Yeah, indeed.

    Their reason - they are both women and don’t like a certain kind of immigration.

    Maybe it’s not knowing enough of the gammon types - but this certainly surprised me.
    Were they from Eastern Europe?
    One Eastern Europe, one South America.

    One had been radicalised by living in Tower Hamlets - there, if you are not part of the corrupt political machine and are poor, you are given the shitty end of the stick by local government. Who are quite upfront about it.
    That they chose to vote Rahman back in is bad, but I as I've said before I still maintain that it should not have been possible - being found personally guilty of corrupt electoral practices should come with a lifetime ban on standing again.

    You shouldn't get a do-over for electoral fraud, so you can be better at it next time.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 28,797
    Nigelb said:

    viewcode said:

    Another related question.

    That this terrible idea is so popular (majority support even from Conservative voters) is pointing to something being perceived as wrong with the current economic order.

    So what is that something, and what is the small-c-conservative-reform-to-avoid-revolution policy that improves that wrong?

    I don't know. I'm quite a fan of the Minimum Necessary Change (and associated concepts like the Minimum Viable Product) so what is it in this case?

    Corporatism solutions don't work in the 2020s because the nation-state is fucked. Neoliberalism solutions don't work in the 2020s because we are knee-deep in debt and cannot match taxes and benefits, in part because the nation-state is fucked. So we need to rebuild the nation-state, not in a Faragist flags-and-parades way, but as a functioning entity. So
    • 1: take control of the borders. Yes that does mean turning back the boats and imposing customs barriers at the NI/IRE border. And if the IRA version whatever kicks off, deal with it. Allow inward migration to those who can pay for it.
    • 2: impose export controls. Tax people who leave the country to live, confiscate assets and businesses taken abroad, impose "golden shares" to stop them being taken abroad
    • 3: create British versions of Facebook, Google, Twitter, etc. Then tax the US versions if they want to access the UK
    In short, everything that crosses the border, in either direction, gets taxed. When you have done that, then you can work out what to do.
    That would, of course, invite retaliation, and trade barriers would rapidly mount, with the usual effects.
    The US can get away with that stuff, just about, but we're both too much dependant on trade, and have insufficient size and influence to do the same.
    So at what point do we thow our hands up and admit we aren't a sovereign nation state anymore? We can't control our borders, we can't govern or regulate trade, we can't wage war in offence or defence. We left the EU because we were tired of being controlled by foreigners, and ten years after the referendum and five years after EU departure and we still haven't asserted a degree of self-control. I appreciate Green and Reform are various flavours of aaargh, but Starmer is a Chinese Room and Badenoch just duckspeaks whatever stupidity her phone feeds her. Something has to change.
  • isamisam Posts: 44,230

    algarkirk said:

    FF43 said:

    Is this a "royal they" from the former Conservative Home Secretary who was in charge of immigration (twice):

    I will never ever trust the Conservative Party again.

    I will never forget how they failed the British people on immigration.


    https://x.com/SuellaBraverman/status/2044425985504735524#m

    Wikipedia puts it in more sober language but I am sure the meaning is the same as Suella's little rant about her family:

    Braverman was born on 3 April 1980 in Harrow, London, and raised in Wembley. She is the daughter of Uma (née Mootien-Pillay) and Christie Fernandes, both of Indian origin, who immigrated to Britain in the 1960s from Mauritius and Kenya respectively.
    I’ve met 2 actual members of Restore. Paid up and everything.

    Both first generation immigrants. Yeah, indeed.

    Their reason - they are both women and don’t like a certain kind of immigration.

    Maybe it’s not knowing enough of the gammon types - but this certainly surprised me.
    Were they from Eastern Europe?
    One Eastern Europe, one South America.

    One had been radicalised by living in Tower Hamlets - there, if you are not part of the corrupt political machine and are poor, you are given the shitty end of the stick by local government. Who are quite upfront about it.
    That’s pretty ominous. There’s a lot more of it coming

    Pre my last relationship, I dated a few Eastern European women, and they were pretty relaxed about their racism. One had been chatted up by a black bloke on the train on the way to our date, and was genuinely flabbergasted that he would even think she’d be interested
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 35,251
    FF43 said:

    Is this a "royal they" from the former Conservative Home Secretary who was in charge of immigration (twice):

    I will never ever trust the Conservative Party again.

    I will never forget how they failed the British people on immigration.


    https://x.com/SuellaBraverman/status/2044425985504735524#m

    That's a bad faith argument. Everyone here knows Suella constantly pushed to reverse immigration, with virtually zero support in Cabinet, and was eventually sacked for her stance on an immigration-adjacent issue. These are matters of public record. Everyone here also understands the concept of collective cabinet responsibility. Why don’t you try making a valid contribution to the debate instead of boring specious attacks?
  • TazTaz Posts: 28,195
    rcs1000 said:

    Taz said:

    Graeme Downie for PM.

    A Labour backbencher has called for the pension triple lock to be reformed to help fund a rise in defence spending

    @GraemeDownieMP wrote in The House this weekend that the government should be brave enough to ask older people who "benefited financially from peace" to make a greater contribution to future national security


    https://x.com/politicshome/status/2045404479185404105

    Reform the whole benefits system, not just the pension part of it.

    Non pension benefits up by 6.4% this year.

    Link both to GDP growth.
    So...

    There's a reason we don't do that.

    The idea is that when the economy slips into recession, then the government acts in a naturally balancing manner. Essentially, the economy is contracting because aggregate demand is falling.

    If you reduce people's incomes by sharing -say- a fixed pool of unemployment benefit among a greater number of people, then it will have all sorts of slightly odd effects.

    For example, when the economy is growing that will mean that that unemployment benefits will start growing. So at a time when the economy needs people to come off the sidelines, you're increasing unemployment benefits.

    Conversely, if you are unemployed, and the economy is in the toilet, then knowing your unemployment cheque is likely to get smaller over time will discourage you from spending, reducing aggregate demand further.

    Basically: government tax and benefits are deliberately -even with Keynesian spending- counter-cyclical.
    Interesting. So it works against you.

    So link to earnings growth then ?
  • TazTaz Posts: 28,195
    Another loss for the Toon 😱

    Howe soon is now !
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 8,097
    Cyclefree said:

    It's a policy which is superficially attractive. There are far too many people overpaid despite being neither use nor ornament.

    However it would be trivially easy to get round. And, frankly, it's all the rest of their policies and the far too many utterly nasty fruitloops they have representing them which are the problem.

    Anyway since we are into green matters and before TSE revokes my license to derail every thread into CycleFree's Big Gardening Adventure, here is my crag. This may not look like much now but imagine pretty much this entire area covered in nettles and brambles and me manfully hacking away at it all (90% of it done).





    I do quite a lot of the less glamorous gardening work first thing in my nightie and if anyone is tempted to do the same and nettles and brambles are involved, remember to wear pants. This, I will confidently say, is the most useful advice you will receive on this thread. Why I have not been made Starmer's special advisor I cannot imagine. The poor man looks like he has got nettles permanently in his pants.

    Now I have the pleasure of creating an alpine rockery and herb garden. The photo was taken ca an hour or so ago. This is, by the way, less than 20% of the entire garden. I really need to get someone to help me because my increasingly dodgy and often painful pelvis stops me doing hard physical work for hours at a time.

    Eldest Son tells me I should find a Village Boy to help me, as if I lived in a world made of Miss Marples and Obliging Youths on Bicycles. Or, more likely, entering my Margaret Rutherford years.

    PS Montbretia - or crocosmia - is like a weed here. I could never grow it successfully in London. But here it takes over if given half a chance. Lovely plant but a thug.

    Totally agree with you about the montbretia. It’s lovely in the verges of country lanes, but a pest in the garden, as are welsh poppies and, this spring particularly, ground elder.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 24,240
    Either the policy would be really easy to get around - by setting up a separate company for Premier League first teams, due example - or it would destroy the Premier League, but it surely can't be both.

    I'm not a massive fan of the policy - I'm sure it would be hard to enforce and would probably create unintended consequences - but opponents damage their credibility by claiming that it would be simultaneously ineffective and destroy the Premier League.
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 8,097
    Those of us who support grass roots football would be happy for the “Premier League Success Story” to collapse. It’s also destroying teams like Leicester and West Brom who try to keep up but don’t have the resources.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 91,960
    edited April 18

    Either the policy would be really easy to get around - by setting up a separate company for Premier League first teams, due example - or it would destroy the Premier League, but it surely can't be both.

    I'm not a massive fan of the policy - I'm sure it would be hard to enforce and would probably create unintended consequences - but opponents damage their credibility by claiming that it would be simultaneously ineffective and destroy the Premier League.

    At one point that is exactly what Arsenal had. Everybody got an avereage wage (still a lot of money) but the big bucks were shares in a holding company in a tax haven. The company did basically nothing. The foreign player in particular if they waited until they finished playing could then drawn down the money at very low tax rates. This all came out when Ray Parlour got divorced and said basically I don't have that much money, here is a pay slip, I have a second home in bognor etc, the big missing was I millions in shares in this offshore company that I can draw down whenever I want. It all eventually came out in court, I think he had to give up the both homes.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 22,035

    Those of us who support grass roots football would be happy for the “Premier League Success Story” to collapse. It’s also destroying teams like Leicester and West Brom who try to keep up but don’t have the resources.

    Coventry made their way back from the wilderness. PUSB
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 8,097

    algarkirk said:

    FF43 said:

    Is this a "royal they" from the former Conservative Home Secretary who was in charge of immigration (twice):

    I will never ever trust the Conservative Party again.

    I will never forget how they failed the British people on immigration.


    https://x.com/SuellaBraverman/status/2044425985504735524#m

    Wikipedia puts it in more sober language but I am sure the meaning is the same as Suella's little rant about her family:

    Braverman was born on 3 April 1980 in Harrow, London, and raised in Wembley. She is the daughter of Uma (née Mootien-Pillay) and Christie Fernandes, both of Indian origin, who immigrated to Britain in the 1960s from Mauritius and Kenya respectively.
    I’ve met 2 actual members of Restore. Paid up and everything.

    Both first generation immigrants. Yeah, indeed.

    Their reason - they are both women and don’t like a certain kind of immigration.

    Maybe it’s not knowing enough of the gammon types - but this certainly surprised me.
    I get confused, which one is Restore...there is Reform, Advance, Restore, Reclaim, Your Party, My Party, Lets All Have a Party...
    Your Party should rebrand as Refrain, since they refrain from standing in elections.

    The Greens could become Revert.
    I’ve started Revive. Major policy - instantly expel everyone from the country.

    So we can’t be outflanked on immigration.
    Can I be exiled to somewhere sunny please?
    No. Only the Nu10k will be exiled to somewhere sunny. The rest of us will be sent to Iceland or Patagonia.
  • FossFoss Posts: 2,726
    viewcode said:

    Nigelb said:

    viewcode said:

    Another related question.

    That this terrible idea is so popular (majority support even from Conservative voters) is pointing to something being perceived as wrong with the current economic order.

    So what is that something, and what is the small-c-conservative-reform-to-avoid-revolution policy that improves that wrong?

    I don't know. I'm quite a fan of the Minimum Necessary Change (and associated concepts like the Minimum Viable Product) so what is it in this case?

    Corporatism solutions don't work in the 2020s because the nation-state is fucked. Neoliberalism solutions don't work in the 2020s because we are knee-deep in debt and cannot match taxes and benefits, in part because the nation-state is fucked. So we need to rebuild the nation-state, not in a Faragist flags-and-parades way, but as a functioning entity. So
    • 1: take control of the borders. Yes that does mean turning back the boats and imposing customs barriers at the NI/IRE border. And if the IRA version whatever kicks off, deal with it. Allow inward migration to those who can pay for it.
    • 2: impose export controls. Tax people who leave the country to live, confiscate assets and businesses taken abroad, impose "golden shares" to stop them being taken abroad
    • 3: create British versions of Facebook, Google, Twitter, etc. Then tax the US versions if they want to access the UK
    In short, everything that crosses the border, in either direction, gets taxed. When you have done that, then you can work out what to do.
    That would, of course, invite retaliation, and trade barriers would rapidly mount, with the usual effects.
    The US can get away with that stuff, just about, but we're both too much dependant on trade, and have insufficient size and influence to do the same.
    So at what point do we thow our hands up and admit we aren't a sovereign nation state anymore? We can't control our borders, we can't govern or regulate trade, we can't wage war in offence or defence. We left the EU because we were tired of being controlled by foreigners, and ten years after the referendum and five years after EU departure and we still haven't asserted a degree of self-control. I appreciate Green and Reform are various flavours of aaargh, but Starmer is a Chinese Room and Badenoch just duckspeaks whatever stupidity her phone feeds her. Something has to change.
    Service guarantees citizenship?
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 39,828

    Those of us who support grass roots football would be happy for the “Premier League Success Story” to collapse. It’s also destroying teams like Leicester and West Brom who try to keep up but don’t have the resources.

    Coventry made their way back from the wilderness. PUSB
    As did the Tractor Boys. It's not nice when the drop comes, particularly when Chelsea and Man City can absolutely take the piss.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 60,420

    algarkirk said:

    kle4 said:

    Taz said:

    Popular until they’re tried.

    Often popular even after they have been tried and found to fail. The failure will be because the politicians didn't do it properly.
    What surprised me recently about social media ban policies is that people support then even if they also don't think they will work.

    Someone argued that because of how potentially damaging social media can be it is worth trying even if you don't think it will definitely work, but that seems so reckless to me, to take forward something even if you don't think it will address the problem.

    I'd say that is worse than taking something forward that doesn't work - and many people said it would not work - because you at least believe it will.
    Most people support our failed and hugely damaging 'war on drugs' policy. With its combined effects of: killing people, enriching bad people, filling prisons, wasting police and court time and encouraging vast amounts of petty crime. So much so that a sane policy is beyond possible implementation

    I propose a new War On Drugs.

    HMG will enter the market as protecting the growers, refiners, suppliers and distributors. Start our own cartel.

    The Armed forces will be the enforcers - the money raised will be used to improve the defence budget.

    Suitably managed, we can go world wide and improve the balance of payments as well.

    {I went to school with scions of the Keswick family from Hong Kong}
    We can move the drugs around in our nuclear subs.

    If only they worked.

    Take out half the missiles and use for storage.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 128,599

    Either the policy would be really easy to get around - by setting up a separate company for Premier League first teams, due example - or it would destroy the Premier League, but it surely can't be both.

    I'm not a massive fan of the policy - I'm sure it would be hard to enforce and would probably create unintended consequences - but opponents damage their credibility by claiming that it would be simultaneously ineffective and destroy the Premier League.

    Premier League clubs aren't allowed to off book costs.

    So the clubs couldn't set up a separate limited company for either the players or the lower paid staff.
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 6,306
    If I did anything along these lines, I'd apply it more to conditions than salaries.

    So, for example, the pension or bonus schemes of the bosses could only be a small multiplier of the pension and bonus schemes of the workers in percentage terms. I wouldn't target the base salary.

    And there would be some measures around how linkages flow between companies.

    The boss of the banks would probably get around some of it with outsourcing, the boss of OCS UK perhaps less so.
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 8,097

    Those of us who support grass roots football would be happy for the “Premier League Success Story” to collapse. It’s also destroying teams like Leicester and West Brom who try to keep up but don’t have the resources.

    Coventry made their way back from the wilderness. PUSB
    As did the Tractor Boys. It's not nice when the drop comes, particularly when Chelsea and Man City can absolutely take the piss.
    It would be more equitable if there was any prospect of Chelsea and Man City being sent to the wilderness.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 12,887
    Free turnips all round.

    PB isn't what it once was. I'm sure its a lack of red meat.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 63,554

    algarkirk said:

    FF43 said:

    Is this a "royal they" from the former Conservative Home Secretary who was in charge of immigration (twice):

    I will never ever trust the Conservative Party again.

    I will never forget how they failed the British people on immigration.


    https://x.com/SuellaBraverman/status/2044425985504735524#m

    Wikipedia puts it in more sober language but I am sure the meaning is the same as Suella's little rant about her family:

    Braverman was born on 3 April 1980 in Harrow, London, and raised in Wembley. She is the daughter of Uma (née Mootien-Pillay) and Christie Fernandes, both of Indian origin, who immigrated to Britain in the 1960s from Mauritius and Kenya respectively.
    I’ve met 2 actual members of Restore. Paid up and everything.

    Both first generation immigrants. Yeah, indeed.

    Their reason - they are both women and don’t like a certain kind of immigration.

    Maybe it’s not knowing enough of the gammon types - but this certainly surprised me.
    I get confused, which one is Restore...there is Reform, Advance, Restore, Reclaim, Your Party, My Party, Lets All Have a Party...
    Your Party should rebrand as Refrain, since they refrain from standing in elections.

    The Greens could become Revert.
    I’ve started Revive. Major policy - instantly expel everyone from the country.

    So we can’t be outflanked on immigration.
    Can I be exiled to somewhere sunny please?
    No. Only the Nu10k will be exiled to somewhere sunny. The rest of us will be sent to Iceland or Patagonia.
    Iceland & Patagonia are for Party Members. Inner Party members get the nice places. The Proles get Rwanda.

    Now, which price plan can I sell you party membership on?
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 17,376
    edited April 18

    Those of us who support grass roots football would be happy for the “Premier League Success Story” to collapse. It’s also destroying teams like Leicester and West Brom who try to keep up but don’t have the resources.

    Coventry made their way back from the wilderness. PUSB
    Took Leeds 16 years after our little dalliance with fiscal incontinence and now we just get to suffer extreme anxiety in the hope of just about surviving. It must be boring as hell supporting a big five team
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 60,420
    Taz said:

    Another loss for the Toon 😱

    Howe soon is now !

    I refuse to believe that Howe has just become a crap manager.

    Look elsewhere.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 63,554

    algarkirk said:

    kle4 said:

    Taz said:

    Popular until they’re tried.

    Often popular even after they have been tried and found to fail. The failure will be because the politicians didn't do it properly.
    What surprised me recently about social media ban policies is that people support then even if they also don't think they will work.

    Someone argued that because of how potentially damaging social media can be it is worth trying even if you don't think it will definitely work, but that seems so reckless to me, to take forward something even if you don't think it will address the problem.

    I'd say that is worse than taking something forward that doesn't work - and many people said it would not work - because you at least believe it will.
    Most people support our failed and hugely damaging 'war on drugs' policy. With its combined effects of: killing people, enriching bad people, filling prisons, wasting police and court time and encouraging vast amounts of petty crime. So much so that a sane policy is beyond possible implementation

    I propose a new War On Drugs.

    HMG will enter the market as protecting the growers, refiners, suppliers and distributors. Start our own cartel.

    The Armed forces will be the enforcers - the money raised will be used to improve the defence budget.

    Suitably managed, we can go world wide and improve the balance of payments as well.

    {I went to school with scions of the Keswick family from Hong Kong}
    We can move the drugs around in our nuclear subs.

    If only they worked.

    Take out half the missiles and use for storage.
    No, the nuclear missiles are part of the plan


    …and one evening in walks Dinsdale with a couple of big lads, one of whom was carrying a tactical nuclear missile. They said I had bought one of their fruit machines and would I pay for it

    2nd Interviewer: How much did they want?

    Vercotti: They wanted three quarters of a million pounds.

    2nd Interviewer: Why didn't you call the police?

    Vercotti: Well I had noticed that the lad with the thermonuclear device was the chief constable for the area.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 39,828

    Those of us who support grass roots football would be happy for the “Premier League Success Story” to collapse. It’s also destroying teams like Leicester and West Brom who try to keep up but don’t have the resources.

    Coventry made their way back from the wilderness. PUSB
    As did the Tractor Boys. It's not nice when the drop comes, particularly when Chelsea and Man City can absolutely take the piss.
    It would be more equitable if there was any prospect of Chelsea and Man City being sent to the wilderness.
    West Brom were absolutely shafted by their previous Chinese owners. It was a very well run club when Mark Jenkins was running it. The new Indian regime is being punished for what it inherited.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 128,599

    Taz said:

    Another loss for the Toon 😱

    Howe soon is now !

    I refuse to believe that Howe has just become a crap manager.

    Look elsewhere.
    He and the club haven't recovered from Liverpool signing Isak and Isak's replacement.

    I think it genuinely broke NUFC.

    The club with the richest owners in the world had to bend the knee to plucky little Liverpool.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 12,887

    algarkirk said:

    kle4 said:

    Taz said:

    Popular until they’re tried.

    Often popular even after they have been tried and found to fail. The failure will be because the politicians didn't do it properly.
    What surprised me recently about social media ban policies is that people support then even if they also don't think they will work.

    Someone argued that because of how potentially damaging social media can be it is worth trying even if you don't think it will definitely work, but that seems so reckless to me, to take forward something even if you don't think it will address the problem.

    I'd say that is worse than taking something forward that doesn't work - and many people said it would not work - because you at least believe it will.
    Most people support our failed and hugely damaging 'war on drugs' policy. With its combined effects of: killing people, enriching bad people, filling prisons, wasting police and court time and encouraging vast amounts of petty crime. So much so that a sane policy is beyond possible implementation

    I propose a new War On Drugs.

    HMG will enter the market as protecting the growers, refiners, suppliers and distributors. Start our own cartel.

    The Armed forces will be the enforcers - the money raised will be used to improve the defence budget.

    Suitably managed, we can go world wide and improve the balance of payments as well.

    {I went to school with scions of the Keswick family from Hong Kong}
    We can move the drugs around in our nuclear subs.

    If only they worked.

    Take out half the missiles and use for storage.
    No, the nuclear missiles are part of the plan


    …and one evening in walks Dinsdale with a couple of big lads, one of whom was carrying a tactical nuclear missile. They said I had bought one of their fruit machines and would I pay for it

    2nd Interviewer: How much did they want?

    Vercotti: They wanted three quarters of a million pounds.

    2nd Interviewer: Why didn't you call the police?

    Vercotti: Well I had noticed that the lad with the thermonuclear device was the chief constable for the area.
    Never trust people with suitcases. Women for example almost always have them when travelling.

  • TazTaz Posts: 28,195

    Those of us who support grass roots football would be happy for the “Premier League Success Story” to collapse. It’s also destroying teams like lLeicester and West Brom who try to keep up but don’t have the resources.

    Coventry made their way back from the wilderness. PUSB
    As did the Tractor Boys. It's not nice when the drop comes, particularly when Chelsea and Man City can absolutely take the piss.
    It would be more equitable if there was any prospect of Chelsea and Man City being sent to the wilderness.
    West Brom were absolutely shafted by their previous Chinese owners. .
    Rather like Blues then. But we’re back and, next season, Ollbeeyun will be too

  • TazTaz Posts: 28,195

    Taz said:

    Another loss for the Toon 😱

    Howe soon is now !

    I refuse to believe that Howe has just become a crap manager.

    Look elsewhere.
    Well the Isak money was not well spent.

  • If anyone needs me I’m in the best room in Killeavy Castle Hotel, under the Ring of Gullion, County Down, Ulster

    And I am sipping some wine as I contemplate the view from my bedroom


  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 91,960
    edited April 18
    Leon said:

    If anyone needs me I’m in the best room in Killeavy Castle Hotel, under the Ring of Gullion, County Down, Ulster

    And I am sipping some wine as I contemplate the view from my bedroom

    How on earth did they get planning permission for the travel lodge looking extension?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 128,599
    I said this last week.

    Bibi torched U.S. support for Israel for a generation

    Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is wreaking havoc on Israel's standing with Americans as the Iran war supercharges a deterioration in relations with the U.S.

    Why it matters: Israel's polling collapse among younger Americans is hitting Congress, too. Lawmakers who started out staunchly pro-Israel are becoming increasingly vocal critics.

    Why it matters: Israel's polling collapse among younger Americans is hitting Congress, too. Lawmakers who started out staunchly pro-Israel are becoming increasingly vocal critics.

    "We need to have a discussion about how to normalize that relationship and what change is necessary; there's no doubt about that," Rep. Jason Crow (D-Colo.) told Axios.

    Zoom in: Every Senate Democrat who's eyeing a 2028 presidential run voted against arms sales to Israel in votes earlier this week.

    40 Senate Dems voted on a resolution to block arms sales to Israel, up from just 15 on a similar vote last April.

    Netanyahu is "destroying the bipartisan nature in terms of support for Israel," Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) told Punchbowl News.

    Over in the House, some Democrats are turning against defensive support, including funding for Israel's Iron Dome missile defense system.

    That was "seen as insanely fringe four years ago," Rep. Maxwell Frost (D-Fla.) told Axios.

    But multiple Democrats who voted for Iron Dome in 2021 told Axios they're done providing financial aid.

    The big picture: Older Republicans and white Evangelicals are the last groups to hold majority favorable views of Israel, according to recent Pew polling.

    For every other group, Israel's favorability has collapsed since 2022.


    https://www.axios.com/2026/04/18/israel-us-support-congress-netanyahu
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 39,828
    edited April 18
    Taz said:

    Those of us who support grass roots football would be happy for the “Premier League Success Story” to collapse. It’s also destroying teams like lLeicester and West Brom who try to keep up but don’t have the resources.

    Coventry made their way back from the wilderness. PUSB
    As did the Tractor Boys. It's not nice when the drop comes, particularly when Chelsea and Man City can absolutely take the piss.
    It would be more equitable if there was any prospect of Chelsea and Man City being sent to the wilderness.
    West Brom were absolutely shafted by their previous Chinese owners. .
    Rather like Blues then. But we’re back and, next season, Ollbeeyun will be too

    I think sacking John Eustace and replacing him with Shrek was the Noses' big error.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 41,579

    Taz said:

    Another loss for the Toon 😱

    Howe soon is now !

    I refuse to believe that Howe has just become a crap manager.

    Look elsewhere.
    He and the club haven't recovered from Liverpool signing Isak and Isak's replacement.

    I think it genuinely broke NUFC.

    The club with the richest owners in the world had to bend the knee to plucky little Liverpool.
    It might be terminal for NUFC because PIF are liquidating a lot of their sporting assets, LIV is gone, Saudi Pro League foot all is gone, the F1 track seems to be on the ropes. I wouldn't be surprised if they look for a buyer for Newcastle in the next couple of years.
  • TazTaz Posts: 28,195

    Taz said:

    Another loss for the Toon 😱

    Howe soon is now !

    I refuse to believe that Howe has just become a crap manager.

    Look elsewhere.
    He and the club haven't recovered from Liverpool signing Isak and Isak's replacement.

    I think it genuinely broke NUFC.

    The club with the richest owners in the world had to bend the knee to plucky little Liverpool.
    Isak has been such a success at Liverpool too
  • Leon said:

    If anyone needs me I’m in the best room in Killeavy Castle Hotel, under the Ring of Gullion, County Down, Ulster

    And I am sipping some wine as I contemplate the view from my bedroom

    How on earth did they get planning permission for the travel lodge looking extension?
    It’s quite jarring, isn’t it?

    But then the castle is faux 19th century and not especially beautiful. It’s not like they desecrated a medieval jewel

    And also, judging by the photos in the lobby, the entire place was burned out and derelict. So my guess is the authorities agreed to the big modern extension on the grounds that someone would save the old building and make it useful

    And the grounds are exceptionally lovely, melting into the mountains of Mourne. Reminds me strongly of the way Gidleigh Park blurs into Dartmoor
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 128,599
    MaxPB said:

    Taz said:

    Another loss for the Toon 😱

    Howe soon is now !

    I refuse to believe that Howe has just become a crap manager.

    Look elsewhere.
    He and the club haven't recovered from Liverpool signing Isak and Isak's replacement.

    I think it genuinely broke NUFC.

    The club with the richest owners in the world had to bend the knee to plucky little Liverpool.
    It might be terminal for NUFC because PIF are liquidating a lot of their sporting assets, LIV is gone, Saudi Pro League foot all is gone, the F1 track seems to be on the ropes. I wouldn't be surprised if they look for a buyer for Newcastle in the next couple of years.
    I think they'll still keep Newcastle United simply for the reason they're hosting the world cup in 2034.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 128,599
    Taz said:

    Taz said:

    Another loss for the Toon 😱

    Howe soon is now !

    I refuse to believe that Howe has just become a crap manager.

    Look elsewhere.
    He and the club haven't recovered from Liverpool signing Isak and Isak's replacement.

    I think it genuinely broke NUFC.

    The club with the richest owners in the world had to bend the knee to plucky little Liverpool.
    Isak has been such a success at Liverpool too
    The injury didn't help.

    Astonishing to say our three big signings last summer have only played 115 minutes together all season.
This discussion has been closed.