Skip to content

Head to heads – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 13,217
edited 6:48AM in General
Head to heads – politicalbetting.com

The most interesting finding from this polling isn’t seeing Andy Burnham being an improvement but even at the end Sir Keir Starmer was preferred to be Prime Minister than Nigel Farage.

Read the full story here

«13

Comments

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 137,238
    'Trump describes Burnham as 'the mayor of a town' and 'extremely liberal'

    Donald Trump has given his first public reaction to the prospect of the former Mayor of Greater Manchester Andy Burnham becoming prime minister.

    Campaigning during the Makerfield by-election, Burnham said the UK needed to avoid what he called the "polarised, poisonous politics" of the US.

    Asked his view of the current frontrunner to replace Sir Keir Starmer, Trump described him as "the mayor of a town" and said he had heard Burnham was "extremely liberal".'

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/videos/cly81w5g1qwo
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 137,238
    Burnham leads both Badenoch and Farage but Farage by more than he leads Kemi, so Kemi and the Tories may still be the best bet in marginal seats to beat Burnham and Labour
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 27,914
    edited 6:57AM
    Third like Scotland.

    Do we have figures for Badenoch v Farage? That could be quite important.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 25,628
    Interesting that a third prefer Starmer to Burnham.

    Even a Burnhamphobe such as me wouldn't go that far.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 64,004
    tlg86 said:

    Third like Scotland.

    Do we have figures for Badenoch v Farage? That could be quite important.

    Good morning, everyone.

    How the anti-Reform tactical voting works come the General Election will also be crucial. Easy to vote against them in a by-election but tougher in many seats in a nationwide vote. No major party wants to give up on hundreds of seats.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 129,122
    tlg86 said:

    Third like Scotland.

    Do we have figures for Badenoch v Farage? That could be quite important.

    This is from April.

    Badenoch beats Farage 67 to 33.

    https://x.com/LukeTryl/status/2050522237677994400
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 36,763
    HYUFD said:

    Burnham leads both Badenoch and Farage but Farage by more than he leads Kemi, so Kemi and the Tories may still be the best bet in marginal seats to beat Burnham and Labour

    Yes, and the Aberdeen South by-election suggests also that the Conservatives are, at the very least, no longer quite so toxic.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 129,122
    edited 7:04AM
    South Africa and South Korea really have done the dirty on Scotland.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 129,122
    edited 7:08AM
    Boston schools in about 8 years time.


  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 22,135
    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    HYUFD said:

    Burnham leads both Badenoch and Farage but Farage by more than he leads Kemi, so Kemi and the Tories may still be the best bet in marginal seats to beat Burnham and Labour

    Yes, and the Aberdeen South by-election suggests also that the Conservatives are, at the very least, no longer quite so toxic.
    In Scotland. The fat lady will only start singing when they start to beat Reform in England. Until then Kemi has no chance at becoming PM.
  • BattlebusBattlebus Posts: 3,458
    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    HYUFD said:

    Burnham leads both Badenoch and Farage but Farage by more than he leads Kemi, so Kemi and the Tories may still be the best bet in marginal seats to beat Burnham and Labour

    Yes, and the Aberdeen South by-election suggests also that the Conservatives are, at the very least, no longer quite so toxic.
    Aberdeen constituencies* were always an odd as they had deep roots in farming and fishing. The oil boom didn't change the population in the same way as imported textile workers changed the Midlands. Families that moved there for the oil boom moved out again.

    Would suggest this was a personal vote rather than a party one.

    * OH is from the area and have family ties there.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 37,212
    Morris_Dancer said:

    tlg86 said:

    Third like Scotland.

    Do we have figures for Badenoch v Farage? That could be quite important.

    Good morning, everyone.

    How the anti-Reform tactical voting works come the General Election will also be crucial. Easy to vote against them in a by-election but tougher in many seats in a nationwide vote. No major party wants to give up on hundreds of seats.
    This is a very good point - it's not instantly clear in my constituency North Dorset for example. Maybe I will have to vote Tory for the first time in my life but how do I know?

    If I were a billionaire, I would be lining up and paying for BCP pollsters to do a proper independent constituency level poll of every seat two weeks out from the GE and make the findings transparently clear.

    How much would that cost, I wonder? £10k-ish a seat, so £6.5m?
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 19,825
    I don't know how to read these head-to-heads. The questions are artificial as people tend to vote for a party as a whole not for its leader, and to the extent they do consider leaders they don't pit one leader against one other. At the margin, head-to-heads must tell us something but not clear to me what.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 55,662
    SandyRentool said:

    Interesting that a third prefer Starmer to Burnham.

    Even a Burnhamphobe such as me wouldn't go that far.

    There was a lady caller to LBC who was in tears at losing Starmer as PM
  • MattWMattW Posts: 33,752
    edited 7:15AM
    HYUFD said:

    'Trump describes Burnham as 'the mayor of a town' and 'extremely liberal'

    Donald Trump has given his first public reaction to the prospect of the former Mayor of Greater Manchester Andy Burnham becoming prime minister.

    Campaigning during the Makerfield by-election, Burnham said the UK needed to avoid what he called the "polarised, poisonous politics" of the US.

    Asked his view of the current frontrunner to replace Sir Keir Starmer, Trump described him as "the mayor of a town" and said he had heard Burnham was "extremely liberal".'

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/videos/cly81w5g1qwo

    Does Trump still approve of Mamdani? He was positive about him when remined that Mamdani had called him a 'despot with fascist tendencies':

    https://youtu.be/vR9g4lJNTj0?t=59

    I'd say is a better tactic for Burnham to stick to his values, rather than try and navigate Trump's ever changing deranged ramblings, and to ignore the random Trump verbal knee jerks, which should perhaps normally be forgotten 6 hours later.

    I'd also say that Trump may be a species of lame duck very, very soon - which may make a difference.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 129,122
    Benpointer said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    tlg86 said:

    Third like Scotland.

    Do we have figures for Badenoch v Farage? That could be quite important.

    Good morning, everyone.

    How the anti-Reform tactical voting works come the General Election will also be crucial. Easy to vote against them in a by-election but tougher in many seats in a nationwide vote. No major party wants to give up on hundreds of seats.
    This is a very good point - it's not instantly clear in my constituency North Dorset for example. Maybe I will have to vote Tory for the first time in my life but how do I know?

    If I were a billionaire, I would be lining up and paying for BCP pollsters to do a proper independent constituency level poll of every seat two weeks out from the GE and make the findings transparently clear.

    How much would that cost, I wonder? £10k-ish a seat, so £6.5m?
    A constituency poll costs North of £40k.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 57,210
    Morris_Dancer said:

    tlg86 said:

    Third like Scotland.

    Do we have figures for Badenoch v Farage? That could be quite important.

    Good morning, everyone.

    How the anti-Reform tactical voting works come the General Election will also be crucial. Easy to vote against them in a by-election but tougher in many seats in a nationwide vote. No major party wants to give up on hundreds of seats.
    No, it is straightforward in the vast majority of seats. If there is an incumbent Lab, LD, Green, Ind or PC then vote for them. Scotland is more complicated with its Nats vs Unionist, but not much more difficult.

    Badenoch hasn't really done enough to distance from Reform to be the tactical vote winner in Con held constituencies.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 64,004
    Foxy said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    tlg86 said:

    Third like Scotland.

    Do we have figures for Badenoch v Farage? That could be quite important.

    Good morning, everyone.

    How the anti-Reform tactical voting works come the General Election will also be crucial. Easy to vote against them in a by-election but tougher in many seats in a nationwide vote. No major party wants to give up on hundreds of seats.
    No, it is straightforward in the vast majority of seats. If there is an incumbent Lab, LD, Green, Ind or PC then vote for them. Scotland is more complicated with its Nats vs Unionist, but not much more difficult.

    Badenoch hasn't really done enough to distance from Reform to be the tactical vote winner in Con held constituencies.
    Dr. Foxy, I fear your personal preference is shining through. "Just vote Labour" is fine, if you want a Labour Government. But if they're doing badly in the polls then that makes things far more complicated. And if you really don't like Reform but also don't want Labour in power, that does make things more complicated.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 129,122
    edited 7:19AM
    Bill Gates’s Russian lover gained City Hall access through Epstein

    The Microsoft founder admitted an affair with a Moscow official whom the paedophile financier helped connect with London mayoral staff under Boris Johnson

    Bill Gates had an extramarital affair with a senior Moscow city official whom Jeffrey Epstein helped to introduce to members of London’s mayoral office while Boris Johnson was running the city.

    The billionaire Microsoft co-founder gave testimony to the United States’ House oversight committee as part of an investigation into Epstein in which he revealed that he had affairs with two Russian women.

    He named them as Karima Nigmatulina, a nuclear physicist, and Mila Antonova, a bridge player. He also admitted to a third affair with Alice Jacobs Nesselrodt, a medical entrepreneur, during his lengthy testimony on June 10.

    According to emails released this year as part of the Epstein files, Nigmatulina travelled to London in October 2012 shortly after being appointed as deputy director of Moscow’s city planning office.

    A few weeks earlier Epstein wrote to David Stern, his fixer, who also worked closely with Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, asking for him to arrange a meeting between Nigmatulina and officials within London’s mayoral office. The meeting was apparently a favour to Boris Nikolic, who worked for Gates as his chief adviser for science and technology.

    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/bill-gates-affair-epstein-russian-official-rjmvzw09s
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 137,238
    MattW said:

    HYUFD said:

    'Trump describes Burnham as 'the mayor of a town' and 'extremely liberal'

    Donald Trump has given his first public reaction to the prospect of the former Mayor of Greater Manchester Andy Burnham becoming prime minister.

    Campaigning during the Makerfield by-election, Burnham said the UK needed to avoid what he called the "polarised, poisonous politics" of the US.

    Asked his view of the current frontrunner to replace Sir Keir Starmer, Trump described him as "the mayor of a town" and said he had heard Burnham was "extremely liberal".'

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/videos/cly81w5g1qwo

    Does Trump still approve of Mamdani? He was positive about him when remined that Mamdani had called him a 'despot with fascist tendencies':

    https://youtu.be/vR9g4lJNTj0?t=59

    I'd say is a better tactic for Burnham to stick to his values, rather than try and navigate Trump's ever changing deranged ramblings, and to ignore the random Trump verbal knee jerks, which should perhaps normally be forgotten 6 hours later.

    I'd also say that Trump may be a species of lame duck very, very soon - which may make a difference.
    “America the Beautiful will NEVER be a Communist Country!!!” Trump wrote on his social media platform in the early hours of Wednesday morning, responding to a slate of victories for Democrats endorsed by left-leaning New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani.

    “Many Communists running in badly failing Blue States,” the president said in another message to his followers.'

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-communism-primary-elections-losers-b3001920.html
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 137,238
    Benpointer said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    tlg86 said:

    Third like Scotland.

    Do we have figures for Badenoch v Farage? That could be quite important.

    Good morning, everyone.

    How the anti-Reform tactical voting works come the General Election will also be crucial. Easy to vote against them in a by-election but tougher in many seats in a nationwide vote. No major party wants to give up on hundreds of seats.
    This is a very good point - it's not instantly clear in my constituency North Dorset for example. Maybe I will have to vote Tory for the first time in my life but how do I know?

    If I were a billionaire, I would be lining up and paying for BCP pollsters to do a proper independent constituency level poll of every seat two weeks out from the GE and make the findings transparently clear.

    How much would that cost, I wonder? £10k-ish a seat, so £6.5m?
    North Dorset projected as 30% Reform, 26% Tory, 25% LD

    https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/seatdetails.py?seat=Dorset North
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 7,989
    How long before Burnham is found out? 12.months
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 57,210
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Foxy said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    tlg86 said:

    Third like Scotland.

    Do we have figures for Badenoch v Farage? That could be quite important.

    Good morning, everyone.

    How the anti-Reform tactical voting works come the General Election will also be crucial. Easy to vote against them in a by-election but tougher in many seats in a nationwide vote. No major party wants to give up on hundreds of seats.
    No, it is straightforward in the vast majority of seats. If there is an incumbent Lab, LD, Green, Ind or PC then vote for them. Scotland is more complicated with its Nats vs Unionist, but not much more difficult.

    Badenoch hasn't really done enough to distance from Reform to be the tactical vote winner in Con held constituencies.
    Dr. Foxy, I fear your personal preference is shining through. "Just vote Labour" is fine, if you want a Labour Government. But if they're doing badly in the polls then that makes things far more complicated. And if you really don't like Reform but also don't want Labour in power, that does make things more complicated.
    Well, that is the forced choice that FPTP puts on voters. Which of the two parties in contention in my seat do I dislike more?

    Either vote tactically, or ignore it and vote for whoever you like even if they have no realistic chance.

    Obviously in a better system like STV or AV there is no need to tactically vote. Personally I like the French system of two rounds to elections as it makes certain which are the two parties in contention.

    I note too that the contention that FPTP brings stable governments has rather taken a beating these last 10 years.
  • BattlebusBattlebus Posts: 3,458
    Foxy said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Foxy said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    tlg86 said:

    Third like Scotland.

    Do we have figures for Badenoch v Farage? That could be quite important.

    Good morning, everyone.

    How the anti-Reform tactical voting works come the General Election will also be crucial. Easy to vote against them in a by-election but tougher in many seats in a nationwide vote. No major party wants to give up on hundreds of seats.
    No, it is straightforward in the vast majority of seats. If there is an incumbent Lab, LD, Green, Ind or PC then vote for them. Scotland is more complicated with its Nats vs Unionist, but not much more difficult.

    Badenoch hasn't really done enough to distance from Reform to be the tactical vote winner in Con held constituencies.
    Dr. Foxy, I fear your personal preference is shining through. "Just vote Labour" is fine, if you want a Labour Government. But if they're doing badly in the polls then that makes things far more complicated. And if you really don't like Reform but also don't want Labour in power, that does make things more complicated.
    Well, that is the forced choice that FPTP puts on voters. Which of the two parties in contention in my seat do I dislike more?

    Either vote tactically, or ignore it and vote for whoever you like even if they have no realistic chance.

    Obviously in a better system like STV or AV there is no need to tactically vote. Personally I like the French system of two rounds to elections as it makes certain which are the two parties in contention.

    I note too that the contention that FPTP brings stable governments has rather taken a beating these last 10 years.
    Has "Duverger's Law" been broken or will it reassert itself in a Labour v Reform 2029 Parliament. Tories ending up like the LibDems having to specialise in areas like Aberdeen South.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 81,220
    What the fucking fuck is going on with school closures - never would have happened if we hadn't had Covid I reckon.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 43,621
    @alexmassie

    This is tremendous. Harsh but terrific. 🫡👏

    https://x.com/alexmassie/status/2070047115544289624?s=20
  • Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 5,273
    Burnham is so far beating Badenoch by significantly less than he is beating Farage. But Badenoch remains compromised by her need to win back supporters of Farage, something that Starmer didn't make enough of. She can't really push back against accusations that she is pandering to the hard right without jeopardising that source of support.

    So Burnham's approach to Badenoch should include the following:
    1. Invite people to draw the reasonable conclusion from her pandering that she would prop up Farage as PM rather than look to the centre.
    2. Model his approach to Trump on that of Carney not Starmer, and paint Badenoch as Trump's poodle by contrast.
    Plus, in addition:
    3. Call her out for what she is. A really despicable nasty person without an ounce of empathy at the personal level, something really evident yesterday. Just like Trump.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 37,212
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    South Africa and South Korea really have done the dirty on Scotland.

    Benpointers guide to Scotland's travel prospects:

    Group D Australia v Paraguay has 'stitch-up' 'draw' written all over it, allowing both teams to qualify. Same in group F with Japan v Sweden, and of course group J with Algeria v Austria, who have previous in these things. But, those all involve third placed teams already above Scotland so don't really impact Scotland's chances.

    Of those who might overtake Scotland:

    Group E: I can't see either Ecuador beating Germany or Curaçao beating Ivory Coast, so nether of them are an issue.
    Group G: Belgium should beat NZ and Egypt v Iran could well be a draw so I'd expect Iran to push Scotland down to 8th place.
    Group H: Another possibility for a stitch-up in Spain v Uruguay where a draw lets Uruguay leap-frog Scotland but I suspect Spain will win that one.
    Group I: Likely that Senegal beat Iraq - Scotland now down to 9th place.
    Group K: Congo are going to beat Uzbekistan to push Scotland to 10th place
    Group L: Ghana beating Croatia be three goals would be handy but I can't see it happening.

    Summary: "We're doomed!"
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 90,224
    Pulpstar said:

    What the fucking fuck is going on with school closures - never would have happened if we hadn't had Covid I reckon.

    Primary school rolls have dropped around 5% in the last half decade (birthrates and crackdown on immigration), and will likely fall another 7% by the end of the decade.
    Unless you switch from per pupil funding, and maintain overall funding in order to reduce class sizes, school closures are inevitable.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 48,100
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    “It turns out appointing a spiteful class warrior as education secretary was a disaster,” said Badenoch.

    This one was too much for Starmer. “She grew up in poverty,” he said. It was a suitable enough note for his time to end on. If anything has defined the Starmer era, it has been the Four Yorkshiremenisation of politics. “Her story,” he said, “is an incredible story of social mobility and success.”

    Starmer’s government is full of incredible stories of social mobility, of which they are all extremely proud. None of them seem to have noticed that they all grew up under Margaret Thatcher.

    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/kemi-badenoch-keir-starmer-cabinet-mpcbvn5z9

    A shopkeeper’s daughter? You were lucky, we only had one shop and all it sold was gravel.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 23,169
    Looks like Farage is dead in the water. It's difficult to see what he can do about it. A one man band sinking. You could feel sorry for those Tories who jumped ship last year if only they weren't such shits.

    Talking of shits Badenoch is getting hammered by Bridget Phillipson in an interview with Nick Robinson. What a performance! I've never particularly rated BP but I suppose she wouldn't have have achieved what she has if she wasn't any good. Her put down of Badenoch was tuned to perfection.
  • eekeek Posts: 34,210
    squareroot2 said:

    How long before Burnham is found out? 12.months

    How long until Farage would be found out (if when elected) - equally less than 12 months.

    The thing is the UK is currently ungovernable - I'm hoping that Burnham has an idea of what needs to be done but we will see.

    Burnham definitely isn't perfect (see him giving WASPI more than 30 milliseconds) but it's going to depend on the team he puts around him.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 10,190
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Bill Gates’s Russian lover gained City Hall access through Epstein

    The Microsoft founder admitted an affair with a Moscow official whom the paedophile financier helped connect with London mayoral staff under Boris Johnson

    Bill Gates had an extramarital affair with a senior Moscow city official whom Jeffrey Epstein helped to introduce to members of London’s mayoral office while Boris Johnson was running the city.

    The billionaire Microsoft co-founder gave testimony to the United States’ House oversight committee as part of an investigation into Epstein in which he revealed that he had affairs with two Russian women.

    He named them as Karima Nigmatulina, a nuclear physicist, and Mila Antonova, a bridge player. He also admitted to a third affair with Alice Jacobs Nesselrodt, a medical entrepreneur, during his lengthy testimony on June 10.

    According to emails released this year as part of the Epstein files, Nigmatulina travelled to London in October 2012 shortly after being appointed as deputy director of Moscow’s city planning office.

    A few weeks earlier Epstein wrote to David Stern, his fixer, who also worked closely with Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, asking for him to arrange a meeting between Nigmatulina and officials within London’s mayoral office. The meeting was apparently a favour to Boris Nikolic, who worked for Gates as his chief adviser for science and technology.

    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/bill-gates-affair-epstein-russian-official-rjmvzw09s

    Fair play to him, managing an affair during his testimony and at his age too! Not too Microsoft.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 23,169
    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    HYUFD said:

    Burnham leads both Badenoch and Farage but Farage by more than he leads Kemi, so Kemi and the Tories may still be the best bet in marginal seats to beat Burnham and Labour

    Yes, and the Aberdeen South by-election suggests also that the Conservatives are, at the very least, no longer quite so toxic.
    Baddenoch is doing her very best to put that right!
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 90,224
    Regarding the defence debate, it's worth looking at this sort of analysis (and remembering that China is by far away the largest drone manufacturer on the planet, and is allied with Russia).
    For all the arguments that drones developments affect the UK less, as we're an island on the edge of Europe, we're still planning to spend multiple billions on MBTs, armoured fighting vehicles and artillery.

    Imagine with me for a moment the beginning of the war, where Russia was firing 20,000+ artillery shells per day, turning farm fields into moon craterscapes. Now imagine instead of artillery shells randomly blowing up fields while being barely aimed, it is long range precision drones. And also imagine the drones cost less money than the shells, so it is actually even more drones than Russia had shells. And then imagine those drones targeting every single vehicle in Russia’s rear. 20,30,40,60+ thousand per day. That’s a lot of vehicles. And imagine with me you do this for 4-5 months straight. And also imagine it costs around 6 billion Euros to do this.
    https://x.com/AndrewPerpetua/status/2070011232300544215

    We've paid around that amount for the barely usable Ajax.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 10,190
    Scott_xP said:

    @alexmassie

    This is tremendous. Harsh but terrific. 🫡👏

    https://x.com/alexmassie/status/2070047115544289624?s=20

    Choose a fucking big nelly!
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 36,763
    Nigelb said:

    Pulpstar said:

    What the fucking fuck is going on with school closures - never would have happened if we hadn't had Covid I reckon.

    Primary school rolls have dropped around 5% in the last half decade (birthrates and crackdown on immigration), and will likely fall another 7% by the end of the decade.
    Unless you switch from per pupil funding, and maintain overall funding in order to reduce class sizes, school closures are inevitable.
    Yes, we should do that. Keep schools open and let class sizes fall. Improve education that way.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 90,224
    eek said:

    squareroot2 said:

    How long before Burnham is found out? 12.months

    How long until Farage would be found out (if when elected) - equally less than 12 months.

    The thing is the UK is currently ungovernable - I'm hoping that Burnham has an idea of what needs to be done but we will see.

    Burnham definitely isn't perfect (see him giving WASPI more than 30 milliseconds) but it's going to depend on the team he puts around him.
    Farage has perhaps already been found out.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 13,539
    squareroot2 said:

    How long before Burnham is found out? 12.months

    The phrase “keeping an open mind” is a complete stranger to this board and indeed the country.

    Admittedly “let’s just see how he gets on” isn’t the kind of post that drives engagement in a polarised world but perhaps this time a PM will, in the words of a dearly departed poster “surprise on the upside” (and yes, I do know what happened in that case).
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 81,220
    Nigelb said:

    Pulpstar said:

    What the fucking fuck is going on with school closures - never would have happened if we hadn't had Covid I reckon.

    Primary school rolls have dropped around 5% in the last half decade (birthrates and crackdown on immigration), and will likely fall another 7% by the end of the decade.
    Unless you switch from per pupil funding, and maintain overall funding in order to reduce class sizes, school closures are inevitable.
    I mean today lol.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 37,212
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    “It turns out appointing a spiteful class warrior as education secretary was a disaster,” said Badenoch.

    This one was too much for Starmer. “She grew up in poverty,” he said. It was a suitable enough note for his time to end on. If anything has defined the Starmer era, it has been the Four Yorkshiremenisation of politics. “Her story,” he said, “is an incredible story of social mobility and success.”

    Starmer’s government is full of incredible stories of social mobility, of which they are all extremely proud. None of them seem to have noticed that they all grew up under Margaret Thatcher.

    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/kemi-badenoch-keir-starmer-cabinet-mpcbvn5z9

    They grew up under Margaret Thatcher; they grew up in poverty.

    Let's see if we can spot the connection there.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 48,100
    Roger said:

    Looks like Farage is dead in the water. It's difficult to see what he can do about it. A one man band sinking. You could feel sorry for those Tories who jumped ship last year if only they weren't such shits.

    Talking of shits Badenoch is getting hammered by Bridget Phillipson in an interview with Nick Robinson. What a performance! I've never particularly rated BP but I suppose she wouldn't have have achieved what she has if she wasn't any good. Her put down of Badenoch was tuned to perfection.

    Nige has decided defender of working class white boys is the way to go. Every lad should have the chance of receiving a £5m ‘gift’ from a crypto billionaire.

    White working-class boys are currently the lowest-performing group in the country’s education system thanks to the Equality Act.

    Reform will scrap it and return Britain to a meritocracy.

    https://x.com/nigel_farage/status/2069717952354554285?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 10,190
    edited 7:48AM
    Nigelb said:

    Pulpstar said:

    What the fucking fuck is going on with school closures - never would have happened if we hadn't had Covid I reckon.

    Primary school rolls have dropped around 5% in the last half decade (birthrates and crackdown on immigration), and will likely fall another 7% by the end of the decade.
    Unless you switch from per pupil funding, and maintain overall funding in order to reduce class sizes, school closures are inevitable.
    I thought pulpstar was referring to the temporary heat closures?

    Teachers Kids today, gone soft, innit?
  • Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 5,273
    edited 7:51AM
    MattW said:

    HYUFD said:

    'Trump describes Burnham as 'the mayor of a town' and 'extremely liberal'

    Donald Trump has given his first public reaction to the prospect of the former Mayor of Greater Manchester Andy Burnham becoming prime minister.

    Campaigning during the Makerfield by-election, Burnham said the UK needed to avoid what he called the "polarised, poisonous politics" of the US.

    Asked his view of the current frontrunner to replace Sir Keir Starmer, Trump described him as "the mayor of a town" and said he had heard Burnham was "extremely liberal".'

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/videos/cly81w5g1qwo

    Does Trump still approve of Mamdani? He was positive about him when remined that Mamdani had called him a 'despot with fascist tendencies':

    https://youtu.be/vR9g4lJNTj0?t=59

    I'd say is a better tactic for Burnham to stick to his values, rather than try and navigate Trump's ever changing deranged ramblings, and to ignore the random Trump verbal knee jerks, which should perhaps normally be forgotten 6 hours later.

    I'd also say that Trump may be a species of lame duck very, very soon - which may make a difference.
    Ignoring Trump is not enough for Burnham. That's broadly what Starmer did, once he was past his overtly a***licking phase of the first year which essentially defines him even now. Push back is needed, not necessarily to the extent of Carney and now Meloni, but enough to be noticed here as a change of approach. And the more that Burnham does so, the more it allows him to put Farage and Badenoch on the spot.

    Not only is Trump heading towards being a lame duck (as you say), the geopolitical need to appease him has receded now that Ukraine is increasingly holding its own despite the loss of much of the support from the US.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 12,955
    Benpointer said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    “It turns out appointing a spiteful class warrior as education secretary was a disaster,” said Badenoch.

    This one was too much for Starmer. “She grew up in poverty,” he said. It was a suitable enough note for his time to end on. If anything has defined the Starmer era, it has been the Four Yorkshiremenisation of politics. “Her story,” he said, “is an incredible story of social mobility and success.”

    Starmer’s government is full of incredible stories of social mobility, of which they are all extremely proud. None of them seem to have noticed that they all grew up under Margaret Thatcher.

    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/kemi-badenoch-keir-starmer-cabinet-mpcbvn5z9

    They grew up under Margaret Thatcher; they grew up in poverty.

    Let's see if we can spot the connection there.
    Ah but the poverty was created by Wilson and Callaghan! :)
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 25,628
    IanB2 said:

    SandyRentool said:

    Interesting that a third prefer Starmer to Burnham.

    Even a Burnhamphobe such as me wouldn't go that far.

    There was a lady caller to LBC who was in tears at losing Starmer as PM
    Was her name Kemi?
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 43,621
    ‪@chadbourn.bsky.social‬

    Overnight Ukraine hit two of three oil refineries in Ufa, Bashkortostan, a whopping 1500 km from the frontline.

    #explodey
  • eekeek Posts: 34,210
    edited 7:51AM
    Theuniondivvie said:

    Roger said:

    Looks like Farage is dead in the water. It's difficult to see what he can do about it. A one man band sinking. You could feel sorry for those Tories who jumped ship last year if only they weren't such shits.

    Talking of shits Badenoch is getting hammered by Bridget Phillipson in an interview with Nick Robinson. What a performance! I've never particularly rated BP but I suppose she wouldn't have have achieved what she has if she wasn't any good. Her put down of Badenoch was tuned to perfection.

    Nige has decided defender of working class white boys is the way to go. Every lad should have the chance of receiving a £5m ‘gift’ from a crypto billionaire.

    White working-class boys are currently the lowest-performing group in the country’s education system thanks to the Equality Act.

    Reform will scrap it and return Britain to a meritocracy.

    https://x.com/nigel_farage/status/2069717952354554285?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q
    There is a whopping large missing step between

    working-class white boys are currently the lowest-performing group and the equality act being part of the issue.

    working-class white boys have been and are the lowest performing group because other parents but more focus on the Education of their children and have higher expectations.

    Once again Farage is finding something that allows his voters to blame someone other than themselves.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 64,004
    edited 7:50AM
    Theuniondivvie said:

    Roger said:

    Looks like Farage is dead in the water. It's difficult to see what he can do about it. A one man band sinking. You could feel sorry for those Tories who jumped ship last year if only they weren't such shits.

    Talking of shits Badenoch is getting hammered by Bridget Phillipson in an interview with Nick Robinson. What a performance! I've never particularly rated BP but I suppose she wouldn't have have achieved what she has if she wasn't any good. Her put down of Badenoch was tuned to perfection.

    Nige has decided defender of working class white boys is the way to go. Every lad should have the chance of receiving a £5m ‘gift’ from a crypto billionaire.

    White working-class boys are currently the lowest-performing group in the country’s education system thanks to the Equality Act.

    Reform will scrap it and return Britain to a meritocracy.

    https://x.com/nigel_farage/status/2069717952354554285?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q
    Curse my impoverished yet undeniably middle class ineligibility for a free £5m donation with no anticipation of return favours!

    Edited extra bit: on the plus side, I have just found a fan which has a small but positive effect.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 10,190
    Benpointer said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    “It turns out appointing a spiteful class warrior as education secretary was a disaster,” said Badenoch.

    This one was too much for Starmer. “She grew up in poverty,” he said. It was a suitable enough note for his time to end on. If anything has defined the Starmer era, it has been the Four Yorkshiremenisation of politics. “Her story,” he said, “is an incredible story of social mobility and success.”

    Starmer’s government is full of incredible stories of social mobility, of which they are all extremely proud. None of them seem to have noticed that they all grew up under Margaret Thatcher.

    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/kemi-badenoch-keir-starmer-cabinet-mpcbvn5z9

    They grew up under Margaret Thatcher; they grew up in poverty.

    Let's see if we can spot the connection there.
    The greater the inequality, the greater the (maximum) possibilities for social mobility though :wink:
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 10,190
    SandyRentool said:

    IanB2 said:

    SandyRentool said:

    Interesting that a third prefer Starmer to Burnham.

    Even a Burnhamphobe such as me wouldn't go that far.

    There was a lady caller to LBC who was in tears at losing Starmer as PM
    Was her name Kemi?
    Rachel
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 59,233
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    South Africa and South Korea really have done the dirty on Scotland.

    SA have been rubbish throughout. How on earth did they win that? SK have a better GD than Scotland so that is another team ahead of us already.

    As I wandered home this morning through a mist not entirely made of Scotland's tears I reflected that our biggest mistake was not really going after Haiti and trying to improve our GD. Matches against teams ranked 5th and 6th in the world were never likely to end well. We needed more goals against the 1 weak team in our group.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 25,628
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    “It turns out appointing a spiteful class warrior as education secretary was a disaster,” said Badenoch.

    This one was too much for Starmer. “She grew up in poverty,” he said. It was a suitable enough note for his time to end on. If anything has defined the Starmer era, it has been the Four Yorkshiremenisation of politics. “Her story,” he said, “is an incredible story of social mobility and success.”

    Starmer’s government is full of incredible stories of social mobility, of which they are all extremely proud. None of them seem to have noticed that they all grew up under Margaret Thatcher.

    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/kemi-badenoch-keir-starmer-cabinet-mpcbvn5z9

    Educated in schools run by Labour-run LEAs.

  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 48,100
    eek said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Roger said:

    Looks like Farage is dead in the water. It's difficult to see what he can do about it. A one man band sinking. You could feel sorry for those Tories who jumped ship last year if only they weren't such shits.

    Talking of shits Badenoch is getting hammered by Bridget Phillipson in an interview with Nick Robinson. What a performance! I've never particularly rated BP but I suppose she wouldn't have have achieved what she has if she wasn't any good. Her put down of Badenoch was tuned to perfection.

    Nige has decided defender of working class white boys is the way to go. Every lad should have the chance of receiving a £5m ‘gift’ from a crypto billionaire.

    White working-class boys are currently the lowest-performing group in the country’s education system thanks to the Equality Act.

    Reform will scrap it and return Britain to a meritocracy.

    https://x.com/nigel_farage/status/2069717952354554285?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q
    There is a whopping large missing step between

    working-class white boys are currently the lowest-performing group and the equality act being part of the issue.

    working-class white boys have been and are the lowest performing group because other parents but more focus on the Education of their children and have higher expectations.

    Once again Farage is finding something that allows his voters to blame someone other than themselves.
    I think we can be sure that Farage won’t put any blame on the parents of working class white boys, he needs their votes!
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 55,662
    Benpointer said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    tlg86 said:

    Third like Scotland.

    Do we have figures for Badenoch v Farage? That could be quite important.

    Good morning, everyone.

    How the anti-Reform tactical voting works come the General Election will also be crucial. Easy to vote against them in a by-election but tougher in many seats in a nationwide vote. No major party wants to give up on hundreds of seats.
    This is a very good point - it's not instantly clear in my constituency North Dorset for example. Maybe I will have to vote Tory for the first time in my life but how do I know?

    It will be one of the key LibDem targets, and the 2024 result - unlike those prior - put the LDs clearly in contention which should, if they campaign dynamically, allow them to pull over Labour and Green voters to beat the Tories. Of course a lot depends on the national state, especially of Tory v Reform, at the time - but I'd be surprised based on the current state of politics if voting Tory to defeat Reform proves a better choice than voting LibDem to defeat Reform.

  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 17,585
    Roger said:

    Looks like Farage is dead in the water. It's difficult to see what he can do about it. A one man band sinking. You could feel sorry for those Tories who jumped ship last year if only they weren't such shits.

    Talking of shits Badenoch is getting hammered by Bridget Phillipson in an interview with Nick Robinson. What a performance! I've never particularly rated BP but I suppose she wouldn't have have achieved what she has if she wasn't any good. Her put down of Badenoch was tuned to perfection.

    I think Badenoch has done harm to the Tory interest. I belong to a very large group of people who are middle class, instinctively Tory, have no problem with private education but - long unvarying family tradition in our case - always use the local state schools out of choice. This group is not small and BP, as a northern catholic with a catholic moral vision about society is not precisely where I am, but she is much closer than Kemi.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 7,989
    Roger said:

    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    HYUFD said:

    Burnham leads both Badenoch and Farage but Farage by more than he leads Kemi, so Kemi and the Tories may still be the best bet in marginal seats to beat Burnham and Labour

    Yes, and the Aberdeen South by-election suggests also that the Conservatives are, at the very least, no longer quite so toxic.
    Baddenoch is doing her very best to put that right!
    Badenoch is right. Putting vat on school fees is spiteful and nasty and typical of Labour.the Nasty party.
    That's the Election slogan in a nutshell
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 62,088
    edited 8:02AM
    HYUFD said:

    MattW said:

    HYUFD said:

    'Trump describes Burnham as 'the mayor of a town' and 'extremely liberal'

    Donald Trump has given his first public reaction to the prospect of the former Mayor of Greater Manchester Andy Burnham becoming prime minister.

    Campaigning during the Makerfield by-election, Burnham said the UK needed to avoid what he called the "polarised, poisonous politics" of the US.

    Asked his view of the current frontrunner to replace Sir Keir Starmer, Trump described him as "the mayor of a town" and said he had heard Burnham was "extremely liberal".'

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/videos/cly81w5g1qwo

    Does Trump still approve of Mamdani? He was positive about him when remined that Mamdani had called him a 'despot with fascist tendencies':

    https://youtu.be/vR9g4lJNTj0?t=59

    I'd say is a better tactic for Burnham to stick to his values, rather than try and navigate Trump's ever changing deranged ramblings, and to ignore the random Trump verbal knee jerks, which should perhaps normally be forgotten 6 hours later.

    I'd also say that Trump may be a species of lame duck very, very soon - which may make a difference.
    “America the Beautiful will NEVER be a Communist Country!!!” Trump wrote on his social media platform in the early hours of Wednesday morning, responding to a slate of victories for Democrats endorsed by left-leaning New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani.

    “Many Communists running in badly failing Blue States,” the president said in another message to his followers.'

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-communism-primary-elections-losers-b3001920.html
    This is part of my reasoning for thinking the Dems might not take the House in November.

    These NY candidates, the friends of Mamdani, are all properly crazy communists.

    They want to close prisons, get rid of the police, think that the world’s problems today are all Israel’s fault, and that 9/11 was America’s fault. Running in New York!
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 27,914
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    tlg86 said:

    Third like Scotland.

    Do we have figures for Badenoch v Farage? That could be quite important.

    This is from April.

    Badenoch beats Farage 67 to 33.

    https://x.com/LukeTryl/status/2050522237677994400
    Thanks! That's quite interesting. She also beats Davey (just). Arguably those two battles are as important as her v the Labour leader.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 13,539
    Sandpit said:

    HYUFD said:

    MattW said:

    HYUFD said:

    'Trump describes Burnham as 'the mayor of a town' and 'extremely liberal'

    Donald Trump has given his first public reaction to the prospect of the former Mayor of Greater Manchester Andy Burnham becoming prime minister.

    Campaigning during the Makerfield by-election, Burnham said the UK needed to avoid what he called the "polarised, poisonous politics" of the US.

    Asked his view of the current frontrunner to replace Sir Keir Starmer, Trump described him as "the mayor of a town" and said he had heard Burnham was "extremely liberal".'

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/videos/cly81w5g1qwo

    Does Trump still approve of Mamdani? He was positive about him when remined that Mamdani had called him a 'despot with fascist tendencies':

    https://youtu.be/vR9g4lJNTj0?t=59

    I'd say is a better tactic for Burnham to stick to his values, rather than try and navigate Trump's ever changing deranged ramblings, and to ignore the random Trump verbal knee jerks, which should perhaps normally be forgotten 6 hours later.

    I'd also say that Trump may be a species of lame duck very, very soon - which may make a difference.
    “America the Beautiful will NEVER be a Communist Country!!!” Trump wrote on his social media platform in the early hours of Wednesday morning, responding to a slate of victories for Democrats endorsed by left-leaning New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani.

    “Many Communists running in badly failing Blue States,” the president said in another message to his followers.'

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-communism-primary-elections-losers-b3001920.html
    This is part of my reasoning for thinking the Dems might not take the House in November.

    These NY candidates, the friends of Mamdani, are all properly crazy communists.

    They want to close prisons, get rid of the police, think that the world’s problems today are all Israel’s fault, and that 9/11 was America’s fault. Running in New York!
    For every bit of Dem batshit crazy I can raise you Rep batshit crazy in spades.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 33,752
    FPT:
    Pulpstar said:

    0.48% even means a cut or at least no more for my parents in Coventry and their house is enormous lol.

    Would be a cut for all but the very very largest houses for the whole of the wider Midlands and the north.

    What do you think about the impact on house values?

    I think it would be modest - in theory I guess one rational model would be the present value of an annuity where the premium is equivalent to the change in annual taxation, plus something to reflect Stamp Duty changes including the effect on market dynamics.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 43,621
    ‪@mitchellst.bsky.social‬

    My model run this morning has Scotland with a 32% chance of progressing with them expecting them to finish 9th in the 3rd place table.

    https://bsky.app/profile/mitchellst.bsky.social/post/3mp3xlrpjrs2q
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 17,585
    edited 8:08AM
    Theuniondivvie said:

    eek said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Roger said:

    Looks like Farage is dead in the water. It's difficult to see what he can do about it. A one man band sinking. You could feel sorry for those Tories who jumped ship last year if only they weren't such shits.

    Talking of shits Badenoch is getting hammered by Bridget Phillipson in an interview with Nick Robinson. What a performance! I've never particularly rated BP but I suppose she wouldn't have have achieved what she has if she wasn't any good. Her put down of Badenoch was tuned to perfection.

    Nige has decided defender of working class white boys is the way to go. Every lad should have the chance of receiving a £5m ‘gift’ from a crypto billionaire.

    White working-class boys are currently the lowest-performing group in the country’s education system thanks to the Equality Act.

    Reform will scrap it and return Britain to a meritocracy.

    https://x.com/nigel_farage/status/2069717952354554285?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q
    There is a whopping large missing step between

    working-class white boys are currently the lowest-performing group and the equality act being part of the issue.

    working-class white boys have been and are the lowest performing group because other parents but more focus on the Education of their children and have higher expectations.

    Once again Farage is finding something that allows his voters to blame someone other than themselves.
    I think we can be sure that Farage won’t put any blame on the parents of working class white boys, he needs their votes!
    If you wanted to know how to best educate WWC boys in my area you could put together an interesting group of WWC men who have more or less never passed a school exam in their lives but now run businesses which employ people and provide essential services in a mostly rural community. You could also add add a sprinkling of WWC boys, now men, who went from the local comp to Oxford and Cambridge and are now senior professionals in law,, engineering and so on.

    Is there any group less understood by media and politicans than the white working class? Rule one is: Stop confusing the WWC with the benefits junkie class.

  • MattWMattW Posts: 33,752
    Dopermean said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Dopermean said:

    eek said:

    Dopermean said:

    Dopermean said:

    dixiedean said:

    Dopermean said:

    eek said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Ratters said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    londonpubman said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    PeterCairns said:

    BatteryCorrectHorse said:

    https://x.com/mbdaytrading/status/2069698353307296240

    Andy Burnham is backing a proposal to scrap Council Tax and Stamp Duty, replacing them with a Proportional Property Tax (PPT).

    📌 Rate: 0.48% of current property value
    📌 Cap: £1,200 per year initially
    📌 Supporters claim 77% of households would save an average £556 annually

    A major reform if it ever gains traction. Winners and losers would depend heavily on property values and location.

    Average Band D in England is just over £2k so capping it at £1,200 and 77% paying less suggests in terms of properties mid Band D.

    Liverpools band A is around £1,600 so unless people in London are going to get hammered I can’t see how they can hold it at £1,200?

    Peter.
    My thought exactly.

    Can't be much lower sum than people are currently paying is my guess.
    Lot of people paying more in London!
    King of the North
    Slayer of the South....

    One of the problems of selling this as a policy is that if I have no intention of selling my home, there is no saving in Stamp Duty by its abolition for me. So it has to stack up against current Council Tax for mot.


    You always have the option of downsizing and reducing your costs. The costs of moving will be much lower without stamp duty.

    I mean 'you' as in people in a similar position often end up with family homes bigger than they need. Which is fine. But it's also fair you pay your fair share as much as someone who moves homes more often for their career or to climb the properly ladder or to downside.

    Stamp duty is just a really, really terrible tax.
    "always have the option to sell" --> Granny forced to sell by Burnham's hated new tax....

    It has the potential to be Burnham's WFA squared....
    Not if you allow the people impacted to put the unpaid amount as a charge against the property.

    Equally if you are that house rich and cash poor it’s probably time to move
    Does this mean complete central government control of local government funding?
    Can't see that being democratic or why places with higher property values should be subsidizing refuse collection in places with lower values...
    That's before the economic illiteracy of collecting less than currently, what makes up the shortfall?

    Politically and economically you need to be very careful f'ing with taxes that could have large (obvious but stupidly ignored) consequences.

    Barring the councils for which the system was originally fixed (Westminster, Wandsworth and City of London), there are no London Band As that aren't comfortably over £1200, I expect that's true for England and Wales.
    It's a cap of an increase of 1200.
    There'll be many more winners than losers. Most of them in the North.
    Levelling up in practice.
    After housing costs there's a large proportion of people in the South with quite low disposable income comparatively... probably in the main Labour voters
    Is this being paid by the property owner or the resident?

    I have very low expectations, though I vote for him over Corbyn, but it's all pointing to him being a massive fuckup.
    So having found the Fairer share website, I understand that this is to be paid by the resident not the property owner.
    So renters in areas with high property values paying more tax on top of their high rents.

    With a cap of £1200 increase, so making it highly regressive, the effect will be a tax cut for comfortably off homeowners at the expense of struggling renters.

    If it's going to be changed to make it a property value tax (which I'd support) then it should be levelled on the property owners.

    But that would simply be passed on to the tenants via higher rents.

    I guess the devil here is in the details and there is going to be a lot of details - 1 of which is that income tax seems to be what councils will be getting a share of with this property tax going to central Government.
    Even if landlords try to pass it on via higher rents, I expect that would be a better result for renters than paying a % of the value of a property you don't own.

    How are you selling this to someone in their 20s paying 40-50% of their disposable income to rent a 1 bed
    flat? They'll now have to pay another £100 per month because the huge rent they struggle to pay for the flat they don't own means it's worth £x00K?

    My memory of that stage of life is my colleagues up north who'd bought themselves a flat or house and a car moaning about London weighting, while myself and my colleagues in London were renting rooms in a houseshare or maybe stretching to renting a 1 bed with a partner.
    You are quite mad if you rent a one bedroom flat.

    When I was in my early (and mid) 20s, I lived in a house share in East London, because that meant I could save for a deposit on a flat. If I'd rented a one bedroom apartment, I would never have been able to save.
    As did I, my disposable income was still less than my colleagues outside London.
    Not so many houseshares any more, the owners have converted them to HMOs and rent is a larger % of people's income.
    An additional land value tax levied on the owners is fine but what fairer share are proposing is regressive.
    A few comments.

    Areas with higher house price increase since 1991 have had half a lifetime of significant underpaying of what their Council Tax should actually have been, so sympathy is very difficult to generate.

    The beneficiaries on the Proportional Property Tax model are between 60% and 80% of people on the models, as Stamp Duty is slated to be abolished. That would free up the property market, and make it easier for first time buyers in terms of requirement for up front cash.

    I think that there are a couple of problems to do with the proposals are they are, as they were created some time ago and some things have shifted.

    - Stamp Duty rates have, I think, been increased some way in those years. I'm not totally convinced that full abolition could be achieved from the 0.48% PPT rate.

    - The proposals around rental have some very rough edges. Since 0.48% could be about 6% up to around 20% of the market rent for a property, that will make a lot of properties loss making. It would place particular pressure on properties rented at below market rents. At the least that is a transition to be managed; at worst it could gut some sectors of the rental market.

    - There will need to be some consideration of renters who currently receive a reduction of exemption for Council Tax.

    - And the liability for Council Tax paid on Council and Socially rented houses would need to be considered; this is currently paid by the tenant.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 57,210
    squareroot2 said:

    Roger said:

    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    HYUFD said:

    Burnham leads both Badenoch and Farage but Farage by more than he leads Kemi, so Kemi and the Tories may still be the best bet in marginal seats to beat Burnham and Labour

    Yes, and the Aberdeen South by-election suggests also that the Conservatives are, at the very least, no longer quite so toxic.
    Baddenoch is doing her very best to put that right!
    Badenoch is right. Putting vat on school fees is spiteful and nasty and typical of Labour.the Nasty party.
    That's the Election slogan in a nutshell
    It might work well on the 7% of parents with kids at private school, less so on the 93% who do not.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 14,461
    edited 8:17AM
    MattW said:

    Dopermean said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Dopermean said:

    eek said:

    Dopermean said:

    Dopermean said:

    dixiedean said:

    Dopermean said:

    eek said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Ratters said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    londonpubman said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    PeterCairns said:

    BatteryCorrectHorse said:

    https://x.com/mbdaytrading/status/2069698353307296240

    Andy Burnham is backing a proposal to scrap Council Tax and Stamp Duty, replacing them with a Proportional Property Tax (PPT).

    📌 Rate: 0.48% of current property value
    📌 Cap: £1,200 per year initially
    📌 Supporters claim 77% of households would save an average £556 annually

    A major reform if it ever gains traction. Winners and losers would depend heavily on property values and location.

    Average Band D in England is just over £2k so capping it at £1,200 and 77% paying less suggests in terms of properties mid Band D.

    Liverpools band A is around £1,600 so unless people in London are going to get hammered I can’t see how they can hold it at £1,200?

    Peter.
    My thought exactly.

    Can't be much lower sum than people are currently paying is my guess.
    Lot of people paying more in London!
    King of the North
    Slayer of the South....

    One of the problems of selling this as a policy is that if I have no intention of selling my home, there is no saving in Stamp Duty by its abolition for me. So it has to stack up against current Council Tax for mot.


    You always have the option of downsizing and reducing your costs. The costs of moving will be much lower without stamp duty.

    I mean 'you' as in people in a similar position often end up with family homes bigger than they need. Which is fine. But it's also fair you pay your fair share as much as someone who moves homes more often for their career or to climb the properly ladder or to downside.

    Stamp duty is just a really, really terrible tax.
    "always have the option to sell" --> Granny forced to sell by Burnham's hated new tax....

    It has the potential to be Burnham's WFA squared....
    Not if you allow the people impacted to put the unpaid amount as a charge against the property.

    Equally if you are that house rich and cash poor it’s probably time to move
    Does this mean complete central government control of local government funding?
    Can't see that being democratic or why places with higher property values should be subsidizing refuse collection in places with lower values...
    That's before the economic illiteracy of collecting less than currently, what makes up the shortfall?

    Politically and economically you need to be very careful f'ing with taxes that could have large (obvious but stupidly ignored) consequences.

    Barring the councils for which the system was originally fixed (Westminster, Wandsworth and City of London), there are no London Band As that aren't comfortably over £1200, I expect that's true for England and Wales.
    It's a cap of an increase of 1200.
    There'll be many more winners than losers. Most of them in the North.
    Levelling up in practice.
    After housing costs there's a large proportion of people in the South with quite low disposable income comparatively... probably in the main Labour voters
    Is this being paid by the property owner or the resident?

    I have very low expectations, though I vote for him over Corbyn, but it's all pointing to him being a massive fuckup.
    So having found the Fairer share website, I understand that this is to be paid by the resident not the property owner.
    So renters in areas with high property values paying more tax on top of their high rents.

    With a cap of £1200 increase, so making it highly regressive, the effect will be a tax cut for comfortably off homeowners at the expense of struggling renters.

    If it's going to be changed to make it a property value tax (which I'd support) then it should be levelled on the property owners.

    But that would simply be passed on to the tenants via higher rents.

    I guess the devil here is in the details and there is going to be a lot of details - 1 of which is that income tax seems to be what councils will be getting a share of with this property tax going to central Government.
    Even if landlords try to pass it on via higher rents, I expect that would be a better result for renters than paying a % of the value of a property you don't own.

    How are you selling this to someone in their 20s paying 40-50% of their disposable income to rent a 1 bed
    flat? They'll now have to pay another £100 per month because the huge rent they struggle to pay for the flat they don't own means it's worth £x00K?

    My memory of that stage of life is my colleagues up north who'd bought themselves a flat or house and a car moaning about London weighting, while myself and my colleagues in London were renting rooms in a houseshare or maybe stretching to renting a 1 bed with a partner.
    You are quite mad if you rent a one bedroom flat.

    When I was in my early (and mid) 20s, I lived in a house share in East London, because that meant I could save for a deposit on a flat. If I'd rented a one bedroom apartment, I would never have been able to save.
    As did I, my disposable income was still less than my colleagues outside London.
    Not so many houseshares any more, the owners have converted them to HMOs and rent is a larger % of people's income.
    An additional land value tax levied on the owners is fine but what fairer share are proposing is regressive.
    A few comments.

    Areas with higher house price increase since 1991 have had half a lifetime of significant underpaying of what their Council Tax should actually have been, so sympathy is very difficult to generate.

    The beneficiaries on the Proportional Property Tax model are between 60% and 80% of people on the models, as Stamp Duty is slated to be abolished. That would free up the property market, and make it easier for first time buyers in terms of requirement for up front cash.

    I think that there are a couple of problems to do with the proposals are they are, as they were created some time ago and some things have shifted.

    - Stamp Duty rates have, I think, been increased some way in those years. I'm not totally convinced that full abolition could be achieved from the 0.48% PPT rate.

    - The proposals around rental have some very rough edges. Since 0.48% could be about 6% up to around 20% of the market rent for a property, that will make a lot of properties loss making. It would place particular pressure on properties rented at below market rents. At the least that is a transition to be managed; at worst it could gut some sectors of the rental market.

    - There will need to be some consideration of renters who currently receive a reduction of exemption for Council Tax.

    - And the liability for Council Tax paid on Council and Socially rented houses would need to be considered; this is currently paid by the tenant.
    House prices will probably drop quite a bit too because having a very high home value will no longer be seen as attractive. This is a good thing, but it’s slightly concerning that so few people can recognise that dynamic response. You’d want 0.6% to be safe.

    It’s tempting to apply lots of discounts (disabled, children, widows etc) but doing that would end up distorting things just as much as the current system does.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 23,553
    IanB2 said:

    SandyRentool said:

    Interesting that a third prefer Starmer to Burnham.

    Even a Burnhamphobe such as me wouldn't go that far.

    There was a lady caller to LBC who was in tears at losing Starmer as PM
    Was she called Victoria?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 137,238
    Eabhal said:

    Benpointer said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    “It turns out appointing a spiteful class warrior as education secretary was a disaster,” said Badenoch.

    This one was too much for Starmer. “She grew up in poverty,” he said. It was a suitable enough note for his time to end on. If anything has defined the Starmer era, it has been the Four Yorkshiremenisation of politics. “Her story,” he said, “is an incredible story of social mobility and success.”

    Starmer’s government is full of incredible stories of social mobility, of which they are all extremely proud. None of them seem to have noticed that they all grew up under Margaret Thatcher.

    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/kemi-badenoch-keir-starmer-cabinet-mpcbvn5z9

    They grew up under Margaret Thatcher; they grew up in poverty.

    Let's see if we can spot the connection there.
    Yep, Rayner/Streeting etc are impressive because their extreme examples of social mobility is so unusual.

    But we have to be careful here - I have colleagues who have been at least as successful as me, and have exhibited significant social mobility, but haven’t been able to consolidate that because all their cash is going to private rents and their student loan (particularly if English). They didn’t get a deposit as gift as I did.

    Income is only half the story - whether you can build wealth is the bit we are missing at the moment. As usual, I remind PB that housing costs across all forms of tenure haven’t increased over the last 30 years. It’s the size of the private rental market that’s changed - and a home-ownership Thatcherite should be appalled by that. It’s why the Conservatives are now the party of landlords and pensioners rather than aspirational workers.

    https://www.resolutionfoundation.org/major-programme/housing-indicators/housing-tenure/

    https://www.resolutionfoundation.org/major-programme/housing-indicators/housing-affordability/
    Reform now lead with pensioners, Kemi has promised to abolish stamp duty
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 23,553
    Pulpstar said:

    What the fucking fuck is going on with school closures - never would have happened if we hadn't had Covid I reckon.

    Same at the Uni (research doesn't stop when the kiddies go home). We've closed our labs and the uni says to work from home if possible.
    I can't WFH (three year old son really shouldn't be commenting at an exam board) so I'm in a hot office. But its not that bad.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 137,238
    Foxy said:

    squareroot2 said:

    Roger said:

    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    HYUFD said:

    Burnham leads both Badenoch and Farage but Farage by more than he leads Kemi, so Kemi and the Tories may still be the best bet in marginal seats to beat Burnham and Labour

    Yes, and the Aberdeen South by-election suggests also that the Conservatives are, at the very least, no longer quite so toxic.
    Baddenoch is doing her very best to put that right!
    Badenoch is right. Putting vat on school fees is spiteful and nasty and typical of Labour.the Nasty party.
    That's the Election slogan in a nutshell
    It might work well on the 7% of parents with kids at private school, less so on the 93% who do not.
    Some of them might want more affordable private schools or scholarships for their children it will hit
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 14,461
    edited 8:21AM
    Pulpstar said:

    Nigelb said:

    Pulpstar said:

    What the fucking fuck is going on with school closures - never would have happened if we hadn't had Covid I reckon.

    Primary school rolls have dropped around 5% in the last half decade (birthrates and crackdown on immigration), and will likely fall another 7% by the end of the decade.
    Unless you switch from per pupil funding, and maintain overall funding in order to reduce class sizes, school closures are inevitable.
    I mean today lol.
    It’s very unusual this heat and I think the closures would have happened anyway. All those ancient brick schools in the south are going to be brutal by Friday. Teenagers in a pizza oven.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 23,275
    edited 8:22AM
    You can tell Kemi hit the back of the net yesterday given so many sour faced lefties are still whining about her gloriously bitchy performance today 😂
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 137,238
    Sandpit said:

    HYUFD said:

    MattW said:

    HYUFD said:

    'Trump describes Burnham as 'the mayor of a town' and 'extremely liberal'

    Donald Trump has given his first public reaction to the prospect of the former Mayor of Greater Manchester Andy Burnham becoming prime minister.

    Campaigning during the Makerfield by-election, Burnham said the UK needed to avoid what he called the "polarised, poisonous politics" of the US.

    Asked his view of the current frontrunner to replace Sir Keir Starmer, Trump described him as "the mayor of a town" and said he had heard Burnham was "extremely liberal".'

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/videos/cly81w5g1qwo

    Does Trump still approve of Mamdani? He was positive about him when remined that Mamdani had called him a 'despot with fascist tendencies':

    https://youtu.be/vR9g4lJNTj0?t=59

    I'd say is a better tactic for Burnham to stick to his values, rather than try and navigate Trump's ever changing deranged ramblings, and to ignore the random Trump verbal knee jerks, which should perhaps normally be forgotten 6 hours later.

    I'd also say that Trump may be a species of lame duck very, very soon - which may make a difference.
    “America the Beautiful will NEVER be a Communist Country!!!” Trump wrote on his social media platform in the early hours of Wednesday morning, responding to a slate of victories for Democrats endorsed by left-leaning New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani.

    “Many Communists running in badly failing Blue States,” the president said in another message to his followers.'

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-communism-primary-elections-losers-b3001920.html
    This is part of my reasoning for thinking the Dems might not take the House in November.

    These NY candidates, the friends of Mamdani, are all properly crazy communists.

    They want to close prisons, get rid of the police, think that the world’s problems today are all Israel’s fault, and that 9/11 was America’s fault. Running in New York!
    Yes but New York city is so left liberal they will probably win anyway
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 14,461
    edited 8:24AM
    HYUFD said:

    Eabhal said:

    Benpointer said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    “It turns out appointing a spiteful class warrior as education secretary was a disaster,” said Badenoch.

    This one was too much for Starmer. “She grew up in poverty,” he said. It was a suitable enough note for his time to end on. If anything has defined the Starmer era, it has been the Four Yorkshiremenisation of politics. “Her story,” he said, “is an incredible story of social mobility and success.”

    Starmer’s government is full of incredible stories of social mobility, of which they are all extremely proud. None of them seem to have noticed that they all grew up under Margaret Thatcher.

    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/kemi-badenoch-keir-starmer-cabinet-mpcbvn5z9

    They grew up under Margaret Thatcher; they grew up in poverty.

    Let's see if we can spot the connection there.
    Yep, Rayner/Streeting etc are impressive because their extreme examples of social mobility is so unusual.

    But we have to be careful here - I have colleagues who have been at least as successful as me, and have exhibited significant social mobility, but haven’t been able to consolidate that because all their cash is going to private rents and their student loan (particularly if English). They didn’t get a deposit as gift as I did.

    Income is only half the story - whether you can build wealth is the bit we are missing at the moment. As usual, I remind PB that housing costs across all forms of tenure haven’t increased over the last 30 years. It’s the size of the private rental market that’s changed - and a home-ownership Thatcherite should be appalled by that. It’s why the Conservatives are now the party of landlords and pensioners rather than aspirational workers.

    https://www.resolutionfoundation.org/major-programme/housing-indicators/housing-tenure/

    https://www.resolutionfoundation.org/major-programme/housing-indicators/housing-affordability/
    Reform now lead with pensioners, Kemi has promised to abolish stamp duty
    If she sticks to that along with reducing student loan interest to CPI, accepts and embraces electricity as the energy of the future, and stops excitedly discussing a civil war, I think the Conservatives could do well.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 48,100
    The culture war becomes an actual culture war.
    Look, just because the Nazis banned Bauhaus and we want to cleanse Bauhaus from our culture doesn't mean we are Nazis!

    'German state election draws Bauhaus into AfD culture war

    "Bauhaus stands for deracination. Bauhaus stands for dislocation of architecture," Hans-Thomas Tillschneider, the AfD's cultural spokesperson, told Reuters. "Bauhaus is the architecture of globalisation – of 'Anywhere's', so to speak."'

    https://www.quora.com/In-WW2-did-Germans-call-the-British-slang-names-like-Engländer-or-Schweinehund
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 23,553
    Benpointer said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    South Africa and South Korea really have done the dirty on Scotland.

    Benpointers guide to Scotland's travel prospects:

    Group D Australia v Paraguay has 'stitch-up' 'draw' written all over it, allowing both teams to qualify. Same in group F with Japan v Sweden, and of course group J with Algeria v Austria, who have previous in these things. But, those all involve third placed teams already above Scotland so don't really impact Scotland's chances.

    Of those who might overtake Scotland:

    Group E: I can't see either Ecuador beating Germany or Curaçao beating Ivory Coast, so nether of them are an issue.
    Group G: Belgium should beat NZ and Egypt v Iran could well be a draw so I'd expect Iran to push Scotland down to 8th place.
    Group H: Another possibility for a stitch-up in Spain v Uruguay where a draw lets Uruguay leap-frog Scotland but I suspect Spain will win that one.
    Group I: Likely that Senegal beat Iraq - Scotland now down to 9th place.
    Group K: Congo are going to beat Uzbekistan to push Scotland to 10th place
    Group L: Ghana beating Croatia be three goals would be handy but I can't see it happening.

    Summary: "We're doomed!"
    Scotland did really well to top their qualifying group but they were handed a terrible group in the finals. Morocco and Brazil rank in the top 6 in the world? Even then they had a shot at getting one more point, but blew it in the first couple of minutes against Morroco.

    For all of the joy for England fans against Croatia, I have a nasty feeling in my waters that we aren't getting beyond the quarters. A horrible exit on penalties awaits after a dull 0-0 grind like the Ghana game.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 57,210
    Theuniondivvie said:

    Roger said:

    Looks like Farage is dead in the water. It's difficult to see what he can do about it. A one man band sinking. You could feel sorry for those Tories who jumped ship last year if only they weren't such shits.

    Talking of shits Badenoch is getting hammered by Bridget Phillipson in an interview with Nick Robinson. What a performance! I've never particularly rated BP but I suppose she wouldn't have have achieved what she has if she wasn't any good. Her put down of Badenoch was tuned to perfection.

    Nige has decided defender of working class white boys is the way to go. Every lad should have the chance of receiving a £5m ‘gift’ from a crypto billionaire.

    White working-class boys are currently the lowest-performing group in the country’s education system thanks to the Equality Act.

    Reform will scrap it and return Britain to a meritocracy.

    https://x.com/nigel_farage/status/2069717952354554285?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q
    Doesn't the school underperformance of WWC boys long predate the Equality Act of 2010, or indeed any other piece of similar legislation.

    I appreciate "Kes" is fiction, but it resonated because people recognised the issue even in the 1960s.
  • CiceroCicero Posts: 4,494
    Foxy said:

    squareroot2 said:

    Roger said:

    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    HYUFD said:

    Burnham leads both Badenoch and Farage but Farage by more than he leads Kemi, so Kemi and the Tories may still be the best bet in marginal seats to beat Burnham and Labour

    Yes, and the Aberdeen South by-election suggests also that the Conservatives are, at the very least, no longer quite so toxic.
    Baddenoch is doing her very best to put that right!
    Badenoch is right. Putting vat on school fees is spiteful and nasty and typical of Labour.the Nasty party.
    That's the Election slogan in a nutshell
    It might work well on the 7% of parents with kids at private school, less so on the 93% who do not.
    The 7% are absolutely livid, but since the largest part of them would never vote Labour, the class war thinks it has a victor. However there are quite a large number of unintended consequences which make the School fees VAT policy a net negative. However, as so often in the UK, the detail is all in the too difficult box and so nobody cares.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 33,752
    Eabhal said:

    MattW said:

    Dopermean said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Dopermean said:

    eek said:

    Dopermean said:

    Dopermean said:

    dixiedean said:

    Dopermean said:

    eek said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Ratters said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    londonpubman said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    PeterCairns said:

    BatteryCorrectHorse said:

    https://x.com/mbdaytrading/status/2069698353307296240

    Andy Burnham is backing a proposal to scrap Council Tax and Stamp Duty, replacing them with a Proportional Property Tax (PPT).

    📌 Rate: 0.48% of current property value
    📌 Cap: £1,200 per year initially
    📌 Supporters claim 77% of households would save an average £556 annually

    A major reform if it ever gains traction. Winners and losers would depend heavily on property values and location.

    Average Band D in England is just over £2k so capping it at £1,200 and 77% paying less suggests in terms of properties mid Band D.

    Liverpools band A is around £1,600 so unless people in London are going to get hammered I can’t see how they can hold it at £1,200?

    Peter.
    My thought exactly.

    Can't be much lower sum than people are currently paying is my guess.
    Lot of people paying more in London!
    King of the North
    Slayer of the South....

    One of the problems of selling this as a policy is that if I have no intention of selling my home, there is no saving in Stamp Duty by its abolition for me. So it has to stack up against current Council Tax for mot.


    You always have the option of downsizing and reducing your costs. The costs of moving will be much lower without stamp duty.

    I mean 'you' as in people in a similar position often end up with family homes bigger than they need. Which is fine. But it's also fair you pay your fair share as much as someone who moves homes more often for their career or to climb the properly ladder or to downside.

    Stamp duty is just a really, really terrible tax.
    "always have the option to sell" --> Granny forced to sell by Burnham's hated new tax....

    It has the potential to be Burnham's WFA squared....
    Not if you allow the people impacted to put the unpaid amount as a charge against the property.

    Equally if you are that house rich and cash poor it’s probably time to move
    Does this mean complete central government control of local government funding?
    Can't see that being democratic or why places with higher property values should be subsidizing refuse collection in places with lower values...
    That's before the economic illiteracy of collecting less than currently, what makes up the shortfall?

    Politically and economically you need to be very careful f'ing with taxes that could have large (obvious but stupidly ignored) consequences.

    Barring the councils for which the system was originally fixed (Westminster, Wandsworth and City of London), there are no London Band As that aren't comfortably over £1200, I expect that's true for England and Wales.
    It's a cap of an increase of 1200.
    There'll be many more winners than losers. Most of them in the North.
    Levelling up in practice.
    After housing costs there's a large proportion of people in the South with quite low disposable income comparatively... probably in the main Labour voters
    Is this being paid by the property owner or the resident?

    I have very low expectations, though I vote for him over Corbyn, but it's all pointing to him being a massive fuckup.
    So having found the Fairer share website, I understand that this is to be paid by the resident not the property owner.
    So renters in areas with high property values paying more tax on top of their high rents.

    With a cap of £1200 increase, so making it highly regressive, the effect will be a tax cut for comfortably off homeowners at the expense of struggling renters.

    If it's going to be changed to make it a property value tax (which I'd support) then it should be levelled on the property owners.

    But that would simply be passed on to the tenants via higher rents.

    I guess the devil here is in the details and there is going to be a lot of details - 1 of which is that income tax seems to be what councils will be getting a share of with this property tax going to central Government.
    Even if landlords try to pass it on via higher rents, I expect that would be a better result for renters than paying a % of the value of a property you don't own.

    How are you selling this to someone in their 20s paying 40-50% of their disposable income to rent a 1 bed
    flat? They'll now have to pay another £100 per month because the huge rent they struggle to pay for the flat they don't own means it's worth £x00K?

    My memory of that stage of life is my colleagues up north who'd bought themselves a flat or house and a car moaning about London weighting, while myself and my colleagues in London were renting rooms in a houseshare or maybe stretching to renting a 1 bed with a partner.
    You are quite mad if you rent a one bedroom flat.

    When I was in my early (and mid) 20s, I lived in a house share in East London, because that meant I could save for a deposit on a flat. If I'd rented a one bedroom apartment, I would never have been able to save.
    As did I, my disposable income was still less than my colleagues outside London.
    Not so many houseshares any more, the owners have converted them to HMOs and rent is a larger % of people's income.
    An additional land value tax levied on the owners is fine but what fairer share are proposing is regressive.
    A few comments.

    Areas with higher house price increase since 1991 have had half a lifetime of significant underpaying of what their Council Tax should actually have been, so sympathy is very difficult to generate.

    The beneficiaries on the Proportional Property Tax model are between 60% and 80% of people on the models, as Stamp Duty is slated to be abolished. That would free up the property market, and make it easier for first time buyers in terms of requirement for up front cash.

    I think that there are a couple of problems to do with the proposals are they are, as they were created some time ago and some things have shifted.

    - Stamp Duty rates have, I think, been increased some way in those years. I'm not totally convinced that full abolition could be achieved from the 0.48% PPT rate.

    - The proposals around rental have some very rough edges. Since 0.48% could be about 6% up to around 20% of the market rent for a property, that will make a lot of properties loss making. It would place particular pressure on properties rented at below market rents. At the least that is a transition to be managed; at worst it could gut some sectors of the rental market.

    - There will need to be some consideration of renters who currently receive a reduction of exemption for Council Tax.

    - And the liability for Council Tax paid on Council and Socially rented houses would need to be considered; this is currently paid by the tenant.
    House prices will probably drop quite a bit too because having a very high home value will no longer be seen as attractive. This is a good thing, but it’s slightly concerning that so few people can recognise that dynamic response. You’d want 0.6% to be safe.

    It’s tempting to apply lots of discounts (disabled, children, widows etc) but doing that would end up distorting things just as much as the current system does.
    They did a lot of modelling to come up with the PPT proposals, but it was some years ago.

    As has been noted, it is all in the details.

    I think the disturbance would be much less than to the current system, because the main disturbance to the current system is that it has not been brought up to date even on its own terms for 35 years.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 32,409
    Scott_xP said:

    ‪@mitchellst.bsky.social‬

    My model run this morning has Scotland with a 32% chance of progressing with them expecting them to finish 9th in the 3rd place table.

    https://bsky.app/profile/mitchellst.bsky.social/post/3mp3xlrpjrs2q

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7xwTn9BFuk
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 13,559
    Nigelb said:

    Pulpstar said:

    What the fucking fuck is going on with school closures - never would have happened if we hadn't had Covid I reckon.

    Primary school rolls have dropped around 5% in the last half decade (birthrates and crackdown on immigration), and will likely fall another 7% by the end of the decade.
    Unless you switch from per pupil funding, and maintain overall funding in order to reduce class sizes, school closures are inevitable.
    I think he means schools closing today because of a bit of warm weather
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 137,238
    Theuniondivvie said:

    Roger said:

    Looks like Farage is dead in the water. It's difficult to see what he can do about it. A one man band sinking. You could feel sorry for those Tories who jumped ship last year if only they weren't such shits.

    Talking of shits Badenoch is getting hammered by Bridget Phillipson in an interview with Nick Robinson. What a performance! I've never particularly rated BP but I suppose she wouldn't have have achieved what she has if she wasn't any good. Her put down of Badenoch was tuned to perfection.

    Nige has decided defender of working class white boys is the way to go. Every lad should have the chance of receiving a £5m ‘gift’ from a crypto billionaire.

    White working-class boys are currently the lowest-performing group in the country’s education system thanks to the Equality Act.

    Reform will scrap it and return Britain to a meritocracy.

    https://x.com/nigel_farage/status/2069717952354554285?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q
    Lowest apart from gypsys
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 23,553
    Benpointer said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    “It turns out appointing a spiteful class warrior as education secretary was a disaster,” said Badenoch.

    This one was too much for Starmer. “She grew up in poverty,” he said. It was a suitable enough note for his time to end on. If anything has defined the Starmer era, it has been the Four Yorkshiremenisation of politics. “Her story,” he said, “is an incredible story of social mobility and success.”

    Starmer’s government is full of incredible stories of social mobility, of which they are all extremely proud. None of them seem to have noticed that they all grew up under Margaret Thatcher.

    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/kemi-badenoch-keir-starmer-cabinet-mpcbvn5z9

    They grew up under Margaret Thatcher; they grew up in poverty.

    Let's see if we can spot the connection there.
    ...and were able through social mobility to reach the top.
  • The_WoodpeckerThe_Woodpecker Posts: 585
    DavidL said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    South Africa and South Korea really have done the dirty on Scotland.

    SA have been rubbish throughout. How on earth did they win that? SK have a better GD than Scotland so that is another team ahead of us already.

    As I wandered home this morning through a mist not entirely made of Scotland's tears I reflected that our biggest mistake was not really going after Haiti and trying to improve our GD. Matches against teams ranked 5th and 6th in the world were never likely to end well. We needed more goals against the 1 weak team in our group.
    A lesson Scotland should have learned after West Germany '74.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 23,553
    Scott_xP said:

    ‪@mitchellst.bsky.social‬

    My model run this morning has Scotland with a 32% chance of progressing with them expecting them to finish 9th in the 3rd place table.

    https://bsky.app/profile/mitchellst.bsky.social/post/3mp3xlrpjrs2q

    Is there anything that England can do that will help/hinder the Scots? I'm reminded of Euro 96 when England's conceding a late consolation against the Dutch buggared the Jocks.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 57,210
    turbotubbs said:

    Benpointer said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    “It turns out appointing a spiteful class warrior as education secretary was a disaster,” said Badenoch.

    This one was too much for Starmer. “She grew up in poverty,” he said. It was a suitable enough note for his time to end on. If anything has defined the Starmer era, it has been the Four Yorkshiremenisation of politics. “Her story,” he said, “is an incredible story of social mobility and success.”

    Starmer’s government is full of incredible stories of social mobility, of which they are all extremely proud. None of them seem to have noticed that they all grew up under Margaret Thatcher.

    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/kemi-badenoch-keir-starmer-cabinet-mpcbvn5z9

    They grew up under Margaret Thatcher; they grew up in poverty.

    Let's see if we can spot the connection there.
    ...and were able through social mobility to reach the top.
    That upward social mobility didn't happen at school. Phillipson was born in 1983, so finished school and went to university under New Labour, being 14 when Tony Blair had his landslide.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 23,553
    HYUFD said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Roger said:

    Looks like Farage is dead in the water. It's difficult to see what he can do about it. A one man band sinking. You could feel sorry for those Tories who jumped ship last year if only they weren't such shits.

    Talking of shits Badenoch is getting hammered by Bridget Phillipson in an interview with Nick Robinson. What a performance! I've never particularly rated BP but I suppose she wouldn't have have achieved what she has if she wasn't any good. Her put down of Badenoch was tuned to perfection.

    Nige has decided defender of working class white boys is the way to go. Every lad should have the chance of receiving a £5m ‘gift’ from a crypto billionaire.

    White working-class boys are currently the lowest-performing group in the country’s education system thanks to the Equality Act.

    Reform will scrap it and return Britain to a meritocracy.

    https://x.com/nigel_farage/status/2069717952354554285?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q
    Lowest apart from gypsys
    Who are so thick judges think a bit of rape is just a minor misdemeanour as they are too stupid to understand. Apparently.
  • OllyTOllyT Posts: 5,225
    Nigelb said:

    eek said:

    squareroot2 said:

    How long before Burnham is found out? 12.months

    How long until Farage would be found out (if when elected) - equally less than 12 months.

    The thing is the UK is currently ungovernable - I'm hoping that Burnham has an idea of what needs to be done but we will see.

    Burnham definitely isn't perfect (see him giving WASPI more than 30 milliseconds) but it's going to depend on the team he puts around him.
    Farage has perhaps already been found out.
    The £5million "gift" has holed him below the waterline and I suspect he knows it..
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 23,553
    Foxy said:

    turbotubbs said:

    Benpointer said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    “It turns out appointing a spiteful class warrior as education secretary was a disaster,” said Badenoch.

    This one was too much for Starmer. “She grew up in poverty,” he said. It was a suitable enough note for his time to end on. If anything has defined the Starmer era, it has been the Four Yorkshiremenisation of politics. “Her story,” he said, “is an incredible story of social mobility and success.”

    Starmer’s government is full of incredible stories of social mobility, of which they are all extremely proud. None of them seem to have noticed that they all grew up under Margaret Thatcher.

    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/kemi-badenoch-keir-starmer-cabinet-mpcbvn5z9

    They grew up under Margaret Thatcher; they grew up in poverty.

    Let's see if we can spot the connection there.
    ...and were able through social mobility to reach the top.
    That upward social mobility didn't happen at school. Phillipson was born in 1983, so finished school and went to university under New Labour, being 14 when Tony Blair had his landslide.
    So she's had to face 28 years of Tory rule and STILL reached the top. Incredible.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 129,122
    This is a pretty big development.

    Comcast-owned Sky reaches terms to buy ITV's broadcast unit, sources say

    https://www.reuters.com/world/comcast-owned-sky-reaches-terms-buy-itvs-broadcast-unit-sources-say-2026-06-24/
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 63,941
    Pulpstar said:

    Nigelb said:

    Pulpstar said:

    What the fucking fuck is going on with school closures - never would have happened if we hadn't had Covid I reckon.

    Primary school rolls have dropped around 5% in the last half decade (birthrates and crackdown on immigration), and will likely fall another 7% by the end of the decade.
    Unless you switch from per pupil funding, and maintain overall funding in order to reduce class sizes, school closures are inevitable.
    I mean today lol.
    Locally, one primary school, in a Victorian brick building is fine. Very high ceilings, windows that open and create a draft - one do strong they have to watch doors crashing shut.

    Meanwhile the super up to date one in the shiny new “campus” turns out to be a lethal heat trap.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 63,941
    HYUFD said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Roger said:

    Looks like Farage is dead in the water. It's difficult to see what he can do about it. A one man band sinking. You could feel sorry for those Tories who jumped ship last year if only they weren't such shits.

    Talking of shits Badenoch is getting hammered by Bridget Phillipson in an interview with Nick Robinson. What a performance! I've never particularly rated BP but I suppose she wouldn't have have achieved what she has if she wasn't any good. Her put down of Badenoch was tuned to perfection.

    Nige has decided defender of working class white boys is the way to go. Every lad should have the chance of receiving a £5m ‘gift’ from a crypto billionaire.

    White working-class boys are currently the lowest-performing group in the country’s education system thanks to the Equality Act.

    Reform will scrap it and return Britain to a meritocracy.

    https://x.com/nigel_farage/status/2069717952354554285?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q
    Lowest apart from gypsys
    And Afro-Caribbean from families who been settled in this country for many years.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 129,122
    I’ve never understood why people brag about their own social mobility.

    I’m the grandson of humble immigrants to the UK and look at me now.

    All thanks to my own hard work and supreme intelligence.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 37,212
    SandyRentool said:

    IanB2 said:

    SandyRentool said:

    Interesting that a third prefer Starmer to Burnham.

    Even a Burnhamphobe such as me wouldn't go that far.

    There was a lady caller to LBC who was in tears at losing Starmer as PM
    Was her name Kemi?
    Victoria?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 57,210
    StillWaters said:

    Nigelb said:

    Pulpstar said:

    What the fucking fuck is going on with school closures - never would have happened if we hadn't had Covid I reckon.

    Primary school rolls have dropped around 5% in the last half decade (birthrates and crackdown on immigration), and will likely fall another 7% by the end of the decade.
    Unless you switch from per pupil funding, and maintain overall funding in order to reduce class sizes, school closures are inevitable.
    I think he means schools closing today because of a bit of warm weather
    Interesting thread here comparing current heatwave to 1976:

    https://bsky.app/profile/monkemma.bsky.social/post/3mp2aif7ltn2i

    In summary, it was nowhere near as hot, though it was longer and drier. People died, the government issued health warnings and appointed a minister for drought, and some workplaces did shift working patterns.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 66,872
    Pulpstar said:

    Nigelb said:

    Pulpstar said:

    What the fucking fuck is going on with school closures - never would have happened if we hadn't had Covid I reckon.

    Primary school rolls have dropped around 5% in the last half decade (birthrates and crackdown on immigration), and will likely fall another 7% by the end of the decade.
    Unless you switch from per pupil funding, and maintain overall funding in order to reduce class sizes, school closures are inevitable.
    I mean today lol.
    Probably staff not wanting/able to travel in, and the schools themselves just being too hot - so closing with union support.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 62,088
    Cicero said:

    Foxy said:

    squareroot2 said:

    Roger said:

    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    HYUFD said:

    Burnham leads both Badenoch and Farage but Farage by more than he leads Kemi, so Kemi and the Tories may still be the best bet in marginal seats to beat Burnham and Labour

    Yes, and the Aberdeen South by-election suggests also that the Conservatives are, at the very least, no longer quite so toxic.
    Baddenoch is doing her very best to put that right!
    Badenoch is right. Putting vat on school fees is spiteful and nasty and typical of Labour.the Nasty party.
    That's the Election slogan in a nutshell
    It might work well on the 7% of parents with kids at private school, less so on the 93% who do not.
    The 7% are absolutely livid, but since the largest part of them would never vote Labour, the class war thinks it has a victor. However there are quite a large number of unintended consequences which make the School fees VAT policy a net negative. However, as so often in the UK, the detail is all in the too difficult box and so nobody cares.
    The negative consequences were all known in advance, and the government was warned about them.

    They did it anyway, because it’s an article of faith rather than a rational policy. Annoying the 7% was the whole point of doing it.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 51,043
    edited 8:40AM
    Selebian said:

    Benpointer said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    “It turns out appointing a spiteful class warrior as education secretary was a disaster,” said Badenoch.

    This one was too much for Starmer. “She grew up in poverty,” he said. It was a suitable enough note for his time to end on. If anything has defined the Starmer era, it has been the Four Yorkshiremenisation of politics. “Her story,” he said, “is an incredible story of social mobility and success.”

    Starmer’s government is full of incredible stories of social mobility, of which they are all extremely proud. None of them seem to have noticed that they all grew up under Margaret Thatcher.

    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/kemi-badenoch-keir-starmer-cabinet-mpcbvn5z9

    They grew up under Margaret Thatcher; they grew up in poverty.

    Let's see if we can spot the connection there.
    The greater the inequality, the greater the (maximum) possibilities for social mobility though :wink:
    That's right. Like the PD of a battery. Or a rubber duck in the bath - the deeper submerged it is the more it flies (!) when released.
Sign In or Register to comment.

© Vanilla Keystone Theme 2026