Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » First Winfrey – Trump polling has Oprah 10 points ahead

13

Comments

  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:



    The fairest solution for social care is higher national insurance paid by over 50s who are still in work and have often paid off the mortgage and have more disposable income as their children may well have left home too

    I suspect the sums don't work. Number of people in residential care is ~ 500,000 (and rising).

    Most are paying circa 30,000 pa. You need to raise about ~ 15 billion per annum to pay the bill.

    And that doesn't include the money you'll also need for those receiving care in their home.

    How much do you have to increase National Insurance for the over 50s to find this kind of money?

    That is why is politicians are looking at Housing Wealth to pay the Bill.
    Most other countries pay for social care through social insurance and all employees from their 20s (or even 16 if they started work then) until 65 pay National Insurance, so that is the best way to fund it, even if the biggest increases are focused on over 50s I expect all workers will have to pay higher National Insurance to pay for more money for the NHS and social care.

    Housing wealth already pays for residential social care bills anyway, the general election result means neither the Tories nor Labour are likely to touching housing wealth for personal care at home costs with a bargepole, so National Insurance it has to be.
    It will not be enough by a mountain mile
    Well most other developed countries manage to fund social care and state healthcare mainly by social insurance without problems
    We need 20-30 billion pa to fund it. It needs more than NI by a distance
    Having just retired in December I shudder to mention it but NI on pensions would raise a lot! I still find it surprising that I get to keep more of my income than someone earning earning the same income through their hard graft does. Similarly someone sitting on their arse living of their (often inherited) investments pays no NI but will still benefit from social care if needed.

    Also why do we allow higher earners to pay 2% above the upper threshold whereas low to middle earners are paying 12%?

    Much fairer to extend NI to pensioners, investors, and self-employed than simply piling it on the 50-70 age band in my opinion... And the way to do it is to roll NI into income tax.
    That would finish any party proposing it - just not possible politically

    The only way anything remotely like that could happen is for a cross party agreement to appoint a Royal Commission and accept its recommendations
  • John_MJohn_M Posts: 6,489
    DavidL said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Alistair said:

    It would have been such larks to see the Save our Toby campaign defend this.

    Actually, Young's response there is quite good - listening to another point of view (however, controversial) doesn't imply any form of acceptance of it.

    Precisely why he would have been so good in challenging campus "no platform" culture.
    Rather undermined by following wackos like Emil Kirkegaard on Twitter.

    Suggests less a brave inclusive listening to all points of view and more that he agrees with them.
    Following someone on Twitter does not imply endorsement of their views.

    I follow Guy Verhofstadt.
    Really - laugh a minute time
    A daily reminder of why we voted Leave? :p
    I read that several times and still haven't got really understood what he's trying to say? Europe doesn't make villains like it used to?
    Quite. They used to threaten the whole world with Armageddon and racist murder. Now they abuse the CAP and fail to adequately apply decisions of the ECHR.

    It’s sad.
    "You’re not quite evil enough. You’re semi-evil. You’re quasi-evil. You’re the margarine of evil. You’re the Diet Coke of evil, just one calorie, not evil enough."
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 28,908
    edited January 10

    Well the England selectors have retained Vince for the New Zealand tour :frowning:

    They've dropped Ballance and brought in Liam Livingstone.

    http://www.bbc.com/sport/cricket/42626494

    Nearly as underwhelming as the May reshuffle...Tom Curran has got to be a bit pissed, he is never a Test bowler, but neither Overton and at least Curran showed some fight.

    Interesting Stokes is in. Does that mean they think he isn't going to get prosecuted?
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:



    The fairest solution for social care is higher national insurance paid by over 50s who are still in work and have often paid off the mortgage and have more disposable income as their children may well have left home too

    I suspect the sums don't work. Number of people in residential care is ~ 500,000 (and rising).

    Most are paying circa 30,000 pa. You need to raise about ~ 15 billion per annum to pay the bill.

    And that doesn't include the money you'll also need for those receiving care in their home.

    How much do you have to increase National Insurance for the over 50s to find this kind of money?

    That is why is politicians are looking at Housing Wealth to pay the Bill.
    Most other countries pay for social care through social insurance and all employees from their 20s (or even 16 if they started work then) until 65 pay National Insurance, so that is the best way to fund it, even if the biggest increases are focused on over 50s I expect all workers will have to pay higher National Insurance to pay for more money for the NHS and social care.

    Housing wealth already pays for residential social care bills anyway, the general election result means neither the Tories nor Labour are likely to touching housing wealth for personal care at home costs with a bargepole, so National Insurance it has to be.
    It will not be enough by a mountain mile
    Well most other developed countries manage to fund social care and state healthcare mainly by social insurance without problems
    We need 20-30 billion pa to fund it. It needs more than NI by a distance
    Given National Insurance already raises £130 billion a year for the government at the moment, you have just reinforced my own argument

    http://budgetresponsibility.org.uk/forecasts-in-depth/tax-by-tax-spend-by-spend/national-insurance-contributions/
    And we spend virtually all of that on Health and pensions
    Social Care is (or at least should be seen as) a sub-section of Health.
    Actually it has been taken into Health and will receive equal billing. Lots of issues for the green paper to investigate this Spring
  • Well the England selectors have retained Vince for the New Zealand tour :frowning:

    They've dropped Ballance and brought in Liam Livingstone.

    http://www.bbc.com/sport/cricket/42626494

    Nearly as underwhelming as the May reshuffle...Tom Curran has got to be a bit pissed, he is never a Test bowler, but neither Overton and at least Curran showed some fight.
    Whilst I don't think Gary Ballance is a test quality player, I do find it amusing the only batter not to play in the Ashes is the one dropped.

  • Nick 'Twatbadger' Timothy is at it again.


    If that is true Greening's sacking is justified
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 28,908
    edited January 10

    Well the England selectors have retained Vince for the New Zealand tour :frowning:

    They've dropped Ballance and brought in Liam Livingstone.

    http://www.bbc.com/sport/cricket/42626494

    Nearly as underwhelming as the May reshuffle...Tom Curran has got to be a bit pissed, he is never a Test bowler, but neither Overton and at least Curran showed some fight.
    Whilst I don't think Gary Ballance is a test quality player, I do find it amusing the only batter not to play in the Ashes is the one dropped.

    I would never have taken him in the first place. Moeen should be dropped, his confidence is shot. They really should have taken the opportunity to give up and comers a chance that look like they might have some fight in them e,g, Hameed.
  • Re Stokes being selected for the New Zealand tour.

    He was also selected for the Ashes and ODI/T20 series as well but removed because he is yet to be cleared.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 28,908
    edited January 10

    Re Stokes being selected for the New Zealand tour.

    He was also selected for the Ashes and ODI/T20 series as well but removed because he is yet to be cleared.

    Even better decision to drop Curran the all-rounder then...

    Do we also really not have anybody who can wang it down at 90mph other than One Leg Wood? And Steve Finn is excluded cos he is crap.

    We also need to get a left armer in there too. 3-4 right arm medium-fast bowlers is terrible when somebody gets in, it becomes like batting practice against the bowling machine.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 2,947

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:



    The fairest solution for social care is higher national insurance paid by over 50s who are still in work and have often paid off the mortgage and have more disposable income as their children may well have left home too

    I suspect the sums don't work. Number of people in residential care is ~ 500,000 (and rising).

    Most are paying circa 30,000 pa. You need to raise about ~ 15 billion per annum to pay the bill.

    And that doesn't include the money you'll also need for those receiving care in their home.

    How much do you have to increase National Insurance for the over 50s to find this kind of money?

    That is why is politicians are looking at Housing Wealth to pay the Bill.
    Most other countries pay for social care through social insurance and all employees from their 20s (or even 16 if they started work then) until 65 pay National Insurance, so that is the best way to fund it, even if the biggest increases are focused on over 50s I expect all workers will have to pay higher National Insurance to pay for more money for the NHS and social care.

    Housing wealth already pays for residential social care bills anyway, the general election result means neither the Tories nor Labour are likely to touching housing wealth for personal care at home costs with a bargepole, so National Insurance it has to be.
    It will not be enough by a mountain mile
    Well most other developed countries manage to fund social care and state healthcare mainly by social insurance without problems
    We need 20-30 billion pa to fund it. It needs more than NI by a distance
    Given National Insurance already raises £130 billion a year for the government at the moment, you have just reinforced my own argument

    http://budgetresponsibility.org.uk/forecasts-in-depth/tax-by-tax-spend-by-spend/national-insurance-contributions/
    And we spend virtually all of that on Health and pensions
    Social Care is (or at least should be seen as) a sub-section of Health.
    Actually it has been taken into Health and will receive equal billing. Lots of issues for the green paper to investigate this Spring
    Wasn't it already part of Health, or at least the central government part? Norman Lamb was Minister for Care and Support under the Coalition 2012-2015.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 3,721
    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    I am pro-Arithmetic.

    Anyone with Key Stage 3 Maths could work out that the Labour manifesto was not fully costed.

    There were a number of posters on pb.com who believed the numbers like 3 billion pounds for a National Care service. So, it proved a useful idiot test !

    Can you point me to where Labour's manifesto costing proposed £3bn to provide a National Care Service?
    Labour will build a new National Care Service. We will also set out the funding alternatives clearly and honestly, seeking to implement change through consensus., enough to place a maximum limit on lifetime personal contributions to care costs, raise the asset threshold below which people are entitled to state support, and provide free end of life care.

    https://labour.org.uk/manifesto/healthcare-for-all/ (section 'Towards a National Care Service').

    Will that do?

    @ydoethur Your quote above shows how Labour were clearly not saying that £3bn was the total cost to provide a National Care Service ("We will also set out the funding alternatives clearly and honestly, seeking to implement change through consensus"). As the earlier quote provided by @YBarddCwsc shows, the £3bn was the money to boost services in the early years only.

    But I am sure you both already know that really! :smile:
    I think the manifesto is vague, probably deliberately so.

    It seeks to give the impression that the problem can be fixed with comparatively little money (3 billion is not much in terms of Government expenditure, just a penny on income tax).

    I think I would be more impressed with a honest statement of the money needed (I think foxy and myself have provided such an estimate earlier in the thread). And then an accurate assessment of where the money is coming from.

    Successful implementation of an idea as grand as the National Care Service needs a realistic budget at the outset.


    Though there is at least some indication that Health spending has a very benificial effect on the economy:

    It's a good point. Too often when we talk about public spending there's an underlying assumption that the money spent is lost forever and disappears out of the economy. In some instances (Hinckley?, a lot of MOD procurement?) it probably does. But most health spending goes to health care workers salaries, from where it mostly gets pumped straight back into the economy, generating more demand and more tax revenue.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 5,538

    Nick 'Twatbadger' Timothy is at it again.


    I'd have cut out his tongue, exiled him to st Helena and napalmed the town he was born in. The myth of Tory ruthlessness exposed, again.
  • Nick 'Twatbadger' Timothy is at it again.


    If that is true Greening's sacking is justified
  • Ishmael_Z said:

    Nick 'Twatbadger' Timothy is at it again.


    I'd have cut out his tongue, exiled him to st Helena and napalmed the town he was born in. The myth of Tory ruthlessness exposed, again.
    Just wait until I became Tory leader/Directly Elected Dictator.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 26,619
    On topic - just noticed the poll in question was conducted by Rasmussen. Isn’t it by far the most Trump-friendly pollster in terms of the approval rates he gets, etc? Might be worth waiting to see what other pollsters turn up.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 3,721
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:



    The fairest solution for social care is higher national insurance paid by over 50s who are still in work and have often paid off the mortgage and have more disposable income as their children may well have left home too

    I suspect the sums don't work. Number of people in residential care is ~ 500,000 (and rising).

    Most are paying circa 30,000 pa. You need to raise about ~ 15 billion per annum to pay the bill.

    And that doesn't include the money you'll also need for those receiving care in their home.

    How much do you have to increase National Insurance for the over 50s to find this kind of money?

    That is why is politicians are looking at Housing Wealth to pay the Bill.
    Most other countries pay for social care through social insurance and all employees from their 20s (or even 16 if they started work then) until 65 pay National Insurance, so that is the best way to fund it, even if the biggest increases are focused on over 50s I expect all workers will have to pay higher National Insurance to pay for more money for the NHS and social care.

    Housing wealth already pays for residential social care bills anyway, the general election result means neither the Tories nor Labour are likely to touching housing wealth for personal care at home costs with a bargepole, so National Insurance it has to be.
    It will not be enough by a mountain mile
    Well most other developed countries manage to fund social care and state healthcare mainly by social insurance without problems
    We need 20-30 billion pa to fund it. It needs more than NI by a distance
    Having just retired in December I shudder to mention it but NI on pensions would raise a lot! I still find it surprising that I get to keep more of my income than someone earning earning the same income through their hard graft does. Similarly someone sitting on their arse living of their (often inherited) investments pays no NI but will still benefit from social care if needed.

    Also why do we allow higher earners to pay 2% above the upper threshold whereas low to middle earners are paying 12%?

    Much fairer to extend NI to pensioners, investors, and self-employed than simply piling it on the 50-70 age band in my opinion... And the way to do it is to roll NI into income tax.
    Agree with much of that but would still keep NI separate from income tax and ensure it is genuinely hypothecated to pay for health and social care and welfare
    Yes, I don't disagree (once I had looked up 'hypothecated'! :smile:)
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 3,721

    Ishmael_Z said:

    Nick 'Twatbadger' Timothy is at it again.


    I'd have cut out his tongue, exiled him to st Helena and napalmed the town he was born in. The myth of Tory ruthlessness exposed, again.
    Just wait until I became Tory leader/Directly Elected Dictator.
    It's gonna be a long wait, just sayin'
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 2,947

    Nick 'Twatbadger' Timothy is at it again.


    If that is true Greening's sacking is justified
    She wasn't sacked. TM wanted her to drink the poisoned chalice of UC at DWP.
  • Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:



    Most other countries pay for social care through social insurance and all employees from their 20s (or even 16 if they started work then) until 65 pay National Insurance, so that is the best way to fund it, even if the biggest increases are focused on over 50s I expect all workers will have to pay higher National Insurance to pay for more money for the NHS and social care.

    Housing wealth already pays for residential social care bills anyway, the general election result means neither the Tories nor Labour are likely to touching housing wealth for personal care at home costs with a bargepole, so National Insurance it has to be.
    It will not be enough by a mountain mile
    Well most other developed countries manage to fund social care and state healthcare mainly by social insurance without problems
    We need 20-30 billion pa to fund it. It needs more than NI by a distance
    Given National Insurance already raises £130 billion a year for the government at the moment, you have just reinforced my own argument

    http://budgetresponsibility.org.uk/forecasts-in-depth/tax-by-tax-spend-by-spend/national-insurance-contributions/
    And we spend virtually all of that on Health and pensions
    Social Care is (or at least should be seen as) a sub-section of Health.
    Actually it has been taken into Health and will receive equal billing. Lots of issues for the green paper to investigate this Spring
    Wasn't it already part of Health, or at least the central government part? Norman Lamb was Minister for Care and Support under the Coalition 2012-2015.
    It sees not as it was welcomed by many as being long overdue and it now puts the green paper on social care under Hunt rather than the DCLG
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 2,947

    Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:



    Most other countries pay for social care through social insurance and all employees from their 20s (or even 16 if they started work then) until 65 pay National Insurance, so that is the best way to fund it, even if the biggest increases are focused on over 50s I expect all workers will have to pay higher National Insurance to pay for more money for the NHS and social care.

    Housing wealth already pays for residential social care bills anyway, the general election result means neither the Tories nor Labour are likely to touching housing wealth for personal care at home costs with a bargepole, so National Insurance it has to be.
    It will not be enough by a mountain mile
    Well most other developed countries manage to fund social care and state healthcare mainly by social insurance without problems
    We need 20-30 billion pa to fund it. It needs more than NI by a distance
    Given National Insurance already raises £130 billion a year for the government at the moment, you have just reinforced my own argument

    http://budgetresponsibility.org.uk/forecasts-in-depth/tax-by-tax-spend-by-spend/national-insurance-contributions/
    And we spend virtually all of that on Health and pensions
    Social Care is (or at least should be seen as) a sub-section of Health.
    Actually it has been taken into Health and will receive equal billing. Lots of issues for the green paper to investigate this Spring
    Wasn't it already part of Health, or at least the central government part? Norman Lamb was Minister for Care and Support under the Coalition 2012-2015.
    It sees not as it was welcomed by many as being long overdue and it now puts the green paper on social care under Hunt rather than the DCLG
    So exactly what has changed?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 66,809
    edited January 10
  • Foxy said:

    Nick 'Twatbadger' Timothy is at it again.


    If that is true Greening's sacking is justified
    She wasn't sacked. TM wanted her to drink the poisoned chalice of UC at DWP.
    Still moved out of Education
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 3,721
    Amazing! 'Britain paying to access the Single Market' - why didn't we think of that before?!
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 19,831

    Brilliant idea on the left.

    Perhaps RBS could make a contribution of £350m a week in return for single market access for the whole UK economy?
  • Amazing! 'Britain paying to access the Single Market' - why didn't we think of that before?!
    Just us in the Banking/Insurance/Financial Services industry.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 2,947
    edited January 10
    Gove loves a little bit of plotting, but can be rather indiscrete about it!
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 28,908
    edited January 10
    Mr Trump seems not to believe in exercise. According to one source, he believes the human body is "like a battery, with a finite amount of energy, which exercise only depletes".

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42614426

    Don't let any lobbyists for the homeopathic industry near him...he will be roped in and making it public policy for all US citizens to micro-dose before we know it.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 3,721

    Also can I just say, as a relative newcomer to the joys of the the weekly shop, wtf is May on about with 'plastic-free aisles'? (top article)

    Has she ever written a shopping list and then tried to fulfill it? It's hard enough to find everything when all the stuff is (relatively) logically placed. Baked beans: with the canned veg or in the plastic-free aisle?

    Fox hunting, Grammar schools, Demential tax... and now plastic-free aisles - what a genius!
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 19,831

    Mr Trump seems not to believe in exercise. According to one source, he believes the human body is "like a battery, with a finite amount of energy, which exercise only depletes".

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42614426

    Don't let any lobbyists for the homeopathic industry near him...he will be roped in and making it public policy for all US citizens to micro-dose before we know it.

    It's a shame we can't make Captain Mandrake our ambassador to the US. He'd know how to reason with Trump.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 28,908
    edited January 10


    Also can I just say, as a relative newcomer to the joys of the the weekly shop, wtf is May on about with 'plastic-free aisles'? (top article)

    Has she ever written a shopping list and then tried to fulfill it? It's hard enough to find everything when all the stuff is (relatively) logically placed. Baked beans: with the canned veg or in the plastic-free aisle?

    Fox hunting, Grammar schools, Demential tax... and now plastic-free aisles - what a genius!
    Its cone hotline time all over again....Don't let her watch the thick of it, we will be getting the quiet bat people and extra quiet carriages on trains.
  • Mr Trump seems not to believe in exercise. According to one source, he believes the human body is "like a battery, with a finite amount of energy, which exercise only depletes".

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42614426

    Don't let any lobbyists for the homeopathic industry near him...he will be roped in and making it public policy for all US citizens to micro-dose before we know it.

    It's a shame we can't make Captain Mandrake our ambassador to the US. He'd know how to reason with Trump.
    No one can reason with Trump. He is a disaster
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 28,908

    Mr Trump seems not to believe in exercise. According to one source, he believes the human body is "like a battery, with a finite amount of energy, which exercise only depletes".

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42614426

    Don't let any lobbyists for the homeopathic industry near him...he will be roped in and making it public policy for all US citizens to micro-dose before we know it.

    It's a shame we can't make Captain Mandrake our ambassador to the US. He'd know how to reason with Trump.
    No one can reason with Trump. He is a disaster stable genius
    Fixed for you.

  • Also can I just say, as a relative newcomer to the joys of the the weekly shop, wtf is May on about with 'plastic-free aisles'? (top article)

    Has she ever written a shopping list and then tried to fulfill it? It's hard enough to find everything when all the stuff is (relatively) logically placed. Baked beans: with the canned veg or in the plastic-free aisle?

    Fox hunting, Grammar schools, Demential tax... and now plastic-free aisles - what a genius!
    Ben - this attack on plastic will be hugely popular and even Ian Dunt that pro EU journalist was saying that putting our foreign aid budget to helping rid Asian rivers of this evil sea life killer unites the Mail and Express readers and the Guardian and Independent readers

    Do not under estimate the anger over plastic
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 19,831


    Also can I just say, as a relative newcomer to the joys of the the weekly shop, wtf is May on about with 'plastic-free aisles'? (top article)

    Has she ever written a shopping list and then tried to fulfill it? It's hard enough to find everything when all the stuff is (relatively) logically placed. Baked beans: with the canned veg or in the plastic-free aisle?

    Fox hunting, Grammar schools, Demential tax... and now plastic-free aisles - what a genius!
    Ben - this attack on plastic will be hugely popular and even Ian Dunt that pro EU journalist was saying that putting our foreign aid budget to helping rid Asian rivers of this evil sea life killer unites the Mail and Express readers and the Guardian and Independent readers

    Do not under estimate the anger over plastic
    https://euobserver.com/economic/140499

    The European Commission wants to use a new "plastic tax", moving income from the emission trading scheme from national to EU level, plus extra money from member states, to help plug the hole in the EU budget left by Brexit and to finance migration and security tasks.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 28,908
    edited January 10
    I have long worried about the make-up of YouGov panel...

    A YouGov survey of 1,616 British adults ranked “American football” as the nation’s second-dullest sport to watch, with 59 percent of respondents rating it “very or quite boring,”

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-10/the-nfl-targets-london-britons-find-it-boring
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 18,417
    edited January 10

    Also why do we allow higher earners to pay 2% above the upper threshold whereas low to middle earners are paying 12%?

    You have to look at the actual real marginal tax rate (income tax + NI), which is 32% for 'basic rate' taxpayers and 42% for 'higher rate' tax payers. In addition there is the employer contribution (which is just a disguised form of income tax on employees), adding another substantial chunk. These are absurdly high marginal rates for modestly-paid employees, made worse by the the cliff-edge at £100K and the withdrawal of child benefit for parents at £50K.

    It is extraordinary that there isn't a massive popular rebellion against these absurdly high marginal rates. Only the Taxpayers Alliance and the IEA seem to have noticed them. Basically PAYE taxpayers are being conned - in their sweet naivety, they think they are being taxed at 20% or 40%.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 42,691
    Gove predicts the next Tory leader will be either Damian Hinds or Gavin Williamson in that Times article, interesting
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 3,721


    Also can I just say, as a relative newcomer to the joys of the the weekly shop, wtf is May on about with 'plastic-free aisles'? (top article)

    Has she ever written a shopping list and then tried to fulfill it? It's hard enough to find everything when all the stuff is (relatively) logically placed. Baked beans: with the canned veg or in the plastic-free aisle?

    Fox hunting, Grammar schools, Demential tax... and now plastic-free aisles - what a genius!
    Ben - this attack on plastic will be hugely popular and even Ian Dunt that pro EU journalist was saying that putting our foreign aid budget to helping rid Asian rivers of this evil sea life killer unites the Mail and Express readers and the Guardian and Independent readers

    Do not under estimate the anger over plastic
    Big_G, don't get me wrong I am 100% in favour of sensible measures to reduce plastic waste wherever possible. You should see the Pointer household - Mrs P enforces a very strict recycling policy and I do actually agree with her on that.

    It's just that plastic-free aisles seems such a bonkers way to further the cause.

    Tbf to Tessa, I should really wait until she actually says it, rather than react to what the Times says she is going to say. With any luck she'll look at that headline and quetly drop the idea from a speach which, if the BBCreport is anything to go by, will actually contain a number of sensible and worthwhile measures.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 28,908
    edited January 10


    Also can I just say, as a relative newcomer to the joys of the the weekly shop, wtf is May on about with 'plastic-free aisles'? (top article)

    Has she ever written a shopping list and then tried to fulfill it? It's hard enough to find everything when all the stuff is (relatively) logically placed. Baked beans: with the canned veg or in the plastic-free aisle?

    Fox hunting, Grammar schools, Demential tax... and now plastic-free aisles - what a genius!
    Ben - this attack on plastic will be hugely popular and even Ian Dunt that pro EU journalist was saying that putting our foreign aid budget to helping rid Asian rivers of this evil sea life killer unites the Mail and Express readers and the Guardian and Independent readers

    Do not under estimate the anger over plastic
    https://euobserver.com/economic/140499

    The European Commission wants to use a new "plastic tax", moving income from the emission trading scheme from national to EU level, plus extra money from member states, to help plug the hole in the EU budget left by Brexit and to finance migration and security tasks.
    The EU have never seen a problem whereby the optimal solution in their opinion is more centralization and increased tax.

  • Also can I just say, as a relative newcomer to the joys of the the weekly shop, wtf is May on about with 'plastic-free aisles'? (top article)

    Has she ever written a shopping list and then tried to fulfill it? It's hard enough to find everything when all the stuff is (relatively) logically placed. Baked beans: with the canned veg or in the plastic-free aisle?

    Fox hunting, Grammar schools, Demential tax... and now plastic-free aisles - what a genius!
    Ben - this attack on plastic will be hugely popular and even Ian Dunt that pro EU journalist was saying that putting our foreign aid budget to helping rid Asian rivers of this evil sea life killer unites the Mail and Express readers and the Guardian and Independent readers

    Do not under estimate the anger over plastic
    https://euobserver.com/economic/140499

    The European Commission wants to use a new "plastic tax", moving income from the emission trading scheme from national to EU level, plus extra money from member states, to help plug the hole in the EU budget left by Brexit and to finance migration and security tasks.
    Well that is up to them as we will not be in the EU
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 6,168
    Scott_P said:
    .... approximately one zillionth as much as you did, Nick.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 3,721

    Also why do we allow higher earners to pay 2% above the upper threshold whereas low to middle earners are paying 12%?

    You have to look at the actual real marginal tax rate (income tax + NI), which is 32% for 'basic rate' taxpayers and 42% for 'higher rate' tax payers. In addition there is the employer contribution (which is just a disguised form of income tax on employees), adding another substantial chunk. These are absurdly high marginal rates for modestly-paid employees, made worse by the the cliff-edge at £100K and the withdrawal of child benefit for parents at £50K.

    It is extraordinary that there isn't a massive popular rebellion against these absurdly high marginal rates. Only the Taxpayers Alliance and the IEA seem to have noticed them. Basically PAYE taxpayers are being conned - in their sweet naivety, they think they are being taxed at 20% or 40%.
    And is your alternative to slash taxes and spending and public services?
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 5,538


    Also can I just say, as a relative newcomer to the joys of the the weekly shop, wtf is May on about with 'plastic-free aisles'? (top article)

    Has she ever written a shopping list and then tried to fulfill it? It's hard enough to find everything when all the stuff is (relatively) logically placed. Baked beans: with the canned veg or in the plastic-free aisle?

    Fox hunting, Grammar schools, Demential tax... and now plastic-free aisles - what a genius!
    ”a relative newcomer to the joys of the the weekly shop” ffs - have you only just started consuming food, or has Mrs pointer reviewed your definition of women's work?

    Do PM me if you need it explaining how the hoover works, because she'll have you doing that next.
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 7,595


    Also can I just say, as a relative newcomer to the joys of the the weekly shop, wtf is May on about with 'plastic-free aisles'? (top article)

    Has she ever written a shopping list and then tried to fulfill it? It's hard enough to find everything when all the stuff is (relatively) logically placed. Baked beans: with the canned veg or in the plastic-free aisle?

    Fox hunting, Grammar schools, Demential tax... and now plastic-free aisles - what a genius!
    Ben - this attack on plastic will be hugely popular and even Ian Dunt that pro EU journalist was saying that putting our foreign aid budget to helping rid Asian rivers of this evil sea life killer unites the Mail and Express readers and the Guardian and Independent readers

    Do not under estimate the anger over plastic
    https://euobserver.com/economic/140499

    The European Commission wants to use a new "plastic tax", moving income from the emission trading scheme from national to EU level, plus extra money from member states, to help plug the hole in the EU budget left by Brexit and to finance migration and security tasks.
    The EU have never seen a problem whereby the optimal solution in their opinion is more centralization and increased tax.
    when all you have is a hammer...
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 18,417
    edited January 10

    Also why do we allow higher earners to pay 2% above the upper threshold whereas low to middle earners are paying 12%?

    You have to look at the actual real marginal tax rate (income tax + NI), which is 32% for 'basic rate' taxpayers and 42% for 'higher rate' tax payers. In addition there is the employer contribution (which is just a disguised form of income tax on employees), adding another substantial chunk. These are absurdly high marginal rates for modestly-paid employees, made worse by the the cliff-edge at £100K and the withdrawal of child benefit for parents at £50K.

    It is extraordinary that there isn't a massive popular rebellion against these absurdly high marginal rates. Only the Taxpayers Alliance and the IEA seem to have noticed them. Basically PAYE taxpayers are being conned - in their sweet naivety, they think they are being taxed at 20% or 40%.
    And is your alternative to slash taxes and spending and public services?
    No, my alternative is to have a sane tax system which merges NI and income tax, so that no-one is conned, the marginal tax rates are transparent and sensibly progressive rather than going up and down like a demented staircase, there are no brain-dead cliff-edges like that introduced by Darling at £100K, and employment income is not singled out for massively higher tax than other forms of income.

    Admittedly getting there from where we are now is politically difficult. If only we had a Conservative government with a very large majority!
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 4,549
    edited January 10
    Three Govt defeats in the Lords tonight on the Data Protection Bill.

    One was to hold the second stage of the Leveson Inquiry into the press.

    Final defeat (by a relatively modest 17 votes) was to make newspapers liable for opponents legal costs (even if newspaper wins) if not signed up to state recognised regulator.

    Govt will seek to overturn defeats in the Commons.

    May has supposedly been on the brink of announcing a list of new Peers since Christmas - surely she needs to get this done without further delay in order to make these defeats less likely.

  • Also can I just say, as a relative newcomer to the joys of the the weekly shop, wtf is May on about with 'plastic-free aisles'? (top article)

    Has she ever written a shopping list and then tried to fulfill it? It's hard enough to find everything when all the stuff is (relatively) logically placed. Baked beans: with the canned veg or in the plastic-free aisle?

    Fox hunting, Grammar schools, Demential tax... and now plastic-free aisles - what a genius!
    Ben - this attack on plastic will be hugely popular and even Ian Dunt that pro EU journalist was saying that putting our foreign aid budget to helping rid Asian rivers of this evil sea life killer unites the Mail and Express readers and the Guardian and Independent readers

    Do not under estimate the anger over plastic
    Big_G, don't get me wrong I am 100% in favour of sensible measures to reduce plastic waste wherever possible. You should see the Pointer household - Mrs P enforces a very strict recycling policy and I do actually agree with her on that.

    It's just that plastic-free aisles seems such a bonkers way to further the cause.

    Tbf to Tessa, I should really wait until she actually says it, rather than react to what the Times says she is going to say. With any luck she'll look at that headline and quetly drop the idea from a speach which, if the BBCreport is anything to go by, will actually contain a number of sensible and worthwhile measures.
    I am old enough to remember a time when your grocer weighed and put your purchase in a paper bag and there was no plastic pollution. Plastic free isles will be very popular and anything else should be in disposable bags and in time end plastic use altogether.

    Indeed there are several local grocers who do not sell anything in plastic bags and customers bring their own re-usable ones
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 7,595

    Amazing! 'Britain paying to access the Single Market' - why didn't we think of that before?!
    Just us in the Banking/Insurance/Financial Services industry.
    isn't paying for bits and bobs exactly the a la carte they've been going on about?

    Reminds me of that dad on facebook who complained about his teenagers needing driving everywhere. "I'm not a taxi service" he explained "I should start charging them money!".

    Except, dear reader, that would make him a taxi service.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 24,532

    Alistair said:

    It would have been such larks to see the Save our Toby campaign defend this.

    Actually, Young's response there is quite good - listening to another point of view (however, controversial) doesn't imply any form of acceptance of it.

    Precisely why he would have been so good in challenging campus "no platform" culture.
    Rather undermined by following wackos like Emil Kirkegaard on Twitter.

    Suggests less a brave inclusive listening to all points of view and more that he agrees with them.
    Following someone on Twitter does not imply endorsement of their views.

    I follow Guy Verhofstadt.
    But how many conferences on realising the Euro-federalist dream have you attended? :smile:
    WilliamGlenn keeps posting me tickets, but they go straight in the bin.
  • HYUFD said:

    Gove predicts the next Tory leader will be either Damian Hinds or Gavin Williamson in that Times article, interesting
    He doesn't predict that.

    He said it could be between those two.
  • HYUFD said:

    Gove predicts the next Tory leader will be either Damian Hinds or Gavin Williamson in that Times article, interesting
    He could be right
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 22,576

    Also why do we allow higher earners to pay 2% above the upper threshold whereas low to middle earners are paying 12%?

    You have to look at the actual real marginal tax rate (income tax + NI), which is 32% for 'basic rate' taxpayers and 42% for 'higher rate' tax payers. In addition there is the employer contribution (which is just a disguised form of income tax on employees), adding another substantial chunk. These are absurdly high marginal rates for modestly-paid employees, made worse by the the cliff-edge at £100K and the withdrawal of child benefit for parents at £50K.

    It is extraordinary that there isn't a massive popular rebellion against these absurdly high marginal rates. Only the Taxpayers Alliance and the IEA seem to have noticed them. Basically PAYE taxpayers are being conned - in their sweet naivety, they think they are being taxed at 20% or 40%.
    And is your alternative to slash taxes and spending and public services?
    No, my alternative is to have a sane tax system which merges NI and income tax, so that no-one is conned, the marginal tax rates are transparent, there are no brain-dead cliff-edges like that introduced by Darling at £100K, and employment income is not singled out for massively higher tax than other forms of income.

    Admittedly getting there from where we are now is politically difficult. If only we had a Conservative government with a very large majority!
    I'd add treating inheritance as exactly what it is: income.

    I find it odd that we expect that money we work for should be taxed, and that which we do not should be tax free.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 28,908
    Alistair said:
    Perhaps they could take Crypto-Kitties instead?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 42,691

    HYUFD said:

    Gove predicts the next Tory leader will be either Damian Hinds or Gavin Williamson in that Times article, interesting
    He doesn't predict that.

    He said it could be between those two.
    Which would mean one of them would become leader
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 18,417

    HYUFD said:

    Gove predicts the next Tory leader will be either Damian Hinds or Gavin Williamson in that Times article, interesting
    He could be right
    I doubt it. Gavin Williamson has zero support in the party, and less than zero support in the House, and owes his career progression entirely to Theresa May, which (how shall I put this politely?) may not necessarily be entirely to his advantage in years to come.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 24,532
    Scott_P said:
    I can see why he grew the beard.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 42,691

    HYUFD said:

    Gove predicts the next Tory leader will be either Damian Hinds or Gavin Williamson in that Times article, interesting
    He could be right
    They are certainly now the best placed of the 'rising stars' having actually made it to the Cabinet
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 19,831

    HYUFD said:

    Gove predicts the next Tory leader will be either Damian Hinds or Gavin Williamson in that Times article, interesting
    He doesn't predict that.

    He said it could be between those two.
    He might as well have said, "The two candidates whose chances I would particularly like to scupper are Gavin Williamson and Damian Hinds."
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 7,595

    Alistair said:
    Perhaps they could take Crypto-Kitties instead?
    Perhaps they could form some sort of central "bank" prepared to issue paper currency entitling you to a bitcoin...
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 3,721
    Ishmael_Z said:


    Also can I just say, as a relative newcomer to the joys of the the weekly shop, wtf is May on about with 'plastic-free aisles'? (top article)

    Has she ever written a shopping list and then tried to fulfill it? It's hard enough to find everything when all the stuff is (relatively) logically placed. Baked beans: with the canned veg or in the plastic-free aisle?

    Fox hunting, Grammar schools, Demential tax... and now plastic-free aisles - what a genius!
    ”a relative newcomer to the joys of the the weekly shop” ffs - have you only just started consuming food, or has Mrs pointer reviewed your definition of women's work?

    Do PM me if you need it explaining how the hoover works, because she'll have you doing that next.
    Haha! Yes fair cop - I can see it reads badly. But for many complicated reasons too tedious to bore you with here, in our agreed spilt of responsibilites shopping was always my wife's responsibility. Now I have retired I have more time (she has been retired these past 20 years!) so I have taken on some of the things she used to do, including all the cooking, and thus the food shopping.

    Still it's touching to know that between all your fox-hunting you still have time for a bit of hoovering and shopping! :smile:
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 42,691
    rcs1000 said:

    Also why do we allow higher earners to pay 2% above the upper threshold whereas low to middle earners are paying 12%?

    You have to look at the actual real marginal tax rate (income tax + NI), which is 32% for 'basic rate' taxpayers and 42% for 'higher rate' tax payers. In addition there is the employer contribution (which is just a disguised form of income tax on employees), adding another substantial chunk. These are absurdly high marginal rates for modestly-paid employees, made worse by the the cliff-edge at £100K and the withdrawal of child benefit for parents at £50K.

    It is extraordinary that there isn't a massive popular rebellion against these absurdly high marginal rates. Only the Taxpayers Alliance and the IEA seem to have noticed them. Basically PAYE taxpayers are being conned - in their sweet naivety, they think they are being taxed at 20% or 40%.
    And is your alternative to slash taxes and spending and public services?
    No, my alternative is to have a sane tax system which merges NI and income tax, so that no-one is conned, the marginal tax rates are transparent, there are no brain-dead cliff-edges like that introduced by Darling at £100K, and employment income is not singled out for massively higher tax than other forms of income.

    Admittedly getting there from where we are now is politically difficult. If only we had a Conservative government with a very large majority!
    I'd add treating inheritance as exactly what it is: income.

    I find it odd that we expect that money we work for should be taxed, and that which we do not should be tax free.
    It isn't, it has already been taxed, the estate which faces inheritance tax is what is left (even if thanks to Osborne it is rather less than it used to be)
  • RobDRobD Posts: 32,839

    Alistair said:
    Perhaps they could take Crypto-Kitties instead?
    Perhaps they could form some sort of central "bank" prepared to issue paper currency entitling you to a bitcoin...
    Paper currency? It’ll never catch on...
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 24,532

    Also why do we allow higher earners to pay 2% above the upper threshold whereas low to middle earners are paying 12%?

    You have to look at the actual real marginal tax rate (income tax + NI), which is 32% for 'basic rate' taxpayers and 42% for 'higher rate' tax payers. In addition there is the employer contribution (which is just a disguised form of income tax on employees), adding another substantial chunk. These are absurdly high marginal rates for modestly-paid employees, made worse by the the cliff-edge at £100K and the withdrawal of child benefit for parents at £50K.

    It is extraordinary that there isn't a massive popular rebellion against these absurdly high marginal rates. Only the Taxpayers Alliance and the IEA seem to have noticed them. Basically PAYE taxpayers are being conned - in their sweet naivety, they think they are being taxed at 20% or 40%.
    And is your alternative to slash taxes and spending and public services?
    No, my alternative is to have a sane tax system which merges NI and income tax, so that no-one is conned, the marginal tax rates are transparent and sensibly progressive rather than going up and down like a demented staircase, there are no brain-dead cliff-edges like that introduced by Darling at £100K, and employment income is not singled out for massively higher tax than other forms of income.

    Admittedly getting there from where we are now is politically difficult. If only we had a Conservative government with a very large majority!
    Income is already heavily taxed, in my view.

    If the Government needs more tax revenue, and it probably does, it needs to find a way of taxing overall asset wealth (excluding people's homes) and non-domiciled foreign investors, although I appreciate that's difficult.
  • HYUFD said:

    Gove predicts the next Tory leader will be either Damian Hinds or Gavin Williamson in that Times article, interesting
    He doesn't predict that.

    He said it could be between those two.
    He might as well have said, "The two candidates whose chances I would particularly like to scupper are Gavin Williamson and Damian Hinds."
    Which is what the rest of the article effectively says and was ignored by HYUFD
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 42,691
    Jacob Rees-Mogg, an exact contemporary of Hinds at Trinity College, Oxford, was beaten by him for the Presidency of the Union, yet says of him: “He’s one of my oldest friends. He’s a very decent, honest man. He doesn’t seek the limelight, but I have thought since 2010 [when they both entered Parliament] he was bound to get into the Cabinet on the basis of ability.”
    https://www.conservativehome.com/highlights/2018/01/profile-damian-hinds-liberal-catholic-social-mobility-wonk-and-new-education-secretary.html
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 3,721
    rcs1000 said:

    Also why do we allow higher earners to pay 2% above the upper threshold whereas low to middle earners are paying 12%?

    You have to look at the actual real marginal tax rate (income tax + NI), which is 32% for 'basic rate' taxpayers and 42% for 'higher rate' tax payers. In addition there is the employer contribution (which is just a disguised form of income tax on employees), adding another substantial chunk. These are absurdly high marginal rates for modestly-paid employees, made worse by the the cliff-edge at £100K and the withdrawal of child benefit for parents at £50K.

    It is extraordinary that there isn't a massive popular rebellion against these absurdly high marginal rates. Only the Taxpayers Alliance and the IEA seem to have noticed them. Basically PAYE taxpayers are being conned - in their sweet naivety, they think they are being taxed at 20% or 40%.
    And is your alternative to slash taxes and spending and public services?
    No, my alternative is to have a sane tax system which merges NI and income tax, so that no-one is conned, the marginal tax rates are transparent, there are no brain-dead cliff-edges like that introduced by Darling at £100K, and employment income is not singled out for massively higher tax than other forms of income.

    Admittedly getting there from where we are now is politically difficult. If only we had a Conservative government with a very large majority!
    I'd add treating inheritance as exactly what it is: income.

    I find it odd that we expect that money we work for should be taxed, and that which we do not should be tax free.
    I agree with both of you! At which unusual instance, I shall skip off to bed. Goodnight all!
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 28,908
    edited January 10

    Alistair said:
    Perhaps they could take Crypto-Kitties instead?
    Perhaps they could form some sort of central "bank" prepared to issue paper currency entitling you to a bitcoin...
    I watched an extended interview with one of the key people behind Cardano today, Charles Hoskinson. He was very impressive.

    Like the first internet bubble that crashed and burned was filled with crap sites and ideas, from the flames Google, Amazon etc rose, somebody is going to crack this decentralized framework. It might not be blockchain, it might be tangles, it might be something else.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 18,417

    Income is already heavily taxed, in my view.

    If the Government needs more tax revenue, and it probably does, it needs to find a way of taxing overall asset wealth (excluding people's homes) and non-domiciled foreign investors, although I appreciate that's difficult.

    I wasn't suggesting taxing income more heavily, just more rationally.
  • Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 1,047
    Note too the sub-headline, "Talks on Britain paying to access single market".

    So Peter Bone was being misleading when he stated earlier "we have offered £39billion to allow them to sell £70bn more goods into this country each year than we sell to them". Clearly we're eventually going to offer them much more than that.

    No deal appears ever more attractive. Remember too that in forgoing a deal, the UK gives up what would be a significant addition to government revenue in the form of import tariffs. Some of that could be used to avoid any overall burden on UK businesses by tax cuts to a similar scale to match the gross bill paid by UK exporters to the EU. The rest could be passed on to the NHS together with savings on the UK's budget contribution to give effect to promises in the referendum.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 32,839
    edited January 10

    Alistair said:
    Perhaps they could take Crypto-Kitties instead?
    Perhaps they could form some sort of central "bank" prepared to issue paper currency entitling you to a bitcoin...
    I watched an extended interview with one of the key people behind Cardano today, Charles Hoskinson. He was very impressive.

    Like the first internet bubble that crashed and burned was filled with crap sites and ideas, from the flames Google, Amazon etc rose, somebody is going to crack this decentralized framework. It might not be blockchain, it might be tangles, it might be something else.
    I think the distributed ledger is the revolutionary part of it. I believe the Bank of England are working on setting their own up.
  • HYUFD said:

    Gove predicts the next Tory leader will be either Damian Hinds or Gavin Williamson in that Times article, interesting
    He doesn't predict that.

    He said it could be between those two.
    He might as well have said, "The two candidates whose chances I would particularly like to scupper are Gavin Williamson and Damian Hinds."
    Which is what the rest of the article effectively says and was ignored by HYUFD
    After this week there are going to be many candidates when the time comes.

    Surprises me for a betting site that there has not been a list of odds on various candidates, unless I missed it
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 28,908
    edited January 10
    RobD said:

    Alistair said:
    Perhaps they could take Crypto-Kitties instead?
    Perhaps they could form some sort of central "bank" prepared to issue paper currency entitling you to a bitcoin...
    I watched an extended interview with one of the key people behind Cardano today, Charles Hoskinson. He was very impressive.

    Like the first internet bubble that crashed and burned was filled with crap sites and ideas, from the flames Google, Amazon etc rose, somebody is going to crack this decentralized framework. It might not be blockchain, it might be tangles, it might be something else.
    I think the distributed ledger is the revolutionary part of it. I believe the Bank of England are working on setting their own up.
    Totally agree.

    What I liked about this Hoskinson guy was it wasn't I am going to get rich quick. It was we have a team of people who approach this from a theoretical point of view, we then publish papers to peer review conferences as we want people to review the actual theory of what we are working on not the implementation.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 42,691

    HYUFD said:

    Gove predicts the next Tory leader will be either Damian Hinds or Gavin Williamson in that Times article, interesting
    He doesn't predict that.

    He said it could be between those two.
    He might as well have said, "The two candidates whose chances I would particularly like to scupper are Gavin Williamson and Damian Hinds."
    Which is what the rest of the article effectively says and was ignored by HYUFD
    After this week there are going to be many candidates when the time comes.

    Surprises me for a betting site that there has not been a list of odds on various candidates, unless I missed it
    Hinds, Williamson, McVey and Lewis and Mourdaunt must all now have at least a shot being new entrants to the Cabinet and relatively young
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Gove predicts the next Tory leader will be either Damian Hinds or Gavin Williamson in that Times article, interesting
    He doesn't predict that.

    He said it could be between those two.
    He might as well have said, "The two candidates whose chances I would particularly like to scupper are Gavin Williamson and Damian Hinds."
    Which is what the rest of the article effectively says and was ignored by HYUFD
    After this week there are going to be many candidates when the time comes.

    Surprises me for a betting site that there has not been a list of odds on various candidates, unless I missed it
    Hinds, Williamson, McVey and Lewis and Mourdaunt must all now have at least a shot being new entrants to the Cabinet and relatively young
    Expanding your horizons ?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 28,908
    The Foreign Office has turned down a request from the Ecuadorian government to grant the WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange diplomatic status as a means of breaking the stalemate over his continued presence in the UK.

    https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/jan/10/julian-assanges-bid-for-diplomatic-status-rejected-by-uk-government
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 42,691

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Gove predicts the next Tory leader will be either Damian Hinds or Gavin Williamson in that Times article, interesting
    He doesn't predict that.

    He said it could be between those two.
    He might as well have said, "The two candidates whose chances I would particularly like to scupper are Gavin Williamson and Damian Hinds."
    Which is what the rest of the article effectively says and was ignored by HYUFD
    After this week there are going to be many candidates when the time comes.

    Surprises me for a betting site that there has not been a list of odds on various candidates, unless I missed it
    Hinds, Williamson, McVey and Lewis and Mourdaunt must all now have at least a shot being new entrants to the Cabinet and relatively young
    Expanding your horizons ?
    If polling evidence emerges that they would give Corbyn a run for his money I would certainly consider them but I think Boris or Davis remain favourite for now
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 28,908
    edited January 10
    John McDonnell, the shadow chancellor who cites Marx as an intellectual influence and wants to tax the super-rich, has announced that he will attend the World Economic Forum in Davos – the annual gathering of the global elite.

    The conference in the Swiss ski resort, held every January, is a talking shop for politicians, business leaders and rock star philanthropists to discuss the state of the world economy.

    McDonnell had accepted an invitation to attend, a spokesman said, adding he would “use the opportunity to set out why it is vital we rewrite the rules of the global economy.

    “He will further explain Labour’s vision for an alternative economic approach to replace the current model of capitalism that has failed the many and led to an unsustainable concentration of wealth and power in the hands of a few.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/jan/10/john-mcdonnell-to-urge-davos-elite-rewrite-global-economy-rules

    Rewrite the global rules with an alternative to capitalism...that scares the shit out of me, especially as McDonnell might be brighter than Jezza, but he ain't no Adam Smith or Milton Friedman, and doubt he has magically found an genius alternative that would work better than capitalism.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 19,831
    On topic - http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/jeremy-kyle-refuses-to-rule-out-political-career-9962722.html

    "Jeremy Kyle refuses to rule out political career"

    Any polling on Jeremy Kyle versus Robert Kilroy-Silk?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 29,042

    The Foreign Office has turned down a request from the Ecuadorian government to grant the WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange diplomatic status as a means of breaking the stalemate over his continued presence in the UK.

    https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/jan/10/julian-assanges-bid-for-diplomatic-status-rejected-by-uk-government


    The government of Ecuador recently requested diplomatic status for Mr Assange here in the UK. The UK did not grant that request, nor are we in talks with Ecuador on this matter. Ecuador knows that the way to resolve this issue is for Julian Assange to leave the embassy to face justice.”


    World’s smallest violin required......
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 28,908

    The Foreign Office has turned down a request from the Ecuadorian government to grant the WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange diplomatic status as a means of breaking the stalemate over his continued presence in the UK.

    https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/jan/10/julian-assanges-bid-for-diplomatic-status-rejected-by-uk-government


    The government of Ecuador recently requested diplomatic status for Mr Assange here in the UK. The UK did not grant that request, nor are we in talks with Ecuador on this matter. Ecuador knows that the way to resolve this issue is for Julian Assange to leave the embassy to face justice.”


    World’s smallest violin required......
    Lock him up....lock him up....lock him up.....
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 10,192
    edited January 10
    rcs1000 said:

    Also why do we allow higher earners to pay 2% above the upper threshold whereas low to middle earners are paying 12%?

    You have to look at the actual real marginal tax rate (income tax + NI), which is 32% for 'basic rate' taxpayers and 42% for 'higher rate' tax payers. In addition there is the employer contribution (which is just a disguised form of income tax on employees), adding another substantial chunk. These are absurdly high marginal rates for modestly-paid employees, made worse by the the cliff-edge at £100K and the withdrawal of child benefit for parents at £50K.

    It is extraordinary that there isn't a massive popular rebellion against these absurdly high marginal rates. Only the Taxpayers Alliance and the IEA seem to have noticed them. Basically PAYE taxpayers are being conned - in their sweet naivety, they think they are being taxed at 20% or 40%.
    And is your alternative to slash taxes and spending and public services?
    No, my alternative is to have a sane tax system which merges NI and income tax, so that no-one is conned, the marginal tax rates are transparent, there are no brain-dead cliff-edges like that introduced by Darling at £100K, and employment income is not singled out for massively higher tax than other forms of income.

    Admittedly getting there from where we are now is politically difficult. If only we had a Conservative government with a very large majority!
    I'd add treating inheritance as exactly what it is: income.

    I find it odd that we expect that money we work for should be taxed, and that which we do not should be tax free.
    You get an inheritance every month? Wow!
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 13,739

    Also why do we allow higher earners to pay 2% above the upper threshold whereas low to middle earners are paying 12%?

    You have to look at the actual real marginal tax rate (income tax + NI), which is 32% for 'basic rate' taxpayers and 42% for 'higher rate' tax payers. In addition there is the employer contribution (which is just a disguised form of income tax on employees), adding another substantial chunk. These are absurdly high marginal rates for modestly-paid employees, made worse by the the cliff-edge at £100K and the withdrawal of child benefit for parents at £50K.

    It is extraordinary that there isn't a massive popular rebellion against these absurdly high marginal rates. Only the Taxpayers Alliance and the IEA seem to have noticed them. Basically PAYE taxpayers are being conned - in their sweet naivety, they think they are being taxed at 20% or 40%.
    And is your alternative to slash taxes and spending and public services?
    No, my alternative is to have a sane tax system which merges NI and income tax, so that no-one is conned, the marginal tax rates are transparent and sensibly progressive rather than going up and down like a demented staircase, there are no brain-dead cliff-edges like that introduced by Darling at £100K, and employment income is not singled out for massively higher tax than other forms of income.

    Admittedly getting there from where we are now is politically difficult. If only we had a Conservative government with a very large majority!
    A good start but go further and merge welfare (tax credits/universal credit) with your combined income tax. There aren't just cliff edges at 100k but at the bottom end having to pay tax and losing welfare ends up being a massive tax rate makes people think they need to stick to just 16 hours or lose benefits.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 32,839
    edited January 10

    The Foreign Office has turned down a request from the Ecuadorian government to grant the WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange diplomatic status as a means of breaking the stalemate over his continued presence in the UK.

    https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/jan/10/julian-assanges-bid-for-diplomatic-status-rejected-by-uk-government


    The government of Ecuador recently requested diplomatic status for Mr Assange here in the UK. The UK did not grant that request, nor are we in talks with Ecuador on this matter. Ecuador knows that the way to resolve this issue is for Julian Assange to leave the embassy to face justice.”


    World’s smallest violin required......
    Lock him up....lock him up....lock him up.....
    Already locked up, and at no expense to the taxpayer ;)
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 28,908
    edited January 11
    RobD said:

    The Foreign Office has turned down a request from the Ecuadorian government to grant the WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange diplomatic status as a means of breaking the stalemate over his continued presence in the UK.

    https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/jan/10/julian-assanges-bid-for-diplomatic-status-rejected-by-uk-government


    The government of Ecuador recently requested diplomatic status for Mr Assange here in the UK. The UK did not grant that request, nor are we in talks with Ecuador on this matter. Ecuador knows that the way to resolve this issue is for Julian Assange to leave the embassy to face justice.”


    World’s smallest violin required......
    Lock him up....lock him up....lock him up.....
    Already locked up, and at no expense to the taxpayer ;)
    Well if the Americans get hold of him, he might have to swap sharing a big house with a load of diplomats for the likes of Abu Hamza. Might be a bit of a culture shock.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 19,831
    RobD said:

    The Foreign Office has turned down a request from the Ecuadorian government to grant the WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange diplomatic status as a means of breaking the stalemate over his continued presence in the UK.

    https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/jan/10/julian-assanges-bid-for-diplomatic-status-rejected-by-uk-government


    The government of Ecuador recently requested diplomatic status for Mr Assange here in the UK. The UK did not grant that request, nor are we in talks with Ecuador on this matter. Ecuador knows that the way to resolve this issue is for Julian Assange to leave the embassy to face justice.”


    World’s smallest violin required......
    Lock him up....lock him up....lock him up.....
    Already locked up, and at no expense to the taxpayer ;)
    Who's feeding him in there? Is he paying rent to Ecuador?
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 793

    Also why do we allow higher earners to pay 2% above the upper threshold whereas low to middle earners are paying 12%?

    You have to look at the actual real marginal tax rate (income tax + NI), which is 32% for 'basic rate' taxpayers and 42% for 'higher rate' tax payers. In addition there is the employer contribution (which is just a disguised form of income tax on employees), adding another substantial chunk. These are absurdly high marginal rates for modestly-paid employees, made worse by the the cliff-edge at £100K and the withdrawal of child benefit for parents at £50K.

    It is extraordinary that there isn't a massive popular rebellion against these absurdly high marginal rates. Only the Taxpayers Alliance and the IEA seem to have noticed them. Basically PAYE taxpayers are being conned - in their sweet naivety, they think they are being taxed at 20% or 40%.
    And is your alternative to slash taxes and spending and public services?
    No, my alternative is to have a sane tax system which merges NI and income tax, so that no-one is conned, the marginal tax rates are transparent and sensibly progressive rather than going up and down like a demented staircase, there are no brain-dead cliff-edges like that introduced by Darling at £100K, and employment income is not singled out for massively higher tax than other forms of income.

    Admittedly getting there from where we are now is politically difficult. If only we had a Conservative government with a very large majority!
    A good start but go further and merge welfare (tax credits/universal credit) with your combined income tax. There aren't just cliff edges at 100k but at the bottom end having to pay tax and losing welfare ends up being a massive tax rate makes people think they need to stick to just 16 hours or lose benefits.
    I bid: National Basic Income combined with a (several %) higher tax rate for accessing it and for some multiple of the time that you access it. Merge state pensions, student debt, perhaps even child benefit into this kind of system and let people choose freely how universal they want these things to be.

  • CharlesCharles Posts: 19,818

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:



    Indeed. The appetite for cuts appears to have abated. Either we put up with what we have now, or someone, somewhere is going to have to cough up something.
    And some of those people are going to moan about it.
    Given that, the Council Tax idea is one possibility among many.
    Social Care needs to be funded somehow, if it is not to be funded by the individual, which seems to be politically impossible.

    It simply adds to the already gross intergenerational unfairness to pay for social care & dementia care by taxes on the working young and middle-aged.

    The fairest solution is that the elderly pay the tax to fund social care, and particularly the elderly with property wealth.

    And so we are back with Labour's Death Tax, the LibDem's Mansion Tax and the Tory Dementia Tax -- all of which basically taxed housing wealth of the elderly and all of which proved to be electoral poison.

    My guess is that the can will continue to be kicked down the road. Ultimately, too many people want to inherit a house rather than see it swallowed up to pay for free social care for all.
    But they lose the house now apart from £23,000 if they contract dementia but not cancer. That is not something that can be kicked down the road and if anyone can find an acceptable solution they will reap big rewards.

    I believe Hunt thinks he can and that is why he refused to go and insisted Social care was added to Health. He was very assured at the dispatch box today
    They only lose the house if they need residential care, not personal care at home
    The problem with dementia is that it not only ends up needing very specialist care but also can be needed for many years. When my sister needed a nursing home for her cancer I saw many that had dementia patients and indeed some that had only dementia patients and it is a very challenging environment for everyone including the nurses and relatives
    Within 10 years we will have vaccines for Alzheimer’s (possibly much sooner). The vast majority of people under 50 have nothing to worry about
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 28,908
    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:



    Indeed. The appetite for cuts appears to have abated. Either we put up with what we have now, or someone, somewhere is going to have to cough up something.
    And some of those people are going to moan about it.
    Given that, the Council Tax idea is one possibility among many.
    Social Care needs to be funded somehow, if it is not to be funded by the individual, which seems to be politically impossible.

    It simply adds to the already gross intergenerational unfairness to pay for social care & dementia care by taxes on the working young and middle-aged.

    The fairest solution is that the elderly pay the tax to fund social care, and particularly the elderly with property wealth.

    And so we are back with Labour's Death Tax, the LibDem's Mansion Tax and the Tory Dementia Tax -- all of which basically taxed housing wealth of the elderly and all of which proved to be electoral poison.

    My guess is that the can will continue to be kicked down the road. Ultimately, too many people want to inherit a house rather than see it swallowed up to pay for free social care for all.
    But they lose the house now apart from £23,000 if they contract dementia but not cancer. That is not something that can be kicked down the road and if anyone can find an acceptable solution they will reap big rewards.

    I believe Hunt thinks he can and that is why he refused to go and insisted Social care was added to Health. He was very assured at the dispatch box today
    They only lose the house if they need residential care, not personal care at home
    The problem with dementia is that it not only ends up needing very specialist care but also can be needed for many years. When my sister needed a nursing home for her cancer I saw many that had dementia patients and indeed some that had only dementia patients and it is a very challenging environment for everyone including the nurses and relatives
    Within 10 years we will have vaccines for Alzheimer’s (possibly much sooner). The vast majority of people under 50 have nothing to worry about
    I heard that 10 years ago...
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 29,042
    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:



    Indeed. The appetite for cuts appears to have abated. Either we put up with what we have now, or someone, somewhere is going to have to cough up something.
    And some of those people are going to moan about it.
    Given that, the Council Tax idea is one possibility among many.
    Social Care needs to be funded somehow, if it is not to be funded by the individual, which seems to be politically impossible.

    It simply adds to the already gross intergenerational unfairness to pay for social care & dementia care by taxes on the working young and middle-aged.

    The fairest solution is that the elderly pay the tax to fund social care, and particularly the elderly with property wealth.

    And so we are back with Labour's Death Tax, the LibDem's Mansion Tax and the Tory Dementia Tax -- all of which basically taxed housing wealth of the elderly and all of which proved to be electoral poison.

    My guess is that the can will continue to be kicked down the road. Ultimately, too many people want to inherit a house rather than see it swallowed up to pay for free social care for all.
    But they lose the house now apart from £23,000 if they contract dementia but not cancer. That is not something that can be kicked down the road and if anyone can find an acceptable solution they will reap big rewards.

    I believe Hunt thinks he can and that is why he refused to go and insisted Social care was added to Health. He was very assured at the dispatch box today
    They only lose the house if they need residential care, not personal care at home
    The problem with dementia is that it not only ends up needing very specialist care but also can be needed for many years. When my sister needed a nursing home for her cancer I saw many that had dementia patients and indeed some that had only dementia patients and it is a very challenging environment for everyone including the nurses and relatives
    Within 10 years we will have vaccines for Alzheimer’s (possibly much sooner). The vast majority of people under 50 have nothing to worry about
    Those of us about to turn 60?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 19,818

    According to Wikipedia Oprah has six homes, all of them in the US, in California, New Jersey, Colorado, Hawaii, Illinois and Florida.

    Beach house, work house, ski chalet, holiday home, true to my roots home, tax haven qualification home.

    Is that right?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 28,908
    Charles said:

    According to Wikipedia Oprah has six homes, all of them in the US, in California, New Jersey, Colorado, Hawaii, Illinois and Florida.

    Beach house, work house, ski chalet, holiday home, true to my roots home, tax haven qualification home.

    Is that right?
    Enough about your homes Charles, what about Oprah’s.
  • PendduPenddu Posts: 147
    I heard that 10 years ago....or was it yesterday..? Have you seen my cats?
  • kjohnwkjohnw Posts: 872
    talking of US presidents , this is interesting:
    https://mobile.twitter.com/MattSmethurst/status/950918033815588869
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 903
    Sandpit said:

    Yorkcity said:

    Yorkcity said:

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jan/10/reshuffle-theresa-may-tragic-victim-brexit David Cameron's former speech writer does not seem impressed with May.

    He’s not a fan of Brexit either tbh.
    True , saw the Daily Politics today Andrew Neil said about May and the re shuffle .That she couldn't organise a piss up in brewery .Strong for 1130 am on the BBC.These conservative commentators seem to be getting very agitated.
    Agree about the critiscm but we are where we are.

    As a matter of interest did you see Neil interview Debbie Abrahams over John McDonnell's abuse of Esther McVey. She was speechless and very embarrassed
    Yes, well done to Neil for that rather uncomfortable interview.
    In fairness to her she didn't actually know the full story, you could argue they should brief people but she might not have expected to be jumped like that with an event from so long ago.

    Once the story is explained later



    She understands what is going on, but the original is nicely cut to push a certain angle.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 19,818

    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:



    Indeed. The appetite for cuts appears to have abated. Either we put up with what we have now, or someone, somewhere is going to have to cough up something.
    And some of those people are going to moan about it.
    Given that, the Council Tax idea is one possibility among many.
    Social Care needs to be funded somehow, if it is not to be funded by the individual, which seems to be politically impossible.

    It simply adds to the already gross intergenerational unfairness to pay for social care & dementia care by taxes on the working young and middle-aged.

    The fairest solution is that the elderly pay the tax to fund social care, and particularly the elderly with property wealth.

    And so we are back with Labour's Death Tax, the LibDem's Mansion Tax and the Tory Dementia Tax -- all of which basically taxed housing wealth of the elderly and all of which proved to be electoral poison.

    My guess is that the can will continue to be kicked down the road. Ultimately, too many people want to inherit a house rather than see it swallowed up to pay for free social care for all.
    But they lose the house now apart from £23,000 if they contract dementia but not cancer. That is not something that can be kicked down the road and if anyone can find an acceptable solution they will reap big rewards.

    I believe Hunt thinks he can and that is why he refused to go and insisted Social care was added to Health. He was very assured at the dispatch box today
    They only lose the house if they need residential care, not personal care at home
    The problem with dementia is that it not only ends up needing very specialist care but also can be needed for many years. When my sister needed a nursing home for her cancer I saw many that had dementia patients and indeed some that had only dementia patients and it is a very challenging environment for everyone including the nurses and relatives
    Within 10 years we will have vaccines for Alzheimer’s (possibly much sooner). The vast majority of people under 50 have nothing to worry about
    I heard that 10 years ago...
    No, you would have heard “a cure for Alzheimer’s”. Very different.

    The science we have today is incredible - the breakthrough in immunology is massive
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 28,908
    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:



    Indeed. The appetite for cuts appears to have abated. Either we put up with what we have now, or someone, somewhere is going to have to cough up something.
    And some of those people are going to moan about it.
    Given that, the Council Tax idea is one possibility among many.
    Social Care needs to be funded somehow, if it is not to be funded by the individual, which seems to be politically impossible.

    It simply adds to the already gross intergenerational unfairness to pay for social care & dementia care by taxes on the working young and middle-aged.

    The fairest solution is that the elderly pay the tax to fund social care, and particularly the elderly with property wealth.

    And so we are back with Labour's Death Tax, the LibDem's Mansion Tax and the Tory Dementia Tax -- all of which basically taxed housing wealth of the elderly and all of which proved to be electoral poison.

    My guess is that the can will continue to be kicked down the road. Ultimately, too many people want to inherit a house rather than see it swallowed up to pay for free social care for all.
    But they lose the house now apart from £23,000 if they contract dementia but not cancer. That is not something that can be kicked down the road and if anyone can find an acceptable solution they will reap big rewards.

    I believe Hunt thinks he can and that is why he refused to go and insisted Social care was added to Health. He was very assured at the dispatch box today
    They only lose the house if they need residential care, not personal care at home
    The problem with dementia is that it not only ends up needing very specialist care but also can be needed for many years. When my sister needed a nursing home for her cancer I saw many that had dementia patients and indeed some that had only dementia patients and it is a very challenging environment for everyone including the nurses and relatives
    Within 10 years we will have vaccines for Alzheimer’s (possibly much sooner). The vast majority of people under 50 have nothing to worry about
    I heard that 10 years ago...
    No, you would have heard “a cure for Alzheimer’s”. Very different.

    The science we have today is incredible - the breakthrough in immunology is massive
    I was kinda of joking. But that genuinely interesting. Not my area of expertise, but I thought the causes for Alzheimers was still not really understood, so how can one immunize against?
This discussion has been closed.