In theory that error should decrease as the parliament goes on, but I think it’s probably overstating the actual conservative position given disproportionately an amount of their current voters won’t be here to vote in 2029
Okay so I hope you know the words majority (50%+1) and minority (50%-1). A plurality occurs when there is a split such that no one group gets a majority of views but is the largest group. So for example you could say that Labour won a plurality of votes at the last election
Which is incredibly common amongst basically all of my friends, but that doesn’t mean it’s common across the population! Let me try and explain another way, I can count on one hand mates/acquaintances that didn’t go to university, but only half of my cohort actually goes!
I mean let me flip it around for you. Basically every younger person I know in their late 20s is at this point paying a mortgage, therefore there’s no problem with the housing market for younger people right?Or more likely the self-selecting group of younger people I know are highly unrepresentative
Keywords in your message “every older person I know” does not mean every older person. Older people you know aren’t representative of older people at large
It doesn’t change the reality of the geography of the seats they’re fighting. They’re basically pitted against each other while the liberals have like 90% of the seats they’re looking at either being currently or previously Tory held
It’s also doubly annoying because I feel there’s a genuine case to be made for getting rid of stamp duty as part of a revamping of council tax into a proper land/property value tax.But saying you’ll do it and make up the difference in benefits while omitting the majority of benefits recipients is BS
I mean I can just start my own party and announce the abolition of both income tax and VAT, which would be about as likely as her announced tax cut. They’ve learned literally nothing. I know their death is bad for politics as a whole, but they deserve it frankly.
It would be a sensible idea if you were bundling it with a revamping of council tax to make it one levied on the value of properties. But saying you’ll scrap stamp duty (which I think is a good thing to do) without explaining how else you’d raise the revenue it does is pure BS
That surprises me to be honest, but maybe because it’s just me overthinking! If you were so way minded it really isn’t a difficult rule to get around, especially if in a built up area.
It’s like getting rid of fuel duty, sure it’ll have to happen over time if we’re moving to electric cars, but you’ll have to actually replace the lost revenue with some likely pay per mile scheme!
When I say bad diet I’m purely talking in energy terms as a (reluctant) student of thermodynamics. Your hormonal imbalances are just the rate at which one can consume energy, the input energy into the system equally matters!
Oh people massively overestimate the ability to out-exercise a fundamentally bad diet! In pure energy terms it’s much easier to control your intake (which I’m fully aware isn’t the same level of easiness for everyone). Lots don’t realise how energy dense certain foods can be
I’m hoping that for those in the long term future generations of the drugs can use different delivery mechanisms (most obviously tablet-based). I’ve no doubt of that, fundamentally we’re hardwired to hoard calories and cave people didn’t have as such easy access to them!
The “only” thing I’d say is it needs to be made clearer to people that their amazing effects only last as long as you’ll take them, you do need to fundamentally change your lifestyle and keep it that way.But I don’t doubt it makes getting to that stage better if it means you can then exercise easier
