Профиль

If we're going to have more films based on poems, Rupert The Bear would be a standout choice.

The essential problem with Zack Polanski is that he is not a leader. He has no strategy, no judgement. What he does have is opinions. He's a Bluesky feed incarnate.

Labour have quite enough fires to fight right now without lighting a new one. The unsustainable can be sustained for a surprisingly long time.

Labour currently hold 59 seats in London. Median house prices in London are c£500,000. Good luck trying to hold onto that lot with a new median £2,000+ annual tax charge on homeowners.

The headline is highly misleading. A first instance tribunal judge accepted this argument. It was set aside on appeal. The relevant judgment is here. www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKA...

The problem with the idea the UK has low turnout because it lacks compulsory voting is that it has managed a high turnout vote (inc among young voters) in recent years: the Scottish independence referendum. And the difference between it and e.g. GE2024 explain low turnout, and aren't solved by CV.

As a rule of thumb, the poll that shows Labour in the worst position is usually the most accurate.

Good evening.

Temu Mamdani is fast running out of buyers for his product.

What I think is not a major problem is the cost falling on the individual if they have assets to support it. Social care has all kinds of substantial problems, but this isn't one of them.

Its focus on the actual problems of social care is correct. However, it has nothing to do with the points I made about the funding of social care, which is the focus of Dan Neidle's thread.

At best this will be a socialism of the asset-rich. At worst there will be a disguised transfer of cost from the asset-rich to the poor. Wouldn't we do better to address the actual cost than tinker with a funding model that only disadvantages a wealthy minority? 5/5

And yes, social care is very expensive. That's not going to change just by insuring the risk. Someone has to pay. And if we move to an insurance model, this is only going to get more money in through premiums. So costs will go up to accommodate the heirs of some of those with assets. 4/5

What of those who do have assets and do need social care? Well, they pay until such point as they don't have assets. Then the state steps in. The losers are the next generation. That's v unfortunate for would-be heirs. But I don't see why this is a risk the rest of us should be underwriting. 3/5

If you don't have enough assets to pay for your social care, the state pays. So this is a problem only for those with assets. If you have assets and you don't ever need social care, it would have been a wasted premium. 2/5

The hill I will die on is that this is not a major problem. Right now, people self-insure. There is no market to insure against this risk and trust me insurers would readily create one if there were an appetite for one. And people are broadly correct about this. 1/5

This for me is the key point. There's a trajectory to Elon Musk's posts and it's one that leads to actual violence.

A Britain where the Austin Allegro is the national emblem is not going to be a successful Britain.

Budapest buildings.

My brother-in-law spotted this in an archery shop in South Dakota. As he said, you wonder how they collect it. Probably tastes better than the local beer, mind.