So the unanimous opinion of the media is that Mrs May has tried unsuccessfully to pull of a publicity stunt by linking the increase in NHS expendidure with Brexit.
How to grab defeat from the jaws of victory. She really is a second rate politician or she's badly advised. Can she really last until next year?
Suspect most people will just hear £20bn for the NHS and not really all the hullabaloo surrounding it...
Yup, it's why all of the pro-EU remainers are so desperate today. This has killed the last chance of remaining, a vote against Brexit is now a vote against an extra £20bn for the NHS. It's utterly toxic for remainers and they know it which is why they are so upset. Linking it to Brexit was the smartest thing Theresa has done in a long time, one suspects Dave suggested it when he went to visit recently...
Maybe I am just a weirdo, I super enjoy my sport but I don't take the result (good or bad) away with me. No kicking the cat in Chez Urquhart.
What I actually really enjoy is seeing live elite sport, being able to witness incredibly talented individuals do things you know you could never do e.g. One of the highlights of a few years ago was seeing Adonis Chapman pitch from only a few rows behind home plate. Seeing an individual throw a baseball at 105 mph is really something special (and I am not much of a baseball fan).
Yes, I'd agree with this. It's why I quite like going to watch golf. It's an insanely difficult game to be any good at.
That said, there's nothing quite like a last minute winner away from home!
I went to the Open a few years ago and the best part of the day was the hour or so I spent watching the pro on the range. I remember Phil Mickelson warming up with pitch shots to a 50 and 100 yard target and not only did he basically get every one close, more actually squared hit it than missed.
It just showed how much better the elite pros are than even your local club scratch golfer.
I have played competitive golf with many low handicap and scratch golfers, some who turned pro but did not make it as a tournament pro. There is indeed a huge gap between a top amateur and a tournament winning pro
I can't imagine what a low handicapper would be scoring on this US Open course if the worlds best are struggling to get near par.
This course is impossible and would see many good amateurs near 100 gross
I don't know why they are struggling, looks on the tv like wide open fairways and massive greens ;-)
The pin placing and speed of the greens are on the edge of being playable. Plus the rough is very difficult
I loved yesterday's action...it was like keystone cops.....
The US open is usually the most entertaining major because the courses are unplayable...come on Tommy
It is a great weekend if you hold betting slips on Jeremy Hunt or Sajid Javid as Mrs May’s successor.
It was of course Boris and Gove who actually originally promised the Brexit bonus for the NHS May has now had to deliver, Hunt would have been unlikely to have got it without the Brexit vote
What rot this is @HYUFD. The NHS needs more money stand still in the face of an increasingly aging and obese population. The Government was always going to have to do something about it. The extra funding will not come from any mythical Brexit dividend, it will come from higher taxes.
What about contributions that would have happened after 2022?
The UK net contribution is £8.6bn pa. I bet we end up paying just as much for access to the EU market by from 2023.
That'd be a rotten deal. Canada pays nothing yet the UK has to pay £10bn per annum?
Canada isn't in the single market and customs union so it's not a comparable relationship. If we don't want a customs border between Northern Ireland and Ireland, or between Ireland and Great Britain, or between England and France, then we need the single market and customs union.
For the sake of argument if we go along with the fiction of the "Brexit dividend", by allocating all of it and more to the NHS, it begs the question of what happens to all the other things Vote Leave were saying we could spend the money on like housing, schools, scientific research, etc.
For the sake of argument if we go along with the fiction of the "Brexit dividend", by allocating all of it and more to the NHS, it begs the question of what happens to all the other things Vote Leave were saying we could spend the money on like housing, schools, scientific research, etc.
The choices people make with what to do with the divdend will change.
At the moment the NHS is on it's knees as those of us who don't go private are well aware... So I doubt very few would begrudge a massive increase in NHS spending.
The point is though it's OUR choice where the money will go.
And remember there are other ways we could see a Brexit dividend, for example how about the complete abolition of VAT on fuel after we leave the EU...
So the unanimous opinion of the media is that Mrs May has tried unsuccessfully to pull of a publicity stunt by linking the increase in NHS expendidure with Brexit.
How to grab defeat from the jaws of victory. She really is a second rate politician or she's badly advised. Can she really last until next year?
Suspect most people will just hear £20bn for the NHS and not really all the hullabaloo surrounding it...
Yup, it's why all of the pro-EU remainers are so desperate today. This has killed the last chance of remaining, a vote against Brexit is now a vote against an extra £20bn for the NHS. It's utterly toxic for remainers and they know it which is why they are so upset. Linking it to Brexit was the smartest thing Theresa has done in a long time, one suspects Dave suggested it when he went to visit recently...
You wish! On the contrary this has tied Brexiteers into spending commitments that can't be met in the event of a hard Brexit.
The ability to distort reality is one of May's few demonstrable political skills.
So the unanimous opinion of the media is that Mrs May has tried unsuccessfully to pull of a publicity stunt by linking the increase in NHS expendidure with Brexit.
How to grab defeat from the jaws of victory. She really is a second rate politician or she's badly advised. Can she really last until next year?
Suspect most people will just hear £20bn for the NHS and not really all the hullabaloo surrounding it...
Yup, it's why all of the pro-EU remainers are so desperate today. This has killed the last chance of remaining, a vote against Brexit is now a vote against an extra £20bn for the NHS. It's utterly toxic for remainers and they know it which is why they are so upset. Linking it to Brexit was the smartest thing Theresa has done in a long time, one suspects Dave suggested it when he went to visit recently...
The whole media in unison attacked the link but again, all the public hear is an extra 20 billion and the link is good politics
Maybe I am just a weirdo, I super enjoy my sport but I don't take the result (good or bad) away with me. No kicking the cat in Chez Urquhart.
What I actually really enjoy is seeing live elite sport, being able to witness incredibly talented individuals do things you know you could never do e.g. One of the highlights of a few years ago was seeing Adonis Chapman pitch from only a few rows behind home plate. Seeing an individual throw a baseball at 105 mph is really something special (and I am not much of a baseball fan).
Yes, I'd agree with this. It's why I quite like going to watch golf. It's an insanely difficult game to be any good at.
That said, there's nothing quite like a last minute winner away from home!
I went to the Open a few years ago and the best part of the day was the hour or so I spent watching the pro on the range. I remember Phil Mickelson warming up with pitch shots to a 50 and 100 yard target and not only did he basically get every one close, more actually squared hit it than missed.
It just showed how much better the elite pros are than even your local club scratch golfer.
I have played competitive golf with many low handicap and scratch golfers, some who turned pro but did not make it as a tournament pro. There is indeed a huge gap between a top amateur and a tournament winning pro
I can't imagine what a low handicapper would be scoring on this US Open course if the worlds best are struggling to get near par.
This course is impossible and would see many good amateurs near 100 gross
I don't know why they are struggling, looks on the tv like wide open fairways and massive greens ;-)
The pin placing and speed of the greens are on the edge of being playable. Plus the rough is very difficult
I loved yesterday's action...it was like keystone cops.....
The US open is usually the most entertaining major because the courses are unplayable...come on Tommy
@MaxPB Thanks for your response, sorry to hear about your friend who now regrets not having kids. Interesting to hear that your male friends are keen to settle down now, tbh I don’t get the sense that anyone among my friends (female or male) is that keen to settle down atm. That could change in the next few years though.
I'd say it goes beyond regret for her. Most of my friends are in their early 30s. I am as well, my fiancé is in her late 20s and we've had the kids conversation already and we're probably going to get on the train almost as soon as we're married later this summer.
I think it will be something that changes over time for you and your friends. I do think there is so much pressure on women to have "successful" careers and prioritise that over family life and I've found women who don't have kids have begin to regret the decision after the age of 35.
I remember my mum sitting down with my sister about this a few years ago when she was against having children, don't make a decision based on today's happiness that will cause a life of regret and bitterness was essentially what my mum said.
I have endless examples of this in women of my generation - 40s and 50s - who were especially sold the You Can Have It All idea - career, sex, travel AND kids and money and everything. They realised, too late, it was bollocks.
At least two of them became actively suicidal about their childlessness in their 40s. One got very very very lucky with the last attempt at IVF, she is now a blissfully contented mother. The other failed - after seeking out sperm donors - and is now dealing with continuing and deep depression.
This is just my experience, it could be unique, it is anecdata, but it is also the truth (in my close circle of friends)
It's definitely something I've begun to see in the workplace as well, some of the older childless women are absolutely scathing about women who take time off for maternity leave. There is a lot of bitterness there that no one ever talks about.
My partner always talks about it in the happiness today vs misery tomorrow sense as well. Plus I think she's a lot more traditional than when we first started dating, a lot of that has come with growing up, we're lucky that we have each other and we both want the same things out of life. The people who realise too late or are convinced by society that it's unnecessary are the ones who regret it most.
So the unanimous opinion of the media is that Mrs May has tried unsuccessfully to pull of a publicity stunt by linking the increase in NHS expendidure with Brexit.
How to grab defeat from the jaws of victory. She really is a second rate politician or she's badly advised. Can she really last until next year?
Suspect most people will just hear £20bn for the NHS and not really all the hullabaloo surrounding it...
Yup, it's why all of the pro-EU remainers are so desperate today. This has killed the last chance of remaining, a vote against Brexit is now a vote against an extra £20bn for the NHS. It's utterly toxic for remainers and they know it which is why they are so upset. Linking it to Brexit was the smartest thing Theresa has done in a long time, one suspects Dave suggested it when he went to visit recently...
You wish! On the contrary this has tied Brexiteers into spending commitments that can't be met in the event of a hard Brexit.
The ability to distort reality is one of May's few demonstrable political skills.
As I said, desperate. You've lost. The final few rebels will fall in line now that the £20bn is tied to delivering Brexit, it will only be the malcontents and traitors like Grieve who will vote to deny the NHS £20bn in additional funding.
Seeing international cricket live, especially test match cricket, is an incredible treat. I think Sky’s coverage is excellent but nothing prepares you for the incredible skill, speed and bravery that you get to appreciate seeing it in person. Strangely, it’s the bowling I remember most. It’s almost inhuman what they do to their bodies to hurl a cricket ball accurately at 85mph over 22 yards. It looks quite sanitised on the TV by comparison. Brett Lee at Lords, Broad at Headingly and Jimmy Anderson pretty much anywhere. Just incredible.
That famous Alan Donald vs Mike Atherton Test...was right behind the bowlers arm...never forget that.....when Atherton didn't walk when he gloved it, the wicketkeeper ended up nearly in the pavillon he was that far back. The pace he bowled at for a number of overs seemed super-human.
Having played at a decent standard were every team had a pro (which was either a former / current county players and the odd test player), I faced the likes of Alex Tudor and Otis Gibson and they were quick, really quick, but seeing Donald on that afternoon it was totally totally different.
So the unanimous opinion of the media is that Mrs May has tried unsuccessfully to pull of a publicity stunt by linking the increase in NHS expendidure with Brexit.
How to grab defeat from the jaws of victory. She really is a second rate politician or she's badly advised. Can she really last until next year?
Suspect most people will just hear £20bn for the NHS and not really all the hullabaloo surrounding it...
Yup, it's why all of the pro-EU remainers are so desperate today. This has killed the last chance of remaining, a vote against Brexit is now a vote against an extra £20bn for the NHS. It's utterly toxic for remainers and they know it which is why they are so upset. Linking it to Brexit was the smartest thing Theresa has done in a long time, one suspects Dave suggested it when he went to visit recently...
You wish! On the contrary this has tied Brexiteers into spending commitments that can't be met in the event of a hard Brexit.
The ability to distort reality is one of May's few demonstrable political skills.
As I said, desperate. You've lost. The final few rebels will fall in line now that the £20bn is tied to delivering Brexit, it will only be the malcontents and traitors like Grieve who will vote to deny the NHS £20bn in additional funding.
It's not tied to delivering Brexit though, is it? It's a bit of retail politics in reverse where the public held the government hostage and May has raided her overdraft to pay the ransom demand. It will reduce the salience of delivering Brexit because most people just cared about spending more on the NHS.
The fact that the commitment is more than the mythical Brexit dividend just makes it harder to argue that delivering Brexit is an essential part of meeting the promise.
So the unanimous opinion of the media is that Mrs May has tried unsuccessfully to pull of a publicity stunt by linking the increase in NHS expendidure with Brexit.
How to grab defeat from the jaws of victory. She really is a second rate politician or she's badly advised. Can she really last until next year?
Suspect most people will just hear £20bn for the NHS and not really all the hullabaloo surrounding it...
Yup, it's why all of the pro-EU remainers are so desperate today. This has killed the last chance of remaining, a vote against Brexit is now a vote against an extra £20bn for the NHS. It's utterly toxic for remainers and they know it which is why they are so upset. Linking it to Brexit was the smartest thing Theresa has done in a long time, one suspects Dave suggested it when he went to visit recently...
You wish! On the contrary this has tied Brexiteers into spending commitments that can't be met in the event of a hard Brexit.
The ability to distort reality is one of May's few demonstrable political skills.
As I said, desperate. You've lost. The final few rebels will fall in line now that the £20bn is tied to delivering Brexit, it will only be the malcontents and traitors like Grieve who will vote to deny the NHS £20bn in additional funding.
It's not tied to delivering Brexit though, is it? It's a bit of retail politics in reverse where the public held the government hostage and May has raided her overdraft to pay the ransom demand. It will reduce the salience of delivering Brexit because most people just cared about spending more on the NHS.
The fact that the commitment is more than the mythical Brexit dividend just makes it harder to argue that delivering Brexit is an essential part of meeting the promise.
So the unanimous opinion of the media is that Mrs May has tried unsuccessfully to pull of a publicity stunt by linking the increase in NHS expendidure with Brexit.
How to grab defeat from the jaws of victory. She really is a second rate politician or she's badly advised. Can she really last until next year?
Suspect most people will just hear £20bn for the NHS and not really all the hullabaloo surrounding it...
Yup, it's why all of the pro-EU remainers are so desperate today. This has killed the last chance of remaining, a vote against Brexit is now a vote against an extra £20bn for the NHS. It's utterly toxic for remainers and they know it which is why they are so upset. Linking it to Brexit was the smartest thing Theresa has done in a long time, one suspects Dave suggested it when he went to visit recently...
You wish! On the contrary this has tied Brexiteers into spending commitments that can't be met in the event of a hard Brexit.
The ability to distort reality is one of May's few demonstrable political skills.
As I said, desperate. You've lost. The final few rebels will fall in line now that the £20bn is tied to delivering Brexit, it will only be the malcontents and traitors like Grieve who will vote to deny the NHS £20bn in additional funding.
It's not tied to delivering Brexit though, is it? It's a bit of retail politics in reverse where the public held the government hostage and May has raided her overdraft to pay the ransom demand. It will reduce the salience of delivering Brexit because most people just cared about spending more on the NHS.
The fact that the commitment is more than the mythical Brexit dividend just makes it harder to argue that delivering Brexit is an essential part of meeting the promise.
It is a great weekend if you hold betting slips on Jeremy Hunt or Sajid Javid as Mrs May’s successor.
It was of course Boris and Gove who actually originally promised the Brexit bonus for the NHS May has now had to deliver, Hunt would have been unlikely to have got it without the Brexit vote
What rot this is @HYUFD. The NHS needs more money stand still in the face of an increasingly aging and obese population. The Government was always going to have to do something about it. The extra funding will not come from any mythical Brexit dividend, it will come from higher taxes.
What about contributions that would have happened after 2022?
The UK net contribution is £8.6bn pa. I bet we end up paying just as much for access to the EU market by from 2023.
That'd be a rotten deal. Canada pays nothing yet the UK has to pay £10bn per annum?
Canada isn't in the single market and customs union so it's not a comparable relationship. If we don't want a customs border between Northern Ireland and Ireland, or between Ireland and Great Britain, or between England and France, then we need the single market and customs union.
We haven't said no customs border. We have said no physical infrastructure. All we have to do is... not put up physical infrastructure. What can the EU do? Unilaterally put up a border they insist they didn't want?
It is a great weekend if you hold betting slips on Jeremy Hunt or Sajid Javid as Mrs May’s successor.
It was of course Boris and Gove who actually originally promised the Brexit bonus for the NHS May has now had to deliver, Hunt would have been unlikely to have got it without the Brexit vote
What rot this is @HYUFD. The NHS needs more money stand still in the face of an increasingly aging and obese population. The Government was always going to have to do something about it. The extra funding will not come from any mythical Brexit dividend, it will come from higher taxes.
What about contributions that would have happened after 2022?
The UK net contribution is £8.6bn pa. I bet we end up paying just as much for access to the EU market by from 2023.
That'd be a rotten deal. Canada pays nothing yet the UK has to pay £10bn per annum?
Canada isn't in the single market and customs union so it's not a comparable relationship. If we don't want a customs border between Northern Ireland and Ireland, or between Ireland and Great Britain, or between England and France, then we need the single market and customs union.
We haven't said no customs border. We have said no physical infrastructure. All we have to do is... not put up physical infrastructure. What can the EU do? Unilaterally put up a border they insist they didn't want?
They can process cross-Channel shipments under WTO rules at the speed that their capacity allows them to which will be enough to ensure utter chaos in the UK... 'No Deal' is not a sustainable end point.
I've returned to the workplace these last months and do not have time for the weekly shop, getting my haircut, getting my teeth polished, going to the pub....how the fuck anyone could work and have kids today is quite beyond me'
Those in their 50s now that had kids in the 90s or earlier had the chance to have 2 or 3 sprogs and still enjoy a middle class lifestyle, with a nice house and garden in a good part of town. The problem for the current generation is that, unless you've done seriously well for yourself, the choice is kids or middle class lifestyle. You can't afford both.
Very true. Kids in my area are a significant indicator of wealth, in the middle classes. LOOK, we can afford to have FOUR.
Many of my friends have only had one, because that's literally all they can afford, in London, and maintain a reasonably pleasant lifestyle.
I think it's more than just money.
Having children is a biological imperative, for men and women alike, and I'm inclined to think that those who don't do it will always have regrets, even if they are only "what ifs..."
The trouble is we have a society that is absolutely at odds with that biological imperative. It's one that encourages us to prioritise our careers, to travel extensively, to live free and never tie ourselves down. Marriage and kids are absolute anathema to that.
Dating has changed a lot in the last few years and not for the better. Why settle down with that guy (or girl) when there is always the possibility of something better around the corner? So we go from relationship to relationship, putting it off because the time is never right. And once time is actually running out we end up going for the first available person who may well be far from our first choice. I've had friends in their late thirties settle and end up absolutely miserable with their partners and the commitment free lives they used to lead.
I'm inclined to agree with Max on this, many of my friends have achieved great financial success but ultimately feel they are leading empty lives. Those who married and had kids relatively early seem much happier and better adjusted. Funnily enough though, it is the men who want to settle down and not so much the women, at least not until it's (very nearly) too late. Is it because women see marriage and children as curtailing their freedom in a way that men don't? I don't have the answers, but something is very definitely "up".
I just wanted to say this was an excellent post kyf. Somehow our GDP and choice maximising governance systems have left us deeply at odds with human happiness.
He forgot to mention financial ruin but other than that I agree.
Most of the women among my friendship group don’t want to have kids. Tbh, I think in my family those who have chosen not to have kids seem much less unhappy and stressed than many married, working mums in my family.
You're quite young, no? Early or mid 20s? (forgive me if I am wrong)
Many of my female friends, when we were all in our 20s, were adamant they didn't want kids. I have witnessed several of them end up so desperate for kids they have been through heartbreaking sessions of IVF, to no avail.
Interestingly, other analyses show that this happiness difference disappears as you get even older. And whether you are a parent or not has almost no effect on your reported happiness in your 70s and 80s - the state of health and the quality of your social life is much more significant.
Those in their 50s now that had kids in the 90s or earlier had the chance to have 2 or 3 sprogs and still enjoy a middle class lifestyle, with a nice house and garden in a good part of town. The problem for the current generation is that, unless you've done seriously well for yourself, the choice is kids or middle class lifestyle. You can't afford both.
What a ridiculous statement.
In what way?
If I recall correctly, rcs lives a financier life in LA and mocks people for aspiring to fly business class. He is out of touch.
Seeing international cricket live, especially test match cricket, is an incredible treat. I think Sky’s coverage is excellent but nothing prepares you for the incredible skill, speed and bravery that you get to appreciate seeing it in person. Strangely, it’s the bowling I remember most. It’s almost inhuman what they do to their bodies to hurl a cricket ball accurately at 85mph over 22 yards. It looks quite sanitised on the TV by comparison. Brett Lee at Lords, Broad at Headingly and Jimmy Anderson pretty much anywhere. Just incredible.
That famous Alan Donald vs Mike Atherton Test...was right behind the bowlers arm...never forget that.....when Atherton didn't walk when he gloved it, the wicketkeeper ended up nearly in the pavillon he was that far back. The pace he bowled at for a number of overs seemed super-human.
Having played at a decent standard were every team had a pro (which was either a former / current county players and the odd test player), I faced the likes of Alex Tudor and Otis Gibson and they were quick, really quick, but seeing Donald on that afternoon it was totally totally different.
And Lee / Shoaib at their peak were even quicker.
I think Brett Lee was the fastest I have seen. At the end of his run up he lent backwards so that his upper body was almost horizontal and then he would whip forward, the ball would disappear and then there would be the loud crack as it hit the wicket keeper’s gloves more than half way to the boundary. Putting yourself in the way just seemed madness. No wonder he ended up with back problems. Mitchell Johnston at the Oval was seriously quick too, especially after the barmy army had wound him up.
He forgot to mention financial ruin but other than that I agree.
Most of the women among my friendship group don’t want to have kids. Tbh, I think in my family those who have chosen not to have kids seem much less unhappy and stressed than many married, working mums in my family.
You're quite young, no? Early or mid 20s? (forgive me if I am wrong)
Interestingly, other analyses show that this happiness difference disappears as you get even older. And whether you are a parent or not has almost no effect on your reported happiness in your 70s and 80s - the state of health and the quality of your social life is much more significant.
Those in their 50s now that had kids in the 90s or earlier had the chance to have 2 or 3 sprogs and still enjoy a middle class lifestyle, with a nice house and garden in a good part of town. The problem for the current generation is that, unless you've done seriously well for yourself, the choice is kids or middle class lifestyle. You can't afford both.
This is a very fair point. We had three kids in London between 1990 and 1998. We bought our first flat in Archway - two bedrooms and a garden - for £60,000 in 1991 when we had a joint income of around £35,000. On the same jobs at the same seniority today we’d be on around £50,000. The flat would cost £500,000. Just before our third was born and we had risen to a joint income of £60,000 a year we sold the flat for £80,000 and bought a three bedroom house in Hornsey for £125,000. I’d guess that would now go for £700,000 or so. We were very, very lucky.
And it's not just the money. Working hours have gone up spectacularly over the last 30 years. So to get to the level of income you need now, you don't have the spare time to actually raise them. That is the cultural legacy of work, work, work Thatcherism. Conservatives have themselves to blame for the collapse in family life.
Unless you work in the city or the top levels of management or a profession normal 9 to 5 hours are still the usual
It is a great weekend if you hold betting slips on Jeremy Hunt or Sajid Javid as Mrs May’s successor.
It was of course Boris and Gove who actually originally promised the Brexit bonus for the NHS May has now had to deliver, Hunt would have been unlikely to have got it without the Brexit vote
What rot this is @HYUFD. The NHS needs more money stand still in the face of an increasingly aging and obese population. The Government was always going to have to do something about it. The extra funding will not come from any mythical Brexit dividend, it will come from higher taxes.
What about contributions that would have happened after 2022?
The UK net contribution is £8.6bn pa. I bet we end up paying just as much for access to the EU market by from 2023.
That'd be a rotten deal. Canada pays nothing yet the UK has to pay £10bn per annum?
Canada isn't in the single market and customs union so it's not a comparable relationship. If we don't want a customs border between Northern Ireland and Ireland, or between Ireland and Great Britain, or between England and France, then we need the single market and customs union.
We haven't said no customs border. We have said no physical infrastructure. All we have to do is... not put up physical infrastructure. What can the EU do? Unilaterally put up a border they insist they didn't want?
They can process cross-Channel shipments under WTO rules at the speed that their capacity allows them to which will be enough to ensure utter chaos in the UK... 'No Deal' is not a sustainable end point.
So the unanimous opinion of the media is that Mrs May has tried unsuccessfully to pull of a publicity stunt by linking the increase in NHS expendidure with Brexit.
How to grab defeat from the jaws of victory. She really is a second rate politician or she's badly advised. Can she really last until next year?
Suspect most people will just hear £20bn for the NHS and not really all the hullabaloo surrounding it...
Yup, it's why all of the pro-EU remainers are so desperate today. This has killed the last chance of remaining, a vote against Brexit is now a vote against an extra £20bn for the NHS. It's utterly toxic for remainers and they know it which is why they are so upset. Linking it to Brexit was the smartest thing Theresa has done in a long time, one suspects Dave suggested it when he went to visit recently...
You wish! On the contrary this has tied Brexiteers into spending commitments that can't be met in the event of a hard Brexit.
The ability to distort reality is one of May's few demonstrable political skills.
As I said, desperate. You've lost. The final few rebels will fall in line now that the £20bn is tied to delivering Brexit, it will only be the malcontents and traitors like Grieve who will vote to deny the NHS £20bn in additional funding.
It's not tied to delivering Brexit though, is it? It's a bit of retail politics in reverse where the public held the government hostage and May has raided her overdraft to pay the ransom demand. It will reduce the salience of delivering Brexit because most people just cared about spending more on the NHS.
The fact that the commitment is more than the mythical Brexit dividend just makes it harder to argue that delivering Brexit is an essential part of meeting the promise.
The Brexit Bonus seems to entail higher taxes and extra borrowing. These will arrive before anyone notices any practical effects from the increases in NHS spending announced today. That seems like bad politics to me, but I guess we’ll see. It will probably buy May a bit more time in the short-term, which is all she is interested in, of course.
He forgot to mention financial ruin but other than that I agree.
Most of the women among my friendship group don’t want to have kids. Tbh, I think in my family those who have chosen not to have kids seem much less unhappy and stressed than many married, working mums in my family.
You're quite young, no? Early or mid 20s? (forgive me if I am wrong)
Interestingly, other analyses show that this happiness difference disappears as you get even older. And whether you are a parent or not has almost no effect on your reported happiness in your 70s and 80s - the state of health and the quality of your social life is much more significant.
Those in their 50s now that had kids in the 90s or earlier had the chance to have 2 or 3 sprogs and still enjoy a middle class lifestyle, with a nice house and garden in a good part of town. The problem for the current generation is that, unless you've done seriously well for yourself, the choice is kids or middle class lifestyle. You can't afford both.
This is a very fair point. We had three kids in London between 1990 and 1998. We bought our first flat in Archway - two bedrooms and a garden - for £60,000 in 1991 when we had a joint income of around £35,000. On the same jobs at the same seniority today we’d be on around £50,000. The flat would cost £500,000. Just before our third was born and we had risen to a joint income of £60,000 a year we sold the flat for £80,000 and bought a three bedroom house in Hornsey for £125,000. I’d guess that would now go for £700,000 or so. We were very, very lucky.
And it's not just the money. Working hours have gone up spectacularly over the last 30 years. So to get to the level of income you need now, you don't have the spare time to actually raise them. That is the cultural legacy of work, work, work Thatcherism. Conservatives have themselves to blame for the collapse in family life.
Unless you work in the city or the top levels of management or a profession normal 9 to 5 hours are still the usual
Along with a salary that doesn't allow you 2-3 kids plus a middle class lifestyle.
It is a great weekend if you hold betting slips on Jeremy Hunt or Sajid Javid as Mrs May’s successor.
It was of course Boris and Gove who actually originally promised the Brexit bonus for the NHS May has now had to deliver, Hunt would have been unlikely to have got it without the Brexit vote
What rot this is @HYUFD. The NHS needs more money stand still in the face of an increasingly aging and obese population. The Government was always going to have to do something about it. The extra funding will not come from any mythical Brexit dividend, it will come from higher taxes.
What about contributions that would have happened after 2022?
The UK net contribution is £8.6bn pa. I bet we end up paying just as much for access to the EU market by from 2023.
That'd be a rotten deal. Canada pays nothing yet the UK has to pay £10bn per annum?
Canada isn't in the single market and customs union so it's not a comparable relationship. If we don't want a customs border between Northern Ireland and Ireland, or between Ireland and Great Britain, or between England and France, then we need the single market and customs union.
We haven't said no customs border. We have said no physical infrastructure. All we have to do is... not put up physical infrastructure. What can the EU do? Unilaterally put up a border they insist they didn't want?
They can process cross-Channel shipments under WTO rules at the speed that their capacity allows them to which will be enough to ensure utter chaos in the UK... 'No Deal' is not a sustainable end point.
And what will they do in Northern Ireland?
They won't need to do anything except take the moral high ground and insist that the UK honour its commitment to the backstop. The British government will have enough on its hands dealing with the economic and logistical fallout out on the mainland.
He forgot to mention financial ruin but other than that I agree.
Most of the women among my friendship group don’t want to have kids. Tbh, I think in my family those who have chosen not to have kids seem much less unhappy and stressed than many married, working mums in my family.
You're quite young, no? Early or mid 20s? (forgive me if I am wrong)
Many of my female friends, when we were all in our 20s, were adamant they didn't want kids. I have witnessed several of them end up so desperate for kids they have been through heartbreaking sessions of IVF, to no avail.
Having kids is no panacea. It doesn't guarantee happiness. Sometimes it means the opposite. But sprogging is what we are here for and I would say my childless friends in their 50s, are fundamentally less "contented" than those who have reproduced. There is just *something* crucially missing from their lives. And analyses show this is true, childless people, especially women, in their 40s and 50s seem to be unhappier than parents.
Interestingly, other analyses show that this happiness difference disappears as you get even older. And whether you are a parent or not has almost no effect on your reported happiness in your 70s and 80s - the state of health and the quality of your social life is much more significant.
Those in their 50s now that had kids in the 90s or earlier had the chance to have 2 or 3 sprogs and still enjoy a middle class lifestyle, with a nice house and garden in a good part of town. The problem for the current generation is that, unless you've done seriously well for yourself, the choice is kids or middle class lifestyle. You can't afford both.
Outside of central London not really true, there are still plenty of middle class families in the London suburbs and Home Counties with 2 children living in a semi or detached property who may not be super rich but live a pretty standard middle class lifestyle with BMW and a holiday in the sun once or twice a year
He forgot to mention financial ruin but other than that I agree.
Most of the women among my friendship group don’t want to have kids. Tbh, I think in my family those who have chosen not to have kids seem much less unhappy and stressed than many married, working mums in my family.
You're quite young, no? Early or mid 20s? (forgive me if I am wrong)
Interestingly, other analyses show that this happiness difference disappears as you get even older. And whether you are a parent or not has almost no effect on your reported happiness in your 70s and 80s - the state of health and the quality of your social life is much more significant.
Those in their 50s now that had kids in the 90s or earlier had the chance to have 2 or 3 sprogs and still enjoy a middle class lifestyle, with a nice house and garden in a good part of town. The problem for the current generation is that, unless you've done seriously well for yourself, the choice is kids or middle class lifestyle. You can't afford both.
This is a very fair point. We had three kids in London between 1990 and 1998. We bought our first flat in Archwa
And it's not just the money. Working hours have gone up spectacularly over the last 30 years. So to get to the level of income you need now, you don't have the spare time to actually raise them. That is the cultural legacy of work, work, work Thatcherism. Conservatives have themselves to blame for the collapse in family life.
Unless you work in the city or the top levels of management or a profession normal 9 to 5 hours are still the usual
Along with a salary that doesn't allow you 2-3 kids plus a middle class lifestyle.
Not true either, plenty of people I work with have 2 kids on a pretty average salary, they just commute in from Essex, Kent, Enfield, Lewisham, Sussex etc rather than living in zones 1 to 2 or the most expensive parts of Surrey or Buckinghamshire. What you are talking about is really upper middle class not lower middle class
"But there is also a big problem with elite liberalism: by insulating technocratic elites from the pressure of popular opinion—by putting them in a comfortable cocoon of like-minded elites—it encourages over-reach. Britain was the perfect example of this. During the Blair-Brown-Cameron years Britain was dominated by a class of politicians who went to the same universities, followed the same career path of a spell as a special advisor followed by a safe seat (usually in an area of the country they had no connection with) followed by a fast-track to a ministerial post. The Labour Party lost its links to the old working class of trade unions and never established any links with the new working class of casual workers. The Conservative Party lost its links with provincial England. In this sense the Brexit referendum was a just punishment: the result of the referendum took everybody in the political elite by surprise, from David Cameron who called the thing, to the commentators who predicted an easy win for “Remain”, because they live in a self-contained world."
"But there is also a big problem with elite liberalism: by insulating technocratic elites from the pressure of popular opinion—by putting them in a comfortable cocoon of like-minded elites—it encourages over-reach. Britain was the perfect example of this. During the Blair-Brown-Cameron years Britain was dominated by a class of politicians who went to the same universities, followed the same career path of a spell as a special advisor followed by a safe seat (usually in an area of the country they had no connection with) followed by a fast-track to a ministerial post. The Labour Party lost its links to the old working class of trade unions and never established any links with the new working class of casual workers. The Conservative Party lost its links with provincial England. In this sense the Brexit referendum was a just punishment: the result of the referendum took everybody in the political elite by surprise, from David Cameron who called the thing, to the commentators who predicted an easy win for “Remain”, because they live in a self-contained world."
Not just the same universities, plural, but usually the same course at the same university: PPE at Oxford. They'd often gone to public schools as well -- minor public schools for Labour; major for Conservative, and under Cameron, often Eton. The Blairites are Cameroons, and the Cameroons are Blairites, as I used to write.
"But there is also a big problem with elite liberalism: by insulating technocratic elites from the pressure of popular opinion—by putting them in a comfortable cocoon of like-minded elites—it encourages over-reach. Britain was the perfect example of this. During the Blair-Brown-Cameron years Britain was dominated by a class of politicians who went to the same universities, followed the same career path of a spell as a special advisor followed by a safe seat (usually in an area of the country they had no connection with) followed by a fast-track to a ministerial post. The Labour Party lost its links to the old working class of trade unions and never established any links with the new working class of casual workers. The Conservative Party lost its links with provincial England. In this sense the Brexit referendum was a just punishment: the result of the referendum took everybody in the political elite by surprise, from David Cameron who called the thing, to the commentators who predicted an easy win for “Remain”, because they live in a self-contained world."
Not just the same universities, plural, but usually the same course at the same university: PPE at Oxford. They'd often gone to public schools as well -- minor public schools for Labour; major for Conservative, and under Cameron, often Eton. The Blairites are Cameroons, and the Cameroons are Blairites, as I used to write.
Interesting point. This is another thought-provoking passage from the article:
"In the end identity politics is not only incompatible with liberalism but positively repugnant to it. The essence of liberalism lies in individualism: liberals believe, along with Benjamin Constant, that “there is a part of human existence that remains of necessity individual and independent, and which lies of right utterly beyond the range of society”. Liberals certainly need to do more to address structural constraints on individual self-fulfilment. But they need to address these constraints as a means to an individualist rather than a collectivist end. By contrast identity politics is obsessed with the collective. It makes a fetish of biological characteristics such as gender, race or sexuality. It encourages people to identify with groups rather than stand out from the crowd. It submerges individuality into some broader sense of identity. It also encourages people to argue that rational arguments are subordinate to questions of identity: white men are asked to “check their privilege” while non-white men frequently invoke their race or gender (“speaking as a black woman) as a way of winning arguments. The price of wokeness is the re-racialisation and re-biologisation of public discourse."
Having children is a biological imperative, for men and women alike, and I'm inclined to think that those who don't do it will always have regrets, even if they are only "what ifs..."
The trouble is we have a society that is absolutely at odds with that biological imperative. It's one that encourages us to prioritise our careers, to travel extensively, to live free and never tie ourselves down. Marriage and kids are absolute anathema to that.
Dating has changed a lot in the last few years and not for the better. Why settle down with that guy (or girl) when there is always the possibility of something better around the corner? So we go from relationship to relationship, putting it off because the time is never right. And once time is actually running out we end up going for the first available person who may well be far from our first choice. I've had friends in their late thirties settle and end up absolutely miserable with their partners and the commitment free lives they used to lead.
I'm inclined to agree with Max on this, many of my friends have achieved great financial success but ultimately feel they are leading empty lives. Those who married and had kids relatively early seem much happier and better adjusted. Funnily enough though, it is the men who want to settle down and not so much the women, at least not until it's (very nearly) too late. Is it because women see marriage and children as curtailing their freedom in a way that men don't? I don't have the answers, but something is very definitely "up".
Interesting post, though as usual one can't quite generalise (I've never had kids and don't feel more than mild curiosity about it, no kind of urge - have done lots of interesting other things and enjoyed love and friendship without feeling I need to perpetuate the family). But I think what you say is the more usual, and the "I wonder if there's something better" thing is very pernicious.
"But there is also a big problem with elite liberalism: by insulating technocratic elites from the pressure of popular opinion—by putting them in a comfortable cocoon of like-minded elites—it encourages over-reach. Britain was the perfect example of this. During the Blair-Brown-Cameron years Britain was dominated by a class of politicians who went to the same universities, followed the same career path of a spell as a special advisor followed by a safe seat (usually in an area of the country they had no connection with) followed by a fast-track to a ministerial post. The Labour Party lost its links to the old working class of trade unions and never established any links with the new working class of casual workers. The Conservative Party lost its links with provincial England. In this sense the Brexit referendum was a just punishment: the result of the referendum took everybody in the political elite by surprise, from David Cameron who called the thing, to the commentators who predicted an easy win for “Remain”, because they live in a self-contained world."
Incidentally, looking closely at the table in the header, I see it doesn't really support the idea that the Tories are becoming more rusted on the NHS. They've been steady at about 22% throughout the 18 months. Labour was higher before (37-41) than the 35s they're scoring now, but I suspect that's mosly because the party has been largely out of the news except for squabbles lately.
Whether Mrs May's announcement will change things I rather doubt, because her image is so battered - it might have been better delivered by Hunt, who would appear to people as an interesting newish broom like Javid. I think most people will just think Mrs May is playing politics to distract from Brexit.
the "I wonder if there's something better" thing is very pernicious.
There certainly was a value to arranged marriages and lowered expectations re romance. Of course, lots of downsides too, particularly as divorce from abusive spouses seems harder under such marriages.
Comments
The US open is usually the most entertaining major because the courses are unplayable...come on Tommy
The choices people make with what to do with the divdend will change.
At the moment the NHS is on it's knees as those of us who don't go private are well aware... So I doubt very few would begrudge a massive increase in NHS spending.
The point is though it's OUR choice where the money will go.
And remember there are other ways we could see a Brexit dividend, for example how about the complete abolition of VAT on fuel after we leave the EU...
The ability to distort reality is one of May's few demonstrable political skills.
My partner always talks about it in the happiness today vs misery tomorrow sense as well. Plus I think she's a lot more traditional than when we first started dating, a lot of that has come with growing up, we're lucky that we have each other and we both want the same things out of life. The people who realise too late or are convinced by society that it's unnecessary are the ones who regret it most.
Having played at a decent standard were every team had a pro (which was either a former / current county players and the odd test player), I faced the likes of Alex Tudor and Otis Gibson and they were quick, really quick, but seeing Donald on that afternoon it was totally totally different.
And Lee / Shoaib at their peak were even quicker.
The fact that the commitment is more than the mythical Brexit dividend just makes it harder to argue that delivering Brexit is an essential part of meeting the promise.
Hope you've got Sean's money ready.
@SO
I've returned to the workplace these last months and do not have time for the weekly shop, getting my haircut, getting my teeth polished, going to the pub....how the fuck anyone could work and have kids today is quite beyond me'
Have you ever heard of the weekend?
"But there is also a big problem with elite liberalism: by insulating technocratic elites from the pressure of popular opinion—by putting them in a comfortable cocoon of like-minded elites—it encourages over-reach. Britain was the perfect example of this. During the Blair-Brown-Cameron years Britain was dominated by a class of politicians who went to the same universities, followed the same career path of a spell as a special advisor followed by a safe seat (usually in an area of the country they had no connection with) followed by a fast-track to a ministerial post. The Labour Party lost its links to the old working class of trade unions and never established any links with the new working class of casual workers. The Conservative Party lost its links with provincial England. In this sense the Brexit referendum was a just punishment: the result of the referendum took everybody in the political elite by surprise, from David Cameron who called the thing, to the commentators who predicted an easy win for “Remain”, because they live in a self-contained world."
https://www.economist.com/bagehots-notebook/2018/06/12/some-thoughts-on-the-crisis-of-liberalism-and-how-to-fix-it
"In the end identity politics is not only incompatible with liberalism but positively repugnant to it. The essence of liberalism lies in individualism: liberals believe, along with Benjamin Constant, that “there is a part of human existence that remains of necessity individual and independent, and which lies of right utterly beyond the range of society”. Liberals certainly need to do more to address structural constraints on individual self-fulfilment. But they need to address these constraints as a means to an individualist rather than a collectivist end. By contrast identity politics is obsessed with the collective. It makes a fetish of biological characteristics such as gender, race or sexuality. It encourages people to identify with groups rather than stand out from the crowd. It submerges individuality into some broader sense of identity. It also encourages people to argue that rational arguments are subordinate to questions of identity: white men are asked to “check their privilege” while non-white men frequently invoke their race or gender (“speaking as a black woman) as a way of winning arguments. The price of wokeness is the re-racialisation and re-biologisation of public discourse."
Whether Mrs May's announcement will change things I rather doubt, because her image is so battered - it might have been better delivered by Hunt, who would appear to people as an interesting newish broom like Javid. I think most people will just think Mrs May is playing politics to distract from Brexit.