This would include stop-and-search, which is opposed by Khan. Correspondingly, stop-and-search has declined dramatically, as knife (and other potentially fatal) crime has risen.
"In the year ending March 2017, there were 303,228 stops and searches carried out under the authority of s.1 of PACE. As Statistical Bulletin 20/17 notes, this accounted for “99.8% of all stops and searches in England and Wales” (at p.19). Whilst this figure is clearly substantial, it falls a long way short of the peak in the year ending March 2011, when there were 1,229,324 s.1 stop and searches. The most recent figure therefore represents a 75.33% reduction from the peak figure."
It does seem that the big drop in Stop and Search precedes the recent spate of murders, and indeed dates to when Mrs May was Home Sec and Boris Mayor of London.
Compared to Khan, Boris Johnson's performance as London Mayor is like comparing Christiano Ronaldo with Carlton Palmer. Boris acheived a great deal as London Mayor despite all the negative stuff written about him on here and his obvious personality flaws. Khan has achieved nothing and when real leadership of the Capital is required like now he has disappeared. He is a disgraceful politician who is happy to be in front of the TV cameras to have a go at Trump or some other mad right wing loon, but not to answer for his own job performance.
The fact that you're not a tribal Tory makes this analysis all the more persuasive.
I detest Johnson, but he was not a terrible Mayor. He rightly beat Livingstone who has gone potty by the end of his second term.
Of course, he was lazy and trite and buffoonish, but he scored a few wins. He had the right instincts - pro business, pro diversity, and pro beating the drum for life in London.
Khan is a disappointment. I agree with the analysis above. The word that comes to mind is preening.
Compared to Khan, Boris Johnson's performance as London Mayor is like comparing Christiano Ronaldo with Carlton Palmer. Boris acheived a great deal as London Mayor despite all the negative stuff written about him on here and his obvious personality flaws. Khan has achieved nothing and when real leadership of the Capital is required like now he has disappeared. He is a disgraceful politician who is happy to be in front of the TV cameras to have a go at Trump or some other mad right wing loon, but not to answer for his own job performance.
The fact that you're not a tribal Tory makes this analysis all the more persuasive.
I detest Johnson, but he was not a terrible Mayor. He rightly beat Livingstone who has gone potty by the end of his second term.
Of course, he was lazy and trite and buffoonish, but he scored a few wins. He had the right instincts - pro business, pro diversity, and pro beating the drum for life in London.
Khan is a disappointment. I agree with the analysis above. The word that comes to mind is preening.
Maybe this can be the issue Khan proves himself on. I agree that above all else, Khan has failed to demonstrate leadership. He has tinkered here and there, with varying degrees of success, but he has not led.
That's not what he said but the point he is making is daft enough. Obviously Nissan and Toyota both came here whilst we were in the EU as did Tata cars who have transformed Jaguar and Land Rover. As the proud owner of a newish Jaguar XF I can attest to the latter's achievement. Its a brilliant car to drive.
I would also suggest that as a generality taking time out of your day to show that Redwood is a fruit cake is perhaps not the most productive use of your time.
Hope you have better luck with the Jag than the Audi!
Compared to Khan, Boris Johnson's performance as London Mayor is like comparing Christiano Ronaldo with Carlton Palmer. Boris acheived a great deal as London Mayor despite all the negative stuff written about him on here and his obvious personality flaws. Khan has achieved nothing and when real leadership of the Capital is required like now he has disappeared. He is a disgraceful politician who is happy to be in front of the TV cameras to have a go at Trump or some other mad right wing loon, but not to answer for his own job performance.
The fact that you're not a tribal Tory makes this analysis all the more persuasive.
I detest Johnson, but he was not a terrible Mayor. He rightly beat Livingstone who has gone potty by the end of his second term.
Of course, he was lazy and trite and buffoonish, but he scored a few wins. He had the right instincts - pro business, pro diversity, and pro beating the drum for life in London.
Khan is a disappointment. I agree with the analysis above. The word that comes to mind is preening.
Maybe this can be the issue Khan proves himself on. I agree that above all else, Khan has failed to demonstrate leadership. He has tinkered here and there, with varying degrees of success, but he has not led.
Maybe but just listened to his interview this afternoon, he seems to be blaming the Tories police cuts( maybe he has a point)but don't we need answers now and the blame game can be later.
Compared to Khan, Boris Johnson's performance as London Mayor is like comparing Christiano Ronaldo with Carlton Palmer. Boris acheived a great deal as London Mayor despite all the negative stuff written about him on here and his obvious personality flaws. Khan has achieved nothing and when real leadership of the Capital is required like now he has disappeared. He is a disgraceful politician who is happy to be in front of the TV cameras to have a go at Trump or some other mad right wing loon, but not to answer for his own job performance.
Latest YouGov Well/Badly in London Khan well 54% Khan Badly 27%
Amongst CON voters Khan Well 36% Khan Badly 53%
That suggests he is doing something right and your view simply is your view alone.
Maybe you are uncomfortable in having a Muslim mayor.
Very poor comment mike on the - "a Muslim mayor" bit.
Maybe he doesn't like him because he thinks he's crap.
Why is it his view alone,even the poll here has him doing badly with Tories 53% and in London heading to 30%,like to see new polls after the murders in London media attention.
When Boris left office there was a whole host of things that he had achieved. I thought he would be a terrible mayor but he wasn't. Obviously he had some stuff that went wrong but overall he can look back with pride at some definte acheivements. Khan is doing nothing. Now is a time for him to lead London and deal with the rising crime head on. Where is he? Hiding because he does not want to answer difficult questions. Whatever you think about Boris he would be in front of the press detailing what he was going to do. All we have now is other labour politicians cringefully trying to stick up for Khan and blame the Government.
What about the measures to control air pollution which is a political gamble given that diesel car owners are going to be singled out?
The Government are already massively targeting diesel car owners, its hardly a political gamble
What a totally ignorant comment. Clearly you have zero knowledge of the plans.
It's said the Tories in London are rubbish at social media. Well, in support of that thesis, the Conservative leader of Westminster council, Nickie Aiken, has just 846 followers on Twitter despite having been on the platform since 2010.
What a totally ignorant comment. Clearly you have zero knowledge of the plans.
The real reason it is not a political gamble is that it is levied pretty much 100% on the poor, (because it costs a tenner a day on top of the congestion charge if you drive a pre-2005 diesel, and what sort of person drives a 13 year old diesel?) while making the rich feel good about themselves. How could such a policy fail?
Oh, and it is levied by a Labourbot on vehicles which people are driving largely because encouraged to do so by previous Labourbots. Oh and and as well as costing them a tenner a day they can't afford, it destroys any remaining value in their cars. Truly a worthy flagship policy of the left.
Compared to Khan, Boris Johnson's performance as London Mayor is like comparing Christiano Ronaldo with Carlton Palmer. Boris acheived a great deal as London Mayor despite all the negative stuff written about him on here and his obvious personality flaws. Khan has achieved nothing and when real leadership of the Capital is required like now he has disappeared. He is a disgraceful politician who is happy to be in front of the TV cameras to have a go at Trump or some other mad right wing loon, but not to answer for his own job performance.
The fact that you're not a tribal Tory makes this analysis all the more persuasive.
I detest Johnson, but he was not a terrible Mayor. He rightly beat Livingstone who has gone potty by the end of his second term.
Of course, he was lazy and trite and buffoonish, but he scored a few wins. He had the right instincts - pro business, pro diversity, and pro beating the drum for life in London.
Khan is a disappointment. I agree with the analysis above. The word that comes to mind is preening.
Maybe this can be the issue Khan proves himself on. I agree that above all else, Khan has failed to demonstrate leadership. He has tinkered here and there, with varying degrees of success, but he has not led.
What had Johnson done less than two years into his Mayoralty?
Compared to Khan, Boris Johnson's performance as London Mayor is like comparing Christiano Ronaldo with Carlton Palmer. Boris acheived a great deal as London Mayor despite all the negative stuff written about him on here and his obvious personality flaws. Khan has achieved nothing and when real leadership of the Capital is required like now he has disappeared. He is a disgraceful politician who is happy to be in front of the TV cameras to have a go at Trump or some other mad right wing loon, but not to answer for his own job performance.
The fact that you're not a tribal Tory makes this analysis all the more persuasive.
I detest Johnson, but he was not a terrible Mayor. He rightly beat Livingstone who has gone potty by the end of his second term.
Of course, he was lazy and trite and buffoonish, but he scored a few wins. He had the right instincts - pro business, pro diversity, and pro beating the drum for life in London.
Khan is a disappointment. I agree with the analysis above. The word that comes to mind is preening.
Maybe this can be the issue Khan proves himself on. I agree that above all else, Khan has failed to demonstrate leadership. He has tinkered here and there, with varying degrees of success, but he has not led.
What had Johnson done less than two years into his Mayoralty?
Well there was Petronella Wyatt and Helen Macintyre and...
Compared to Khan, Boris Johnson's performance as London Mayor is like comparing Christiano Ronaldo with Carlton Palmer. Boris acheived a great deal as London Mayor despite all the negative stuff written about him on here and his obvious personality flaws. Khan has achieved nothing and when real leadership of the Capital is required like now he has disappeared. He is a disgraceful politician who is happy to be in front of the TV cameras to have a go at Trump or some other mad right wing loon, but not to answer for his own job performance.
The fact that you're not a tribal Tory makes this analysis all the more persuasive.
I detest Johnson, but he was not a terrible Mayor. He rightly beat Livingstone who has gone potty by the end of his second term.
Of course, he was lazy and trite and buffoonish, but he scored a few wins. He had the right instincts - pro business, pro diversity, and pro beating the drum for life in London.
Khan is a disappointment. I agree with the analysis above. The word that comes to mind is preening.
Maybe this can be the issue Khan proves himself on. I agree that above all else, Khan has failed to demonstrate leadership. He has tinkered here and there, with varying degrees of success, but he has not led.
What had Johnson done less than two years into his Mayoralty?
If it hadn’t been for the Olympics, which were Livingstones idea, Johnson’s term would be seen as a waste of four years.
Compared to Khan, Boris Johnson's performance as London Mayor is like comparing Christiano Ronaldo with Carlton Palmer. Boris acheived a great deal as London Mayor despite all the negative stuff written about him on here and his obvious personality flaws. Khan has achieved nothing and when real leadership of the Capital is required like now he has disappeared. He is a disgraceful politician who is happy to be in front of the TV cameras to have a go at Trump or some other mad right wing loon, but not to answer for his own job performance.
The fact that you're not a tribal Tory makes this analysis all the more persuasive.
I detest Johnson, but he was not a terrible Mayor. He rightly beat Livingstone who has gone potty by the end of his second term.
Of course, he was lazy and trite and buffoonish, but he scored a few wins. He had the right instincts - pro business, pro diversity, and pro beating the drum for life in London.
Khan is a disappointment. I agree with the analysis above. The word that comes to mind is preening.
Maybe this can be the issue Khan proves himself on. I agree that above all else, Khan has failed to demonstrate leadership. He has tinkered here and there, with varying degrees of success, but he has not led.
What had Johnson done less than two years into his Mayoralty?
Well there was Petronella Wyatt and Helen Macintyre and...
Compared to Khan, Boris Johnson's performance as London Mayor is like comparing Christiano Ronaldo with Carlton Palmer. Boris acheived a great deal as London Mayor despite all the negative stuff written about him on here and his obvious personality flaws. Khan has achieved nothing and when real leadership of the Capital is required like now he has disappeared. He is a disgraceful politician who is happy to be in front of the TV cameras to have a go at Trump or some other mad right wing loon, but not to answer for his own job performance.
The fact that you're not a tribal Tory makes this analysis all the more persuasive.
I detest Johnson, but he was not a terrible Mayor. He rightly beat Livingstone who has gone potty by the end of his second term.
Of course, he was lazy and trite and buffoonish, but he scored a few wins. He had the right instincts - pro business, pro diversity, and pro beating the drum for life in London.
Khan is a disappointment. I agree with the analysis above. The word that comes to mind is preening.
Maybe this can be the issue Khan proves himself on. I agree that above all else, Khan has failed to demonstrate leadership. He has tinkered here and there, with varying degrees of success, but he has not led.
What had Johnson done less than two years into his Mayoralty?
Don't get me wrong Mike, I am giving Khan time.
I was reasonably happy to see him elected against the backdrop of a much more left-wing Labour party. For all his faults I would far prefer him over a Corbynite.
Compared to Khan, Boris Johnson's performance as London Mayor is like comparing Christiano Ronaldo with Carlton Palmer. Boris acheived a great deal as London Mayor despite all the negative stuff written about him on here and his obvious personality flaws. Khan has achieved nothing and when real leadership of the Capital is required like now he has disappeared. He is a disgraceful politician who is happy to be in front of the TV cameras to have a go at Trump or some other mad right wing loon, but not to answer for his own job performance.
The fact that you're not a tribal Tory makes this analysis all the more persuasive.
I detest Johnson, but he was not a terrible Mayor. He rightly beat Livingstone who has gone potty by the end of his second term.
Of course, he was lazy and trite and buffoonish, but he scored a few wins. He had the right instincts - pro business, pro diversity, and pro beating the drum for life in London.
Khan is a disappointment. I agree with the analysis above. The word that comes to mind is preening.
Maybe this can be the issue Khan proves himself on. I agree that above all else, Khan has failed to demonstrate leadership. He has tinkered here and there, with varying degrees of success, but he has not led.
What had Johnson done less than two years into his Mayoralty?
Well there was Petronella Wyatt and Helen Macintyre and...
Petsy was years before he became Mayor.
I yield to someone with more knowledge of the bonking Bojo timeline.
Since we're on the subject, is the Tory female distaste for Boris (Rudd, Ruth) just because he's a shit or is there something nastier in the woodshed? All that 'not the man you want to drive you home at the end of the evening' stuff seemed very pointed.
It seems that a part of the south African people want the pale people out.
It is more that they want restoration of land that was stolen from them, and often quite recently. Following the Group Areas Act of 1950, 3.2 million people, nearly all Black, Coloured, or Asian were evicted from lands, in areas designated as White. This continued as late as the 1980s, and without compensation.
What a totally ignorant comment. Clearly you have zero knowledge of the plans.
The real reason it is not a political gamble is that it is levied pretty much 100% on the poor, (because it costs a tenner a day on top of the congestion charge if you drive a pre-2005 diesel, and what sort of person drives a 13 year old diesel?) while making the rich feel good about themselves. How could such a policy fail?
Oh, and it is levied by a Labourbot on vehicles which people are driving largely because encouraged to do so by previous Labourbots. Oh and and as well as costing them a tenner a day they can't afford, it destroys any remaining value in their cars. Truly a worthy flagship policy of the left.
Diesel pollution is literally killing Londoners. Most poor people in London don’t even own a car - indeed many wealthy people don’t either. Less sanctimonious bollocks from you and more practical solutions would be welcome.
Compared to Khan, Boris Johnson's performance as London Mayor is like comparing Christiano Ronaldo with Carlton Palmer. Boris acheived a great deal as London Mayor despite all the negative stuff written about him on here and his obvious personality flaws. Khan has achieved nothing and when real leadership of the Capital is required like now he has disappeared. He is a disgraceful politician who is happy to be in front of the TV cameras to have a go at Trump or some other mad right wing loon, but not to answer for his own job performance.
The fact that you're not a tribal Tory makes this analysis all the more persuasive.
I detest Johnson, but he was not a terrible Mayor. He rightly beat Livingstone who has gone potty by the end of his second term.
Of course, he was lazy and trite and buffoonish, but he scored a few wins. He had the right instincts - pro business, pro diversity, and pro beating the drum for life in London.
Khan is a disappointment. I agree with the analysis above. The word that comes to mind is preening.
Maybe this can be the issue Khan proves himself on. I agree that above all else, Khan has failed to demonstrate leadership. He has tinkered here and there, with varying degrees of success, but he has not led.
What had Johnson done less than two years into his Mayoralty?
Don't get me wrong Mike, I am giving Khan time.
I was reasonably happy to see him elected against the backdrop of a much more left-wing Labour party. For all his faults I would far prefer him over a Corbynite.
After Tom Brake Tweeted that he’d just joined the Lib Dems this morning, it looks like they’ve also screwed up a bunch of leaflets. The glossy ones were supposed to go out before the purdah period, not after it had started, and some councillors put their council work email addresses on them - meaning they’re going to end up pulped. https://order-order.com/2018/04/05/sutton-libdem-campaign-brake-down/
What a totally ignorant comment. Clearly you have zero knowledge of the plans.
The real reason it is not a political gamble is that it is levied pretty much 100% on the poor, (because it costs a tenner a day on top of the congestion charge if you drive a pre-2005 diesel, and what sort of person drives a 13 year old diesel?) while making the rich feel good about themselves. How could such a policy fail?
Oh, and it is levied by a Labourbot on vehicles which people are driving largely because encouraged to do so by previous Labourbots. Oh and and as well as costing them a tenner a day they can't afford, it destroys any remaining value in their cars. Truly a worthy flagship policy of the left.
As a BMJ article noted, wood burning emits 2.4x as many particles as all the UK's diesel engines. If anyone wants evidence-based policies, tax the owners of Islington houses who fit 'trendy' woodstoves. Give the owners of >8 year old diesel vehicles ~£1,000 to scrap them, i.e. they're crushed and can't be resold.
But either politicians don't want evidence-based policies, or their advisers don't know what they're talking about and have fed them rubbish about diesel cars being *the* problem.
Compared to Khan, Boris Johnson's performance as London Mayor is like comparing Christiano Ronaldo with Carlton Palmer. Boris acheived a great deal as London Mayor despite all the negative stuff written about him on here and his obvious personality flaws. Khan has achieved nothing and when real leadership of the Capital is required like now he has disappeared. He is a disgraceful politician who is happy to be in front of the TV cameras to have a go at Trump or some other mad right wing loon, but not to answer for his own job performance.
The fact that you're not a tribal Tory makes this analysis all the more persuasive.
I detest Johnson, but he was not a terrible Mayor. He rightly beat Livingstone who has gone potty by the end of his second term.
Of course, he was lazy and trite and buffoonish, but he scored a few wins. He had the right instincts - pro business, pro diversity, and pro beating the drum for life in London.
Khan is a disappointment. I agree with the analysis above. The word that comes to mind is preening.
Maybe this can be the issue Khan proves himself on. I agree that above all else, Khan has failed to demonstrate leadership. He has tinkered here and there, with varying degrees of success, but he has not led.
What had Johnson done less than two years into his Mayoralty?
If it hadn’t been for the Olympics, which were Livingstones idea, Johnson’s term would be seen as a waste of four years.
Getting London 2012 was also down to the man Labour don't talk about - Mr. Blair.
What a totally ignorant comment. Clearly you have zero knowledge of the plans.
The real reason it is not a political gamble is that it is levied pretty much 100% on the poor, (because it costs a tenner a day on top of the congestion charge if you drive a pre-2005 diesel, and what sort of person drives a 13 year old diesel?) while making the rich feel good about themselves. How could such a policy fail?
Oh, and it is levied by a Labourbot on vehicles which people are driving largely because encouraged to do so by previous Labourbots. Oh and and as well as costing them a tenner a day they can't afford, it destroys any remaining value in their cars. Truly a worthy flagship policy of the left.
Diesel pollution is literally killing Londoners. Most poor people in London don’t even own a car - indeed many wealthy people don’t either. Less sanctimonious bollocks from you and more practical solutions would be welcome.
Thank you for making my point so clearly for me: you are, reading between the lines, a rich, carless Londoner, and practically befouling yourself with joy over Khan's no-skin-off-your-nose policy.
Not all poor people have diesel cars. Some do, but feck 'em. Serve them right for being poor.
What a totally ignorant comment. Clearly you have zero knowledge of the plans.
The real reason it is not a political gamble is that it is levied pretty much 100% on the poor, (because it costs a tenner a day on top of the congestion charge if you drive a pre-2005 diesel, and what sort of person drives a 13 year old diesel?) while making the rich feel good about themselves. How could such a policy fail?
Oh, and it is levied by a Labourbot on vehicles which people are driving largely because encouraged to do so by previous Labourbots. Oh and and as well as costing them a tenner a day they can't afford, it destroys any remaining value in their cars. Truly a worthy flagship policy of the left.
Diesel pollution is literally killing Londoners. Most poor people in London don’t even own a car - indeed many wealthy people don’t either. Less sanctimonious bollocks from you and more practical solutions would be welcome.
You make some good points in your posts but why spoil your argument with unnecessary personal abuse to posters
What a totally ignorant comment. Clearly you have zero knowledge of the plans.
The real reason it is not a political gamble is that it is levied pretty much 100% on the poor, (because it costs a tenner a day on top of the congestion charge if you drive a pre-2005 diesel, and what sort of person drives a 13 year old diesel?) while making the rich feel good about themselves. How could such a policy fail?
Oh, and it is levied by a Labourbot on vehicles which people are driving largely because encouraged to do so by previous Labourbots. Oh and and as well as costing them a tenner a day they can't afford, it destroys any remaining value in their cars. Truly a worthy flagship policy of the left.
Diesel pollution is literally killing Londoners. Most poor people in London don’t even own a car - indeed many wealthy people don’t either. Less sanctimonious bollocks from you and more practical solutions would be welcome.
You make some good points in your posts but why spoil your argument with unnecessary personal abuse to posters
I made no personal attack. I criticised his post(s), not him as a person. Why would I attack an anonymous internet person who is no doubt a lovely gent IRL?
What a totally ignorant comment. Clearly you have zero knowledge of the plans.
The real reason it is not a political gamble is that it is levied pretty much 100% on the poor, (because it costs a tenner a day on top of the congestion charge if you drive a pre-2005 diesel, and what sort of person drives a 13 year old diesel?) while making the rich feel good about themselves. How could such a policy fail?
Oh, and it is levied by a Labourbot on vehicles which people are driving largely because encouraged to do so by previous Labourbots. Oh and and as well as costing them a tenner a day they can't afford, it destroys any remaining value in their cars. Truly a worthy flagship policy of the left.
Diesel pollution is literally killing Londoners. Most poor people in London don’t even own a car - indeed many wealthy people don’t either. Less sanctimonious bollocks from you and more practical solutions would be welcome.
Thank you for making my point so clearly for me: you are, reading between the lines, a rich, carless Londoner, and practically befouling yourself with joy over Khan's no-skin-off-your-nose policy.
Not all poor people have diesel cars. Some do, but feck 'em. Serve them right for being poor.
A bizarre and frankly disturbing misinterpretation of my response.
South Africa is the only place where I have stayed with real Nazis. I was travelling in the East Transvaal, and we pulled into a small town to stay the night. Usually it was fairly easy to find a room, but unfortunately we had come the night of a lumberjacks convention, so no room at the inn. We asked around and it was suggested we try this place up the road a couple of miles. It was getting dark, so we set off, and found the place easily enough. It was a farmhouse with Neo-Nazi flags, and affiliated to Eugene Terre Blanches Afrikaner Resistance Movement. No Black people allowed, but they made room for us.
It was a fairly spartan place, with homestyle food, lots of guns, dogs and barbed wire, but quite hospitable. Conversation was a little odd!
This was 1994, a few weeks after the election in which Mandela came to power. They had retreated to their Laager, but nothing happened. The Lumberjack convention had moments of interest too.
I yield to someone with more knowledge of the bonking Bojo timeline.
Since we're on the subject, is the Tory female distaste for Boris (Rudd, Ruth) just because he's a shit or is there something nastier in the woodshed? All that 'not the man you want to drive you home at the end of the evening' stuff seemed very pointed.
He displays all the worst excesses of a man.
In his mind there are two types of women.
1) Women who he has bonked
2) Women who will eventually will succumb to his charms
Plus he has a tendency to forget which women he has tried on it on with/he has slept with.
Some attribute that to his general bumbling demeanour, some say it is because he is a shit.
So a few weeks ago he might have tried it on with woman 1, today he'll be trying it on with woman 2, in full view of woman 1, often using the same chat up routine.
Those are tactical investments for the next four or five years. In the case of Toyota and Peugeot vans they had an immediate capacity requirement that could only be fulfilled in the UK, unless they built new factories. We need at least to sort out a customs union and single market arrangement if we are going to retain automotive manufacturing in the medium to long term.
What a totally ignorant comment. Clearly you have zero knowledge of the plans.
The real reason it is not a political gamble is that it is levied pretty much 100% on the poor, (because it costs a tenner a day on top of the congestion charge if you drive a pre-2005 diesel, and what sort of person drives a 13 year old diesel?) while making the rich feel good about themselves. How could such a policy fail?
Oh, and it is levied by a Labourbot on vehicles which people are driving largely because encouraged to do so by previous Labourbots. Oh and and as well as costing them a tenner a day they can't afford, it destroys any remaining value in their cars. Truly a worthy flagship policy of the left.
As a BMJ article noted, wood burning emits 2.4x as many particles as all the UK's diesel engines. If anyone wants evidence-based policies, tax the owners of Islington houses who fit 'trendy' woodstoves. Give the owners of >8 year old diesel vehicles ~£1,000 to scrap them, i.e. they're crushed and can't be resold.
But either politicians don't want evidence-based policies, or their advisers don't know what they're talking about and have fed them rubbish about diesel cars being *the* problem.
I run a 14 year old diesel. It's worth around £1800 tradein. I looked at scrappage last year but frankly the offers on the table were better than the one you put forward but still incredibly unattractive.
I keep it going largely because it does 77 miles to the gallon.
What a totally ignorant comment. Clearly you have zero knowledge of the plans.
The real reason it is not a political gamble is that it is levied pretty much 100% on the poor, (because it costs a tenner a day on top of the congestion charge if you drive a pre-2005 diesel, and what sort of person drives a 13 year old diesel?) while making the rich feel good about themselves. How could such a policy fail?
Oh, and it is levied by a Labourbot on vehicles which people are driving largely because encouraged to do so by previous Labourbots. Oh and and as well as costing them a tenner a day they can't afford, it destroys any remaining value in their cars. Truly a worthy flagship policy of the left.
Diesel pollution is literally killing Londoners. Most poor people in London don’t even own a car - indeed many wealthy people don’t either. Less sanctimonious bollocks from you and more practical solutions would be welcome.
You do realise that air quality in london is the best it been since the end of the industrial revolution?
What a totally ignorant comment. Clearly you have zero knowledge of the plans.
The real reason it is not a political gamble is that it is levied pretty much 100% on the poor, (because it costs a tenner a day on top of the congestion charge if you drive a pre-2005 diesel, and what sort of person drives a 13 year old diesel?) while making the rich feel good about themselves. How could such a policy fail?
Oh, and it is levied by a Labourbot on vehicles which people are driving largely because encouraged to do so by previous Labourbots. Oh and and as well as costing them a tenner a day they can't afford, it destroys any remaining value in their cars. Truly a worthy flagship policy of the left.
Diesel pollution is literally killing Londoners. Most poor people in London don’t even own a car - indeed many wealthy people don’t either. Less sanctimonious bollocks from you and more practical solutions would be welcome.
You do realise that air quality in london is the best it been since the end of the industrial revolution?
I yield to someone with more knowledge of the bonking Bojo timeline.
Since we're on the subject, is the Tory female distaste for Boris (Rudd, Ruth) just because he's a shit or is there something nastier in the woodshed? All that 'not the man you want to drive you home at the end of the evening' stuff seemed very pointed.
He displays all the worst excesses of a man.
In his mind there are two types of women.
1) Women who he has bonked
2) Women who will eventually will succumb to his charms
Plus he has a tendency to forget which women he has tried on it on with/he has slept with.
Some attribute that to his general bumbling demeanour, some say it is because he is a shit.
So a few weeks ago he might have tried it on with woman 1, today he'll be trying it on with woman 2, in full view of woman 1, often using the same chat up routine.
Its dumb, just as your points ion the same subject are dumb. For a start - as has been pointed out to you on countless occasions before - lack of a degree is generally equated with age. If you were 18 before 1973 then you lived at a time when only a tiny percentage of people went to university. Adding together the degree profile and the cohort profile is, to an overwhelming extent, simply double counting the same effect.
What a totally ignorant comment. Clearly you have zero knowledge of the plans.
The real reason it is not a political gamble is that it is levied pretty much 100% on the poor, (because it costs a tenner a day on top of the congestion charge if you drive a pre-2005 diesel, and what sort of person drives a 13 year old diesel?) while making the rich feel good about themselves. How could such a policy fail?
Oh, and it is levied by a Labourbot on vehicles which people are driving largely because encouraged to do so by previous Labourbots. Oh and and as well as costing them a tenner a day they can't afford, it destroys any remaining value in their cars. Truly a worthy flagship policy of the left.
Diesel pollution is literally killing Londoners. Most poor people in London don’t even own a car - indeed many wealthy people don’t either. Less sanctimonious bollocks from you and more practical solutions would be welcome.
You do realise that air quality in london is the best it been since the end of the industrial revolution?
Do you mean 'start?'
Hmm yes and no. clumsy writing by me, probably the start, i was thinking more the 1850s once industrialisation had taken hold. Air quality now is unparalleled with twenty years ago, and even more so twenty years before that. We should always try to do better, but this moral panic of dubious deaths caused by air pollution, is just that, a moral panic.
Its dumb, just as your points ion the same subject are dumb. For a start - as has been pointed out to you on countless occasions before - lack of a degree is generally equated with age. If you were 18 before 1973 then you lived at a time when only a tiny percentage of people went to university. Adding together the degree profile and the cohort profile is, to an overwhelming extent, simply double counting the same effect.
Take it up with them, not me.
My main emphasis is on the age of Leave voters. They are far older than Remain voters and in the absence of new recruits, Leave will soon be outnumbered. To gain new recruits, Leave will need to show charm and persuasion. That, of course, is a major problem for them.
What a totally ignorant comment. Clearly you have zero knowledge of the plans.
The real reason it is not a political gamble is that it is levied pretty much 100% on the poor, (because it costs a tenner a day on top of the congestion charge if you drive a pre-2005 diesel, and what sort of person drives a 13 year old diesel?) while making the rich feel good about themselves. How could such a policy fail?
Oh, and it is levied by a Labourbot on vehicles which people are driving largely because encouraged to do so by previous Labourbots. Oh and and as well as costing them a tenner a day they can't afford, it destroys any remaining value in their cars. Truly a worthy flagship policy of the left.
Diesel pollution is literally killing Londoners. Most poor people in London don’t even own a car - indeed many wealthy people don’t either. Less sanctimonious bollocks from you and more practical solutions would be welcome.
You do realise that air quality in london is the best it been since the end of the industrial revolution?
My 3 year old is the tallest she's ever been. She still can't get things off high shelves.
What a totally ignorant comment. Clearly you have zero knowledge of the plans.
The real reason it is not a political gamble is that it is levied pretty much 100% on the poor, (because it costs a tenner a day on top of the congestion charge if you drive a pre-2005 diesel, and what sort of person drives a 13 year old diesel?) while making the rich feel good about themselves. How could such a policy fail?
Oh, and it is levied by a Labourbot on vehicles which people are driving largely because encouraged to do so by previous Labourbots. Oh and and as well as costing them a tenner a day they can't afford, it destroys any remaining value in their cars. Truly a worthy flagship policy of the left.
Diesel pollution is literally killing Londoners. Most poor people in London don’t even own a car - indeed many wealthy people don’t either. Less sanctimonious bollocks from you and more practical solutions would be welcome.
You make some good points in your posts but why spoil your argument with unnecessary personal abuse to posters
I made no personal attack. I criticised his post(s), not him as a person. Why would I attack an anonymous internet person who is no doubt a lovely gent IRL?
Its dumb, just as your points ion the same subject are dumb. For a start - as has been pointed out to you on countless occasions before - lack of a degree is generally equated with age. If you were 18 before 1973 then you lived at a time when only a tiny percentage of people went to university. Adding together the degree profile and the cohort profile is, to an overwhelming extent, simply double counting the same effect.
Take it up with them, not me.
My main emphasis is on the age of Leave voters. They are far older than Remain voters and in the absence of new recruits, Leave will soon be outnumbered. To gain new recruits, Leave will need to show charm and persuasion. That, of course, is a major problem for them.
That assumes that peoples views do not change as they age. It is the same mistake left wingers have been making for decades.
South Africa is the only place where I have stayed with real Nazis. I was travelling in the East Transvaal, and we pulled into a small town to stay the night. Usually it was fairly easy to find a room, but unfortunately we had come the night of a lumberjacks convention, so no room at the inn. We asked around and it was suggested we try this place up the road a couple of miles. It was getting dark, so we set off, and found the place easily enough. It was a farmhouse with Neo-Nazi flags, and affiliated to Eugene Terre Blanches Afrikaner Resistance Movement. No Black people allowed, but they made room for us.
It was a fairly spartan place, with homestyle food, lots of guns, dogs and barbed wire, but quite hospitable. Conversation was a little odd!
This was 1994, a few weeks after the election in which Mandela came to power. They had retreated to their Laager, but nothing happened. The Lumberjack convention had moments of interest too.
ETB always seemed a little like Idi Amin to me - comic opera monsters.
Fortunately ETB always remained a small-scale amateur production.
Its dumb, just as your points ion the same subject are dumb. For a start - as has been pointed out to you on countless occasions before - lack of a degree is generally equated with age. If you were 18 before 1973 then you lived at a time when only a tiny percentage of people went to university. Adding together the degree profile and the cohort profile is, to an overwhelming extent, simply double counting the same effect.
Take it up with them, not me.
My main emphasis is on the age of Leave voters. They are far older than Remain voters and in the absence of new recruits, Leave will soon be outnumbered. To gain new recruits, Leave will need to show charm and persuasion. That, of course, is a major problem for them.
That assumes that peoples views do not change as they age. It is the same mistake left wingers have been making for decades.
Compared to Khan, Boris Johnson's performance as London Mayor is like comparing Christiano Ronaldo with Carlton Palmer. Boris acheived a great deal as London Mayor despite all the negative stuff written about him on here and his obvious personality flaws. Khan has achieved nothing and when real leadership of the Capital is required like now he has disappeared. He is a disgraceful politician who is happy to be in front of the TV cameras to have a go at Trump or some other mad right wing loon, but not to answer for his own job performance.
The fact that you're not a tribal Tory makes this analysis all the more persuasive.
I detest Johnson, but he was not a terrible Mayor. He rightly beat Livingstone who has gone potty by the end of his second term.
Of course, he was lazy and trite and buffoonish, but he scored a few wins. He had the right instincts - pro business, pro diversity, and pro beating the drum for life in London.
Khan is a disappointment. I agree with the analysis above. The word that comes to mind is preening.
Maybe this can be the issue Khan proves himself on. I agree that above all else, Khan has failed to demonstrate leadership. He has tinkered here and there, with varying degrees of success, but he has not led.
What had Johnson done less than two years into his Mayoralty?
If it hadn’t been for the Olympics, which were Livingstones idea, Johnson’s term would be seen as a waste of four years.
Getting London 2012 was also down to the man Labour don't talk about - Mr. Blair.
Getting London 2012 was also due to the man neither party talks about -- David Beckham. Not just him but other athletes too. While other bids were dominated by politicians, ours was leavened by sporting royalty in order to attract votes from delegates who were often retired athletes themselves.
Its dumb, just as your points ion the same subject are dumb. For a start - as has been pointed out to you on countless occasions before - lack of a degree is generally equated with age. If you were 18 before 1973 then you lived at a time when only a tiny percentage of people went to university. Adding together the degree profile and the cohort profile is, to an overwhelming extent, simply double counting the same effect.
Take it up with them, not me.
My main emphasis is on the age of Leave voters. They are far older than Remain voters and in the absence of new recruits, Leave will soon be outnumbered. To gain new recruits, Leave will need to show charm and persuasion. That, of course, is a major problem for them.
I am an oldie and voted remain - so I lose remain one vote
The problem with Sadiq is that he's just useless. London is in the middle of a murder wave and he's nowhere to be seen. He has no plan.
Police cut.................ssssss - same mantra from Abbott and Lammy and in Lammy's case with a policeman behind him. Also the young man who died yesterday fell at the foot of beat bobbies
Its dumb, just as your points ion the same subject are dumb. For a start - as has been pointed out to you on countless occasions before - lack of a degree is generally equated with age. If you were 18 before 1973 then you lived at a time when only a tiny percentage of people went to university. Adding together the degree profile and the cohort profile is, to an overwhelming extent, simply double counting the same effect.
Take it up with them, not me.
My main emphasis is on the age of Leave voters. They are far older than Remain voters and in the absence of new recruits, Leave will soon be outnumbered. To gain new recruits, Leave will need to show charm and persuasion. That, of course, is a major problem for them.
That assumes that peoples views do not change as they age. It is the same mistake left wingers have been making for decades.
You think being in favour of the EU is left wing?
It's a simple point William.
Differences between demographics can be the result of differing experiences as much as the year in which someone is born.
So a left-wing activist at age 20, who is a uni student, lives in central London, rents, and is yet to enter the workforce can become a 40 year old homeowner with two kids, a house, a car, in the suburbs. His circumstances have changed.
So too for the referendum: as we move out of the EU, our circumstances will all change.
Its dumb, just as your points ion the same subject are dumb. For a start - as has been pointed out to you on countless occasions before - lack of a degree is generally equated with age. If you were 18 before 1973 then you lived at a time when only a tiny percentage of people went to university. Adding together the degree profile and the cohort profile is, to an overwhelming extent, simply double counting the same effect.
Take it up with them, not me.
My main emphasis is on the age of Leave voters. They are far older than Remain voters and in the absence of new recruits, Leave will soon be outnumbered. To gain new recruits, Leave will need to show charm and persuasion. That, of course, is a major problem for them.
That assumes that peoples views do not change as they age. It is the same mistake left wingers have been making for decades.
You think being in favour of the EU is left wing?
It's a simple point William.
Differences between demographics can be the result of differing experiences as much as the year in which someone is born.
So a left-wing activist at age 20, who is a uni student, lives in central London, rents, and is yet to enter the workforce can become a 40 year old homeowner with two kids, a house, a car, in the suburbs. His circumstances have changed.
So too for the referendum: as we move out of the EU, our circumstances will all change.
Being in the EU will become the good old days and be favoured by older nostalgics?
Compared to Khan, Boris Johnson's performance as London Mayor is like comparing Christiano Ronaldo with Carlton Palmer. Boris acheived a great deal as London Mayor despite all the negative stuff written about him on here and his obvious personality flaws. Khan has achieved nothing and when real leadership of the Capital is required like now he has disappeared. He is a disgraceful politician who is happy to be in front of the TV cameras to have a go at Trump or some other mad right wing loon, but not to answer for his own job performance.
Best quote about Carlton Palmer.
"He covers every blade of grass out there, but that's only because his first touch is so crap" - Dave Jones
Carlton Palmer 18 Engalnd Caps Matt le tessier 8 Engalnd Caps
And we wonder why we never win anything
Likewise Ray Wilkins won twice as many caps as those of Ray Kennedy, Terry McDermott and Jimmy Case added together.
Its dumb, just as your points ion the same subject are dumb. For a start - as has been pointed out to you on countless occasions before - lack of a degree is generally equated with age. If you were 18 before 1973 then you lived at a time when only a tiny percentage of people went to university. Adding together the degree profile and the cohort profile is, to an overwhelming extent, simply double counting the same effect.
Take it up with them, not me.
My main emphasis is on the age of Leave voters. They are far older than Remain voters and in the absence of new recruits, Leave will soon be outnumbered. To gain new recruits, Leave will need to show charm and persuasion. That, of course, is a major problem for them.
That assumes that peoples views do not change as they age. It is the same mistake left wingers have been making for decades.
It's also silly because it ignores what the engineers call hysteresis. Just because I voted Remain, and continue to think that Brexit is on balance a mistake, it doesn't follow that I would want to rejoin once we've left. In fact, I rather think that the whole referendum experience has been so divisive and unpleasant that the overwhelming sentiment will be 'let's not go there again', assuming of course that Brexit is not a complete and unambiguous economic disaster (such disaster looking increasingly unlikely).
Much more likely is that we settle into a new post-Brexit relationship with the EU which will include close cooperation in many fields, and de facto alignment with much of EU regulations.
In political terms I think it may be rather like views on gay marriage amongst Conservative voters; at the time of the change in the law it was hugely controversial and divisive, but once it had happened, and the world having not come to an end, its salience as an issue very rapidly dissipated.
Its dumb, just as your points ion the same subject are dumb. For a start - as has been pointed out to you on countless occasions before - lack of a degree is generally equated with age. If you were 18 before 1973 then you lived at a time when only a tiny percentage of people went to university. Adding together the degree profile and the cohort profile is, to an overwhelming extent, simply double counting the same effect.
Take it up with them, not me.
My main emphasis is on the age of Leave voters. They are far older than Remain voters and in the absence of new recruits, Leave will soon be outnumbered. To gain new recruits, Leave will need to show charm and persuasion. That, of course, is a major problem for them.
That assumes that peoples views do not change as they age. It is the same mistake left wingers have been making for decades.
And, indeed, people who voted Remain in 1975 largely voted Leave in 2016.
Its dumb, just as your points ion the same subject are dumb. For a start - as has been pointed out to you on countless occasions before - lack of a degree is generally equated with age. If you were 18 before 1973 then you lived at a time when only a tiny percentage of people went to university. Adding together the degree profile and the cohort profile is, to an overwhelming extent, simply double counting the same effect.
Take it up with them, not me.
My main emphasis is on the age of Leave voters. They are far older than Remain voters and in the absence of new recruits, Leave will soon be outnumbered. To gain new recruits, Leave will need to show charm and persuasion. That, of course, is a major problem for them.
That assumes that peoples views do not change as they age. It is the same mistake left wingers have been making for decades.
You think being in favour of the EU is left wing?
It's a simple point William.
Differences between demographics can be the result of differing experiences as much as the year in which someone is born.
So a left-wing activist at age 20, who is a uni student, lives in central London, rents, and is yet to enter the workforce can become a 40 year old homeowner with two kids, a house, a car, in the suburbs. His circumstances have changed.
So too for the referendum: as we move out of the EU, our circumstances will all change.
Being in the EU will become the good old days and be favoured by older nostalgics?
You could become like the League of Empire Loyalists.
Its dumb, just as your points ion the same subject are dumb. For a start - as has been pointed out to you on countless occasions before - lack of a degree is generally equated with age. If you were 18 before 1973 then you lived at a time when only a tiny percentage of people went to university. Adding together the degree profile and the cohort profile is, to an overwhelming extent, simply double counting the same effect.
Take it up with them, not me.
My main emphasis is on the age of Leave voters. They are far older than Remain voters and in the absence of new recruits, Leave will soon be outnumbered. To gain new recruits, Leave will need to show charm and persuasion. That, of course, is a major problem for them.
That assumes that peoples views do not change as they age. It is the same mistake left wingers have been making for decades.
You think being in favour of the EU is left wing?
No, apologies. I was simply saying that the left wingers make the same mistake. Both groups assume that the young will remain unchanged in their political opinions as they grow older. It is not the case.
In 2003 there were 204 homicides in London, which is about the same rate as this year, but I don't remember it being a big news issue at the time for whatever reasons.
Its dumb, just as your points ion the same subject are dumb. For a start - as has been pointed out to you on countless occasions before - lack of a degree is generally equated with age. If you were 18 before 1973 then you lived at a time when only a tiny percentage of people went to university. Adding together the degree profile and the cohort profile is, to an overwhelming extent, simply double counting the same effect.
Take it up with them, not me.
My main emphasis is on the age of Leave voters. They are far older than Remain voters and in the absence of new recruits, Leave will soon be outnumbered. To gain new recruits, Leave will need to show charm and persuasion. That, of course, is a major problem for them.
That assumes that peoples views do not change as they age. It is the same mistake left wingers have been making for decades.
You think being in favour of the EU is left wing?
Yes, ultimately the EU is collectivism. That's a very left wing idea.
Its dumb, just as your points ion the same subject are dumb. For a start - as has been pointed out to you on countless occasions before - lack of a degree is generally equated with age. If you were 18 before 1973 then you lived at a time when only a tiny percentage of people went to university. Adding together the degree profile and the cohort profile is, to an overwhelming extent, simply double counting the same effect.
Take it up with them, not me.
My main emphasis is on the age of Leave voters. They are far older than Remain voters and in the absence of new recruits, Leave will soon be outnumbered. To gain new recruits, Leave will need to show charm and persuasion. That, of course, is a major problem for them.
That assumes that peoples views do not change as they age. It is the same mistake left wingers have been making for decades.
You think being in favour of the EU is left wing?
Yes, ultimately the EU is collectivism. That's a very left wing idea.
Nonsense. The EU is a check on the inherent collectivism of nationalism.
In 2003 there were 204 homicides in London, which is about the same rate as this year, but I don't remember it being a big news issue at the time for whatever reasons.
Compared to Khan, Boris Johnson's performance as London Mayor is like comparing Christiano Ronaldo with Carlton Palmer. Boris acheived a great deal as London Mayor despite all the negative stuff written about him on here and his obvious personality flaws. Khan has achieved nothing and when real leadership of the Capital is required like now he has disappeared. He is a disgraceful politician who is happy to be in front of the TV cameras to have a go at Trump or some other mad right wing loon, but not to answer for his own job performance.
Best quote about Carlton Palmer.
"He covers every blade of grass out there, but that's only because his first touch is so crap" - Dave Jones
Carlton Palmer 18 Engalnd Caps Matt le tessier 8 Engalnd Caps
And we wonder why we never win anything
Phil Neville holds more England caps than Paul Gascoigne.
In fairness that is more to do with the fact Gazza couldn't play left back, also that he was injured or not fit to play. Much as I loved him, Euro 96 the chip over Hendry and volley is one of my favourite international moments.
Its dumb, just as your points ion the same subject are dumb. For a start - as has been pointed out to you on countless occasions before - lack of a degree is generally equated with age. If you were 18 before 1973 then you lived at a time when only a tiny percentage of people went to university. Adding together the degree profile and the cohort profile is, to an overwhelming extent, simply double counting the same effect.
Take it up with them, not me.
My main emphasis is on the age of Leave voters. They are far older than Remain voters and in the absence of new recruits, Leave will soon be outnumbered. To gain new recruits, Leave will need to show charm and persuasion. That, of course, is a major problem for them.
That assumes that peoples views do not change as they age. It is the same mistake left wingers have been making for decades.
You think being in favour of the EU is left wing?
Yes, ultimately the EU is collectivism. That's a very left wing idea.
Nonsense. The EU is a check on the inherent collectivism of nationalism.
The EU is a check on nothing. It is a collectivist organisation which wants to pool the power of independent nations into something they hope will be more than the sum of the individuals.
Its dumb, just as your points ion the same subject are dumb. For a start - as has been pointed out to you on countless occasions before - lack of a degree is generally equated with age. If you were 18 before 1973 then you lived at a time when only a tiny percentage of people went to university. Adding together the degree profile and the cohort profile is, to an overwhelming extent, simply double counting the same effect.
Take it up with them, not me.
My main emphasis is on the age of Leave voters. They are far older than Remain voters and in the absence of new recruits, Leave will soon be outnumbered. To gain new recruits, Leave will need to show charm and persuasion. That, of course, is a major problem for them.
That assumes that peoples views do not change as they age. It is the same mistake left wingers have been making for decades.
You think being in favour of the EU is left wing?
Yes, ultimately the EU is collectivism. That's a very left wing idea.
Nonsense. The EU is a check on the inherent collectivism of nationalism.
The EU is a check on nothing. It is a collectivist organisation which wants to pool the power of independent nations into something they hope will be more than the sum of the individuals.
Its dumb, just as your points ion the same subject are dumb. For a start - as has been pointed out to you on countless occasions before - lack of a degree is generally equated with age. If you were 18 before 1973 then you lived at a time when only a tiny percentage of people went to university. Adding together the degree profile and the cohort profile is, to an overwhelming extent, simply double counting the same effect.
Take it up with them, not me.
My main emphasis is on the age of Leave voters. They are far older than Remain voters and in the absence of new recruits, Leave will soon be outnumbered. To gain new recruits, Leave will need to show charm and persuasion. That, of course, is a major problem for them.
That assumes that peoples views do not change as they age. It is the same mistake left wingers have been making for decades.
You think being in favour of the EU is left wing?
Yes, ultimately the EU is collectivism. That's a very left wing idea.
Nonsense. The EU is a check on the inherent collectivism of nationalism.
The EU is a check on nothing. It is a collectivist organisation which wants to pool the power of independent nations into something they hope will be more than the sum of the individuals.
Nations are not individuals but collectives.
Nation states hold power on an individual basis. For example, the US can go to war, California can't.
Its dumb, just as your points ion the same subject are dumb. For a start - as has been pointed out to you on countless occasions before - lack of a degree is generally equated with age. If you were 18 before 1973 then you lived at a time when only a tiny percentage of people went to university. Adding together the degree profile and the cohort profile is, to an overwhelming extent, simply double counting the same effect.
Take it up with them, not me.
My main emphasis is on the age of Leave voters. They are far older than Remain voters and in the absence of new recruits, Leave will soon be outnumbered. To gain new recruits, Leave will need to show charm and persuasion. That, of course, is a major problem for them.
That assumes that peoples views do not change as they age. It is the same mistake left wingers have been making for decades.
There are good reasons why people get more conservative as they get older. I can't think of any reason the EU should appeal to a particular age group.
Its dumb, just as your points ion the same subject are dumb. For a start - as has been pointed out to you on countless occasions before - lack of a degree is generally equated with age. If you were 18 before 1973 then you lived at a time when only a tiny percentage of people went to university. Adding together the degree profile and the cohort profile is, to an overwhelming extent, simply double counting the same effect.
Take it up with them, not me.
My main emphasis is on the age of Leave voters. They are far older than Remain voters and in the absence of new recruits, Leave will soon be outnumbered. To gain new recruits, Leave will need to show charm and persuasion. That, of course, is a major problem for them.
That assumes that peoples views do not change as they age. It is the same mistake left wingers have been making for decades.
Much more significantly it assumes that those who had reservations about the disruption of leaving are enthusiastic about the disruption of rejoining. When the status quo is out those wanting to rejoin will have to make a positive case for rejoining. Good luck with that.
Its dumb, just as your points ion the same subject are dumb. For a start - as has been pointed out to you on countless occasions before - lack of a degree is generally equated with age. If you were 18 before 1973 then you lived at a time when only a tiny percentage of people went to university. Adding together the degree profile and the cohort profile is, to an overwhelming extent, simply double counting the same effect.
Take it up with them, not me.
My main emphasis is on the age of Leave voters. They are far older than Remain voters and in the absence of new recruits, Leave will soon be outnumbered. To gain new recruits, Leave will need to show charm and persuasion. That, of course, is a major problem for them.
That assumes that peoples views do not change as they age. It is the same mistake left wingers have been making for decades.
You think being in favour of the EU is left wing?
Yes, ultimately the EU is collectivism. That's a very left wing idea.
Nonsense. The EU is a check on the inherent collectivism of nationalism.
The EU is a check on nothing. It is a collectivist organisation which wants to pool the power of independent nations into something they hope will be more than the sum of the individuals.
Nations are not individuals but collectives.
Nation states hold power on an individual basis. For example, the US can go to war, California can't.
Collectivism is about the relationship of the individual to the group in the form of the state, not about the relationship of states to each other. If you think the ability of a nation state to subsume the individuals within it is a good thing then you are not against collectivism.
Its dumb, just as your points ion the same subject are dumb. For a start - as has been pointed out to you on countless occasions before - lack of a degree is generally equated with age. If you were 18 before 1973 then you lived at a time when only a tiny percentage of people went to university. Adding together the degree profile and the cohort profile is, to an overwhelming extent, simply double counting the same effect.
Take it up with them, not me.
My main emphasis is on the age of Leave voters. They are far older than Remain voters and in the absence of new recruits, Leave will soon be outnumbered. To gain new recruits, Leave will need to show charm and persuasion. That, of course, is a major problem for them.
That assumes that peoples views do not change as they age. It is the same mistake left wingers have been making for decades.
Much more significantly it assumes that those who had reservations about the disruption of leaving are enthusiastic about the disruption of rejoining. When the status quo is out those wanting to rejoin will have to make a positive case for rejoining. Good luck with that.
That assumes we will have left on anything other than a 'name only' basis within any reasonable time frame. So far there's absolutely no reason to believe that we will.
Its dumb, just as your points ion the same subject are dumb. For a start - as has been pointed out to you on countless occasions before - lack of a degree is generally equated with age. If you were 18 before 1973 then you lived at a time when only a tiny percentage of people went to university. Adding together the degree profile and the cohort profile is, to an overwhelming extent, simply double counting the same effect.
Take it up with them, not me.
My main emphasis is on the age of Leave voters. They are far older than Remain voters and in the absence of new recruits, Leave will soon be outnumbered. To gain new recruits, Leave will need to show charm and persuasion. That, of course, is a major problem for them.
That assumes that peoples views do not change as they age. It is the same mistake left wingers have been making for decades.
It's also silly because it ignores what the engineers call hysteresis. Just because I voted Remain, and continue to think that Brexit is on balance a mistake, it doesn't follow that I would want to rejoin once we've left. In fact, I rather think that the whole referendum experience has been so divisive and unpleasant that the overwhelming sentiment will be 'let's not go there again', assuming of course that Brexit is not a complete and unambiguous economic disaster (such disaster looking increasingly unlikely).
Much more likely is that we settle into a new post-Brexit relationship with the EU which will include close cooperation in many fields, and de facto alignment with much of EU regulations.
In political terms I think it may be rather like views on gay marriage amongst Conservative voters; at the time of the change in the law it was hugely controversial and divisive, but once it had happened, and the world having not come to an end, its salience as an issue very rapidly dissipated.
Naive to think Britain's relationship with the rest of Europe is settled. Agree though we cannot see today how this might play out.
Who wil win the mayoralty - Aspire, the People's Alliance or Labour? It's often amazing considering given Labour champions diversity how many Labour Mayors and Leaders in London representing very diverse boroughs are white middle class men and women? I may be wrong but are Redbridge and Brent the only exceptions?
Comments
From: https://www.criminallawandjustice.co.uk/features/Stop-and-Search-Statistics
It does seem that the big drop in Stop and Search precedes the recent spate of murders, and indeed dates to when Mrs May was Home Sec and Boris Mayor of London.
Of course, he was lazy and trite and buffoonish, but he scored a few wins. He had the right instincts - pro business, pro diversity, and pro beating the drum for life in London.
Khan is a disappointment. I agree with the analysis above. The word that comes to mind is preening.
On the diesel thing, is it brave? I’m not sure. It feels well overdue, actually.
https://twitter.com/nickieaiken
https://twitter.com/SamCoatesTimes/status/981928039163580416
Oh, and it is levied by a Labourbot on vehicles which people are driving largely because encouraged to do so by previous Labourbots. Oh and and as well as costing them a tenner a day they can't afford, it destroys any remaining value in their cars. Truly a worthy flagship policy of the left.
I was reasonably happy to see him elected against the backdrop of a much more left-wing Labour party. For all his faults I would far prefer him over a Corbynite.
Since we're on the subject, is the Tory female distaste for Boris (Rudd, Ruth) just because he's a shit or is there something nastier in the woodshed? All that 'not the man you want to drive you home at the end of the evening' stuff seemed very pointed.
Land is very political in South Africa.
http://www.sahistory.org.za/article/forced-removals-south-africa
https://order-order.com/2018/04/05/sutton-libdem-campaign-brake-down/
But either politicians don't want evidence-based policies, or their advisers don't know what they're talking about and have fed them rubbish about diesel cars being *the* problem.
Not all poor people have diesel cars. Some do, but feck 'em. Serve them right for being poor.
It was a fairly spartan place, with homestyle food, lots of guns, dogs and barbed wire, but quite hospitable. Conversation was a little odd!
This was 1994, a few weeks after the election in which Mandela came to power. They had retreated to their Laager, but nothing happened. The Lumberjack convention had moments of interest too.
In his mind there are two types of women.
1) Women who he has bonked
2) Women who will eventually will succumb to his charms
Plus he has a tendency to forget which women he has tried on it on with/he has slept with.
Some attribute that to his general bumbling demeanour, some say it is because he is a shit.
So a few weeks ago he might have tried it on with woman 1, today he'll be trying it on with woman 2, in full view of woman 1, often using the same chat up routine.
Understandably it upsets women.
I run a 14 year old diesel. It's worth around £1800 tradein. I looked at scrappage last year but frankly the offers on the table were better than the one you put forward but still incredibly unattractive.
I keep it going largely because it does 77 miles to the gallon.
https://twitter.com/YesTories/status/979727912101404672
https://twitter.com/ukandeu/status/981927902064324608?s=21
' Drug gangs controlled by Eastern European criminals are fuelling the rising tide of violent crime in London, a Labour MP has claimed. '
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43653291
My main emphasis is on the age of Leave voters. They are far older than Remain voters and in the absence of new recruits, Leave will soon be outnumbered. To gain new recruits, Leave will need to show charm and persuasion. That, of course, is a major problem for them.
Don't see it happening though. When TM stands down it will be someone from the cabinet who takes over.
However if that person blows the 2021/2022 general election I could see JRM becoming LOTO against PM Jezza.
Fortunately ETB always remained a small-scale amateur production.
Differences between demographics can be the result of differing experiences as much as the year in which someone is born.
So a left-wing activist at age 20, who is a uni student, lives in central London, rents, and is yet to enter the workforce can become a 40 year old homeowner with two kids, a house, a car, in the suburbs. His circumstances have changed.
So too for the referendum: as we move out of the EU, our circumstances will all change.
Much more likely is that we settle into a new post-Brexit relationship with the EU which will include close cooperation in many fields, and de facto alignment with much of EU regulations.
In political terms I think it may be rather like views on gay marriage amongst Conservative voters; at the time of the change in the law it was hugely controversial and divisive, but once it had happened, and the world having not come to an end, its salience as an issue very rapidly dissipated.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_London
https://twitter.com/CatalansForYes/status/981955649591500800
https://twitter.com/CatalansForYes/status/981939693473460225
I believe Puigdemont can still be extradited on misuse of funds for the referendum.