Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
peanut-
Feb 17, 2004
Fun Shoe

Failed Imagineer posted:

Hmm possibly have a job offer which could be contingent on being in Cambridge a few days a month for reasons (??).

Could anyone speculate on how grim it would be to have to visit there regularly from Dublin? I've actually never been but I'm assuming there's a lot of decentish hotels or short-stay flats because of all the MNCs located there? If works paying the bill it could be fine I guess.

Might be totally unworkable due to people being tax cunts tho

If you're working in the UK less than 60 days a year it shouldn't be a tax headache.

Would your employer pay for the travel? If so it seems pretty manageable for 2-3 days a month. Only real downside would be the amount of time spent in Stansted, which is a hell place.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

peanut-
Feb 17, 2004
Fun Shoe

goddamnedtwisto posted:

For ages before the first bankruptcy you could upgrade to first class for like a tenner on most services if you prebooked and you could make the money back on free tea and biscuits before you got to Peterborough.

Is this not a thing at all anymore then? I used to get first class for a few quid extra all the time, but now you mention it I probably haven't in the last 5 years.

peanut-
Feb 17, 2004
Fun Shoe
Just in case you hadn't worked out that the FBPEs are bad yet

https://twitter.com/TheNewEuropean/status/1455510582472368131?s=20

peanut-
Feb 17, 2004
Fun Shoe
It's just going to be the regulatory department being overly cautious about what they do and don't have to label in the new packaging rules, especially if something might go to NI.

Which is a dumb Brexit problem but not some malicious nationalist conspiracy.

peanut-
Feb 17, 2004
Fun Shoe
Random thing I just learned reading about energy company collapses: variable green energy tariffs are exempt from the OFGEM price cap, so anyone with good intentions who signed up to one will currently be paying 2-3x the power bill of someone on a non-green energy tariff.

peanut-
Feb 17, 2004
Fun Shoe
I don't understand what it's meant to depict.

Is the troop marrying the embodied concept of respect? Is the bride furiously remembering while having a pretend marriage to her dead troop?

peanut-
Feb 17, 2004
Fun Shoe
Isn't it likely that's the matched absence voting thing? Like if those 28 Labour MPs had voted against they just would have dragged in 28 extra Tories to vote for.

lol that one of them is Starmer though

peanut-
Feb 17, 2004
Fun Shoe
Is this too much hubris? It is at least the lead story in every paper.

Con (+2)

peanut-
Feb 17, 2004
Fun Shoe

You’d know pretty quickly if this applied to you as you’d currently be getting a ~£200 a month bill to power a one bedroom flat. If that is you, I don’t think you can be locked into a contract on a variable tariff so switch asap.

peanut-
Feb 17, 2004
Fun Shoe
They've lost my details and I haven't been a member of the Labour party since 2011. Good to know they prune their lists regularly.

peanut-
Feb 17, 2004
Fun Shoe
Tory MPs must be spitting nails about being made to vote for this before doing an immediate u-turn the next day.

gently caress em obviously, but worth noting on the basis that they're the only actual threat to the government.

peanut-
Feb 17, 2004
Fun Shoe

forkboy84 posted:

Neil Hamilton had a safe Tory seat when he got beaten by journalist Martin Bell. Tatton was later George Osborne's seat. People aren't wild about corruption. Well, explicitly open corruption, people don't really care about the general undercurrent if it

Also safe seats are often safe seats because they don't get any campaigning resource from the other parties

In by-elections with reduced turnout and greater focus from the other parties they can get a lot wobblier.

serious gaylord posted:

Patterson is done.

How much of this was him coming out swinging last night calling the report a fabrication and for the committee to resign. What a loving idiot.

peanut-
Feb 17, 2004
Fun Shoe
He could have just served his suspension and carried on being an MP right? If he just apologised and took his medicine I doubt there would have been a recall petition and this story would have been gone in a week.

peanut-
Feb 17, 2004
Fun Shoe

Marmaduke! posted:

This is more like the Thick of It style of incompetent fun that we haven't had in a while.

... he's going to be PM next season isn't he?

This whole thing would be nicely rounded off by appointing him to the House of Lords imo

peanut-
Feb 17, 2004
Fun Shoe
It wouldn’t surprise me if no professional advisor really did anything wrong. If they’re collecting the right (forged) ID docs, correspondence is going to the property and being answered, how are they meant to detect what’s happening?

peanut-
Feb 17, 2004
Fun Shoe
99% of those "don't knows" will vote in the column they're currently in so the only actual notable thing in that chart is the movement from Labour and Lib Dems to the Greens.

peanut-
Feb 17, 2004
Fun Shoe
Exciting new twist for war christmas as our nation's MPs all take a turn on the most respectful exercise bike.

https://twitter.com/indparltrust/status/1455852208797462536

peanut-
Feb 17, 2004
Fun Shoe
Fire pits are a nice idea but in reality every time I've sat round one the experience has been smoke blowing directly into my face and stinking clothes.

If I was going to buy one it would be one with a chimney.

peanut-
Feb 17, 2004
Fun Shoe
lmao

https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1456966705872244743

peanut-
Feb 17, 2004
Fun Shoe
British columnists are a truly unique class of brain

https://twitter.com/rcolvile/status/1457271787943829504?s=21

peanut-
Feb 17, 2004
Fun Shoe

a pipe smoking dog posted:

Check out this incredibly cursed company I found while doing some investigative stuff at work today:

KARLMARX HOLDINGS LIMITED

It's the holding company for Oxygen Electric Bikes, South Yorkshire Electric Bike Centre, and Sea Scooter UK Ltd.

I never made it to vol 2. of Capital myself so missed the bits about weird electric personal transportation systems.

peanut-
Feb 17, 2004
Fun Shoe
https://twitter.com/tomhfh/status/1458704761474191360?s=20

I found it quite interesting reading the backlash in the replies to this. It seems like a pretty good insight into the difference between UK and US right wing culture.

All the obvious overtones when someone like him talks about a "demographic crisis" and the family being the most important unit in society are of just no interest to his audience compared to the real nightmare: the notion of scroungers with flat-screen TVs having more kids than they can afford.

peanut-
Feb 17, 2004
Fun Shoe
I never know if this account is real news or not, but holy poo poo if it is. Someone was seriously going to blow up a maternity hospital?

https://twitter.com/PoliticsForAlI/status/1460006875815161858

peanut-
Feb 17, 2004
Fun Shoe
Why do they talk like that? A debris-generating event sounds like a cousin of an officer-involved shooting.

Nothing can ever happen in the active voice.

peanut-
Feb 17, 2004
Fun Shoe
There is very little slander of England I will not accept as accurate but the idea that we have bad sausages cannot stand unchallenged.

peanut-
Feb 17, 2004
Fun Shoe
The Tory back benches are gonna revolt over the second jobs rules. Most of them are completely safe in their seats, and I have no problem believing they would rather topple the government than lose half their income.

I dunno if even Boris could get out of proposing these rules then withdrawing them.

peanut-
Feb 17, 2004
Fun Shoe
I don't think major political rivals will be his problem. They're careerists and will fall in line. Plus his biggest most obvious rival is stupidly rich and will have no issues with this.

It's the rank and file Tories who are secure in their seats, aren't ministers and never will be, and double their income with this stuff. They are not going to be happy at all.

peanut-
Feb 17, 2004
Fun Shoe
Also the membership absolutely will elect Sunak, sorry. The only thing that ultimately matters to Tories is that you're a Tory.

peanut-
Feb 17, 2004
Fun Shoe
That Bloomberg article says Amazon are offering customers £20 to switch their default payment mechanism to a debit card or non-VISA credit card, so if you have a Visa CC probably worth setting it as default payment method to see if you can get that.

peanut-
Feb 17, 2004
Fun Shoe
They're banning VISA credit cards, not debit cards. VISA dominate debit in the UK but are a much smaller player in credit cards (~20% of the market).

peanut-
Feb 17, 2004
Fun Shoe
The UK ruling class distilled into 14 words (not those 14)

https://twitter.com/jamesdgreig/status/1460995226668093449

peanut-
Feb 17, 2004
Fun Shoe
In a predictable turn of events, it seems that closing the public transport gap between London and the rest of the country is just going to mean putting TFL into managed decline. This is levelling up I guess?

peanut-
Feb 17, 2004
Fun Shoe

ThomasPaine posted:

Is there really any reason we couldn't have negotiated a Switzerland or Norway-like situation if the govt had actually put the effort in?

I mean as far as I understand Brexit has hosed the Swiss arrangement too. A lot of the inviolable EU rules had, in fact, been violated in the Swiss deal and everyone mostly ignored that for convenience.

But credibly claiming they couldn't be broken for the UK required not breaking them for Switzerland anymore and the result was that the Swiss binned the deal (at least that was the case when I was reading about it 6 months ago).

peanut-
Feb 17, 2004
Fun Shoe

I reckon they're eventually going to find a way to put Corbyn in jail. If the Tories don't do it Starmer will. He must be punished for existing.

peanut-
Feb 17, 2004
Fun Shoe
Genuinely hard to believe that there are real people who exist out there buying copies of The New European

peanut-
Feb 17, 2004
Fun Shoe
One interesting aspect for the future (and something I think the left really fails to understand or address) is the nature of wealth in the UK.

By far the largest pool of wealth in the UK is not houses or private savings, it's defined benefit pension rights of which the vast majority are public sector pension rights. Outside of a few wealthy outliers, the richest people you know in terms of true asset wealth are highly likely to be NHS employees, teachers, civil servants, local government employees etc.

This is quite masked at the moment because so much of the current generation of retireds own their houses and come from an era when defined benefit pensions still existed in the private sector. But over the next 15 years or so that will stop being the case. What happens in voting when the only wealthy olds (on a millions of people, election moving scale) are retired public sector employees?

(Incidentally this is also a big practical issue with many wealth tax ideas. Not an unsolvable one but it is an impediment to many of what seem like the most obvious implementations)

peanut-
Feb 17, 2004
Fun Shoe
They are certainly lower than the past, but career average is still enormously, many multiples more than the vast majority of private sector employees will have. "Wealthy" is relative here.

peanut-
Feb 17, 2004
Fun Shoe

Jedit posted:

I am a public sector employee and let me tell you, no, we do not get "many multiples more" than the private sector.

This is what I mean when I say the left refuse to engage with this, people get incredibly mad when you talk about it as if you're accusing them of being a secret Tory. Nowhere does my post say that public sector pensions are wrong or the benefits need to be taken away, just that this is how things are and that it may affect future voting patterns.

Because it is reality, the average UK public sector employee will receive significantly more benefit from their pension than the average private sector employee. That is just endemic to how the different types of pension work and is something the ONS can and do work out. Four-fifths of all pension wealth in the UK is held in defined benefit schemes.

It's not a comment that public sector employees are all rich, it's a comment that private sector retirees of the future are going to be very poor.

peanut-
Feb 17, 2004
Fun Shoe

WhatEvil posted:

E:

Oh. How does that work then?

Pensions are a mind gently caress of complexity and lies, but basically under a DB scheme you earn entitlements to future annual payouts and when you retire you receive the payout you’ve earned no matter what. There’s no pot of investments you’re contributing to that can go up or down in value.

Employees pay some contribution towards that from their salary (I think ~8% in government) and the employer pays some contribution (~24% in government). The real cost of these liabilities is actually ~60% of annual salary for most public sector employees, so the difference gets plugged from general taxation.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

peanut-
Feb 17, 2004
Fun Shoe

Funny is this is, the absolute state of British people in the replies is quite depressing.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply