General Election July 2024

[egor110]

Kermit power said:

egor110 said:

BigMon said:

egor110 said:

Kermit power said:

I'd start by removing the tax free lump sum on the pension of anyone retiring before state pension age without having had children. That group is most able to afford it as they've not had kids, and has also most contributed to the ageing population crisis for the same reason.

They'd also use less services , no schooling costs , less nhs costs compared to a family of 4 , produce less rubbish so need less bin collections .

If you have read any of Kermit's previous posts regarding the childless you will see they almost all following the same pattern of punitive charges levied at those who have had the temerity not to breed.

The fact that, to the best of my knowledge, not one person on here has supported his position seems to pass him by.

It's amusing he thinks everyone's children are going to help the ageing population crisis .

Because there all currently flocking to those social care jobs looking after the elderly aren't they .

You're surely not that incapable of looking ahead? You seriously think the only area we're going to have shortages is in social care???

Have you tried getting a builder lately, or a plumber? Needed to try and find a new dentist or book a GP?

There are loads of areas where we.don't have enough people, and with birth rates falling, retirement age static and life expectancy way up, problems are only going to get worse.

Of course i have , fact is the young don't want to do manual dirty jobs like building, plumbing so how is more children going to alter that ?

[pingu393]

egor110 said:

Of course i have , fact is the young don't want to do manual dirty jobs like building, plumbing so how is more children going to alter that ?

and those are the types of jobs that AI will struggle to master.

[Puzzles]

Wages will increase and people will take it up

[rscott]

This sums up the current Tory administration - they managed to not purchase key advertising space before announcing the election.
Instead, Labour noticed the increase in betting (several of the online bookmakers publish betting trends on their sites),brealised the announcement was coming and quickly booked most of the prime advertising.

https://x.com/Peston/status/1807500964737458329?s=...

On more than one occasion recently, the Daily Mail has had multiple Labour advertising all over the home page.

[paulw123]

JagLover said:

Murph7355 said:

Apparently, however, "hard working people" shouldn't be expected to pay more tax.

Which sounds like those not working should be. Which is a strange position for Labour to take, but does highlight a significant problem - that not enough people are paying in.

The Labour definition of working people apparently excludes people with any savings.

Yep, go after those people who are wise enough to save some of their hard earned for a rainy day rather than spunk it all each month on Chinese made crap and leased German cars.

[borcy]

Anyone ever been interviewed for an exit poll?

Apparently it's the same 100-120 constituencies.

[pingu393]

rscott said:

This sums up the current Tory administration - they managed to not purchase key advertising space before announcing the election.
Instead, Labour noticed the increase in betting (several of the online bookmakers publish betting trends on their sites),brealised the announcement was coming and quickly booked most of the prime advertising.

https://x.com/Peston/status/1807500964737458329?s=...

On more than one occasion recently, the Daily Mail has had multiple Labour advertising all over the home page.

If they are this competent in government, we should be in safe hands.

[768]

pingu393 said:

rscott said:

This sums up the current Tory administration - they managed to not purchase key advertising space before announcing the election.
Instead, Labour noticed the increase in betting (several of the online bookmakers publish betting trends on their sites),brealised the announcement was coming and quickly booked most of the prime advertising.

https://x.com/Peston/status/1807500964737458329?s=...

On more than one occasion recently, the Daily Mail has had multiple Labour advertising all over the home page.

If they are this competent in government, we should be in safe hands.

I'm sceptical that it's true.

They certainly spent a lot more money on social media advertising, but it didn't start until after the election announcement. We may just be in another set of spinning hands.



FT | Archive

[turbobloke]

rscott said:

This sums up the current Tory administration - they managed to not purchase key advertising space before announcing the election.

Is that not the nature of this problem, if they bought key advertising space before the announcement, it would announce an imminent election to both insiders and outsiders before the announcement.

[President Merkin]

And yet Labour managed to have it in place. The post mortem to this election will inevitably conclude that Sunak rage quit when he should have waited. Had he done so, Farage would have been safely tucked away, tickling Trump's teats, various bits of economic good news would be up for grabs & he wouldn't have pulled the rug from under dozens of his own MP's. The variable yet to be ascertained is why he jumped. We may never know but the idea the letters were flying in & he decided to take revenge is not unattractive.

Edited by President Merkin on Monday 1st July 11:05

[oyster]

President Merkin said:

And yet Labour managed to have it in place. The post mortem to this election will inevitably conclude that Sunak rage quit when he should have waited. Had he done so, Farage would have been safely tucked away, tickling Trump's teats, various bits of economic good news would be up for grabs & he wouldn't have pulled the rug from under dozens of his own MP's. The variable yet to be ascertained is why he jumped. We may never know but the idea the letters were flying in & he decided to take revenge is not unattractive.

Edited by President Merkin on Monday 1st July 11:05

I think it's all down to Rwanda flights.

They were promised in July. Yet they would not have happened in July and the flagship policy would be in tatters.



It's utterly irrelevant now of course, but at the time it probably didn't look that way.

[Collectingbrass]

768 said:

pingu393 said:

rscott said:

This sums up the current Tory administration - they managed to not purchase key advertising space before announcing the election.
Instead, Labour noticed the increase in betting (several of the online bookmakers publish betting trends on their sites),brealised the announcement was coming and quickly booked most of the prime advertising.

https://x.com/Peston/status/1807500964737458329?s=...

On more than one occasion recently, the Daily Mail has had multiple Labour advertising all over the home page.

If they are this competent in government, we should be in safe hands.

I'm sceptical that it's true.

They certainly spent a lot more money on social media advertising, but it didn't start until after the election announcement. We may just be in another set of spinning hands.

Isn't this the difference between booked & paid deposit v paid the final bill though? I wouldn't have thought they'd have known the art work for this week when they saw the bookie's data for example.

Either way the Tories do seem to be living out Brewster's Millions. I wonder what they stand to inherit when they spend the last pound on the bus fare home from the Palace on 5 July.

[thetapeworm]

I wonder if there are any studies that show a decline in business for companies that openly promote a particular candidate rather than just voting for them and keeping quiet?

[carlo996]

pingu393 said:

If they are this competent in government, we should be in safe hands.

They won't be. It's Labour

[blueg33]

carlo996 said:

pingu393 said:

If they are this competent in government, we should be in safe hands.

They won't be. It's Labour

Well the Tories have set the bar very low so i think Labour will be more competant. A bloody goldfish would be more competent than the shower we have had since 2016

[Bonefish Blues]

blueg33 said:

carlo996 said:

pingu393 said:

If they are this competent in government, we should be in safe hands.

They won't be. It's Labour

Well the Tories have set the bar very low so i think Labour will be more competant. A bloody goldfish would be more competent than the shower we have had since 2016

Vote flipper and goldie - you know it makes sense.

[Rufus Stone]

thetapeworm said:

I wonder if there are any studies that show a decline in business for companies that openly promote a particular candidate rather than just voting for them and keeping quiet?

I wonder when they are proposing to show some common sense?

[mikey_b]

thetapeworm said:

I wonder if there are any studies that show a decline in business for companies that openly promote a particular candidate rather than just voting for them and keeping quiet?

Well, I guess Mike Lindell's company 'My Pillows' lost a chunk of business after going all in with Trump. Though probably more to do with his becoming a nutjob conspiracy theorist, rather than merely promoting Trump per-se.

[Mortarboard]

Election calculus still giving the libdems more seats than cons. 10 seat or so advantage. It's going to be close.

Reform "down" to 7 seats.

M.

[Silverage]

oyster said:

I think it's all down to Rwanda flights.

They were promised in July. Yet they would not have happened in July and the flagship policy would be in tatters.



It's utterly irrelevant now of course, but at the time it probably didn't look that way.

£320m down the Swannee on that about to be cancelled policy apparently.