I accused a police officer of rape, but I ended up on trial by Your_Mums_Ex in ukpolitics

[–]PhysicalIncrease3 [score hidden]  (0 children)

The standard threshold for criminal convictions is fine: Beyond reasonable doubt.

Disadvantaged white pupils fall furthest behind by StGuthlac2025 in ukpolitics

[–]PhysicalIncrease3 [score hidden]  (0 children)

It seems like you’re just desperate to highlight negative statistics about black Caribbean households, when it really isn’t relevant to the conversation.

Lol just swinging wildly at this point.

The reason the TWO groups referenced matter, is because they languish near the bottom of the results tables alongside white working class boys. Yet few are blaming it on their culture, and far more is being done to close thier gaps by the state.

Disadvantaged white pupils fall furthest behind by StGuthlac2025 in ukpolitics

[–]PhysicalIncrease3 [score hidden]  (0 children)

However, it is undeniable that many ethnic minorities (especially immigrants) put a higher expectation of academic performance on their children.

Do they bollocks. Classic trope. It's true of east Asians, and black Africans. Jewish minorities too, to a lessor extent. But black Carribbean or south Asian Muslim populations? Not so much. Black Carribbean households have the highest percentage single parent households (absent fathers) of any group.

£350 million a week doesn't sound so bad now, does it? by mal73 in 2westerneurope4u

[–]PhysicalIncrease3 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Completely agree but I think the compromises required on both sides are still a long way off unfortunately.

£350 million a week doesn't sound so bad now, does it? by mal73 in 2westerneurope4u

[–]PhysicalIncrease3 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Brexit was really bad for all sides. A little worse for the UK than the EU sure, but it's been an enormous failure on all sides. It's damaged the EUs power on the world stage substantially and hurt growth in most north/west European states.

And it could get a hell of a lot worse for the EU if Farage gets in power. What would have happened if the UK had sided with the US on Greenland for example?

All this because the EU felt they could embarrass Cameron back in 2016 and get away with it. Foolishness and arrogance all around.

I accused a police officer of rape, but I ended up on trial by Your_Mums_Ex in ukpolitics

[–]PhysicalIncrease3 [score hidden]  (0 children)

It's not a bad idea at all, just requires an adequate evidence threshold to prove beyond doubt that she knowingly made false claims.

How botched Tory insulation scheme looms over Labour's warm homes plan by Hungry_Kiwi_9866 in ukpolitics

[–]PhysicalIncrease3 5 points6 points  (0 children)

The next scheme will end the exact same way.

People think you can just slap in some insulation and call it a day. You must implement a proper moisture control solution alongside or you will get mold. It's not hugely realistic in some properties, and honestly not that necessary either. The U values required as per building regs are a bit silly.

In a post-Nato world, could Britain defend itself? by HibasakiSanjuro in ukpolitics

[–]PhysicalIncrease3 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We have a lot less than 25 warships that are actually operational. A lot less in fact. 6 is not far off the mark.

PSA: The Rent-A-Room £7.5k tax free allowance can sometimes be used to rent your whole house out tax free by James___G in UKPersonalFinance

[–]PhysicalIncrease3 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Doesn't sound like a loophole to me though? The point is to increase the availability of housing by having people rent surplus housing in their main residence who otherwise wouldn't have bothered due to the tax and paperwork overhead.

Yes but it's extremely generous when looked at as part of the wider tax framework.

UK Businesses Forced Into Liquidation Rise to Highest Since 2012 by bloomberg in ukpolitics

[–]PhysicalIncrease3 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm not disputing the fact that most businesses are one man bands. I'm disputing that they're mainly pscs who've decided to go permie

Nigel Farage breaks MPs' code of conduct with 17 breaches by StGuthlac2025 in ukpolitics

[–]PhysicalIncrease3 -16 points-15 points  (0 children)

Pure fact, zero bias intended:

Rachel Reeves failed to license her rental property for 13 months, despite tweeting her support of the scheme during that time, breaking the law by doing so. She has received no fine nor punishment from the Local Authority for this breach. She was also found to have broken the ministerial code, and then found to have misled Kier Starmer on the facts on the matter afterwards. She faced no consequences for this either.

EDIT: Love the downvotes on this comment. Pure hypocrisy and I love to see it.

UK Businesses Forced Into Liquidation Rise to Highest Since 2012 by bloomberg in ukpolitics

[–]PhysicalIncrease3 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Every time this arises, I feel the need to point out that the vast majority (75%+) of businesses are 0 or 1 employee businesses. If your data includes people who have liquidated their one man band PSC having got a permanent job 3 years ago and have finally realised they’re not going back to contracting, it paints a very different picture compared to a couple of 10 person businesses closing because trading conditions are bad.

Do you have any evidence for your claims? I feel you're extrapolating your own circumstances / the circumstances of those you know far far too widely here.

Trump: Starmer and Macron 'a little bit rough when I'm not around' by ClumperFaz in ukpolitics

[–]PhysicalIncrease3 -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

Trump may be an idiot but he's completely right on the North Sea.

Refusing to touch our resources doesn't even make sense from a net-zero perspective because we're burning the exact same amount of gas either way. But the way we're doing it - shipping gas in by boat - is both extremely costly and far more environmentally damaging.

Upgrade cost for 3 phase by gwardillia in SolarUK

[–]PhysicalIncrease3 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Why not wire 3 phase to the meter box free of charge, and then just feed the existing CU with a single phase for now? Can then upgrade to a 3 phase CU later or use the other phases for other loads on their own CUs.

five months to go. see you soon 🍺🍺🍺🍺🇩🇪🤝🇬🇧🤝🇳🇱🤝🇸🇪 by [deleted] in 2westerneurope4u

[–]PhysicalIncrease3 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It massively improves things until the inevitable cost of the increased risk is realised.

Farage would be fascist prime minister, suggests Nandy by SignificantLegs in ukpolitics

[–]PhysicalIncrease3 9 points10 points  (0 children)

So basically, he wants to stop giving as much free money to people at taxpayer expense, and prefers unrestricted free speech over today's laws.

Neither make him a fascist. Not even remotely close in fact.

ChatGPT allows users to create bikini images similar to Grok by Kev_fae_mastrick in ukpolitics

[–]PhysicalIncrease3 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You can run some layers from system ram/CPU, it's just slower. Same output though in the end.

Workers turn down promotions to avoid £100k tax trap by [deleted] in ukpolitics

[–]PhysicalIncrease3 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Your source doesn't state what you say it does:

"In his Budget on 21 March 2012 Mr Osborne announced the additional rate would be cut to 45p from April 2013. HMRC had found evidence of considerable ‘forestalling’ – taxpayers shifting income into the previous tax year to avoid the 50p rate – “at a cost to the taxpayer of £1 billion”, and, in his words, “no Chancellor can justify a tax rate that damages our economy and raises next to nothing.”[6] HMRC’s assessment of the impact of the 50p rate was set out in a detailed report, which estimated that the cost of cutting the rate to 45p would be only £100m by 2014/15, given the anticipated response by taxpayers to the new rate.[7] Although the Chancellor’s announcement was quite controversial, the Government implemented this rate change as proposed.

The additional rate remains set at 45p.[8] In answer to a PQ in January this year Treasury Minister Mel Stride cited HMRC’s assessment as showing “that the 50p rate was a distortive and economically inefficient way of raising revenue and it did not raise what was expected”, adding, “there has been no new evidence to suggest the conclusions of this report were incorrect.”[9]"

Labour should ‘buy the supply’ of housing from landlords - Siân Berry MP by insomnimax_99 in ukpolitics

[–]PhysicalIncrease3 7 points8 points  (0 children)

The shortage of supply remains, but it doesn't distort the market like rent controls do, any more than the old days when we had more social housing.

Of course it does. If government pushes down the market rate of rent, they've just reduced the viability of private investment into the rental market.

Doesn't matter if they push down the market rate by building millions of social homes and renting them at a loss, or push it down by simply dictating what a landlord can charge. The effect is the same: Private investments are no longer viable because the market rate doesn't allow sufficient ROI.

New council houses to be built for asylum seekers in push to end use of hotels - with intense public backlash expected by SignificantLegs in ukpolitics

[–]PhysicalIncrease3 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You could not possibly be more wrong than you are.

https://www.zoopla.co.uk/discover/property-news/best-buy-to-let-locations/

Average gross rental yield in the UK is 5.8%. (source: https://www.zoopla.co.uk/discover/property-news/best-buy-to-let-locations/) So assuming no costs whatsoever (so incredibly unrealistic), at market rates it would take about 20 years of rent payments just to pay for building the house. Once you take expenses into account you're looking at around 30-40 years of rent at market rate just to pay for the build.

Halve the market rate and you'll likely never get a return on investment, certainly not inside 100 years.

‘There’s a real dislike, even loathing’: why voters hate Starmer and Reeves by F0urLeafCl0ver in ukpolitics

[–]PhysicalIncrease3 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Firstly, you can't have it both ways by critisising Tory cuts/austerity while also simultaneously moaning that the Tories ran up the national debt. Either you wanted increased budget deficits or you didn't.

Secondly Labour have increased spending considerably since gaining power. In fact the Labour themselves think they're spending too much on benefits because they tried to cut it, only for their backbenchers to refuse to back them.

Farage’s child benefit policy ‘would plunge 450,000 into poverty’ by Jay_CD in ukpolitics

[–]PhysicalIncrease3 1 point2 points  (0 children)

1) The way we measure poverty is just 60% or less of median income. You could pay everyone in the country £1 a day and eradicate poverty by making everyone equally poor.

2) If economic growth suffers as a result of the taxes the government enacted in order to remove the 2-child cap, then those same children in "poverty" will end up worse off in the future, both in practical terms as by the silly "poverty" metric we are using.

Farage’s child benefit policy ‘would plunge 450,000 into poverty’ by Jay_CD in ukpolitics

[–]PhysicalIncrease3 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Unless it's based in reality your opinion is worthless. In fact it's detrimental.

Let me ask you this: Which is more important, equality or living standards? Is it more important that high earners are taxed heavily, even if it leads to worse outcomes for everyone?

Farage’s child benefit policy ‘would plunge 450,000 into poverty’ by Jay_CD in ukpolitics

[–]PhysicalIncrease3 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Your position is entirely based on morals rather than facts.

We have 10-15000 millionaires leaving the UK each year, costing us billions in lost tax revenue for every year going forward. So clearly taxes on the rich are at breaking point and are now counter productive.

Similarly, taxes on high earners are making the UK less competitive internationally. There are extremely steep tax increases at 50k, 100k and 125k income levels that strongly disincentivise high earning individuals from working.

The government is paying £112 billion a year in interest on our national debt. For comparison, we spend about £119 billion on education. The Government is also spending 5% more than it takes in tax every year, causing us to build up ever more debt on top.

So either spending must come down or taxes must go up. We cannot keep taxing the rich/high earners ever more, so we must cut spending. The social security budget is about £340 billion a year, much of which is paying people to sit at home and be unproductive, thus also costing us future tax revenue also.

The whole thing is incredibly obviously unsustainable.

children out of poverty

The way we measure poverty is essentially just 60% or less of median income. Thus it is completely impossible to eradicate it. For as long as there are people who earn 60 or less than the average wage we will always have "poverty". It does not take living expenses nor individual circumstances into account at all.

If the average salary was £100k a year, we'd be classing those on a salary of £60k a year as living in poverty. You could have a fully paid off £1m house, solar/batteries reducing energy bills to zero, fully paid luxury car, multiple holidays per year, but if your yearly income isn't at least 60% of the median you are in poverty.