UK Politics: who's in charge today?

[Werthead]

15 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Agreed, we can only guess. And fyi, depending on where they live a huge number of college grads are also living well below the line the articles you linked suggested. Things aren't exactly great here right now either. I must admit though I'm surprised at the pay rates you've cited for teachers and nurses. Those seem absurdly low, and I'm assuming that's pre-tax. 

TBF, when has offering less money attracted better candidates in any field? 

It's worth remembering that British people don't need to pay for private health insurance, and the pound is - traditionally - stronger than the dollar and goes somewhat further. However, yes, it is ridiculously low for high-stress positions. Both the NHS and the national teaching systems are hugely understaffed at present because so many people have left, partially because the pay is pitiful, their treatment by the government has been horrifying and they have been on the front lines for abuse and even violence from members of the public.

[williamjm]

The latest tally of (public) backers for the (potential) candidates is 123 for Sunak (easily over the 100 vote threshold), 54 for Boris and 24 for Mordaunt. That leaves about 160 left to declare. Some of Boris' backers have claimed he does have over 100 MPs supporting him but there seems to be some scepticism about that with Sunak's supporters wondering why half of them are apparently keeping their support a secret. It definitely looks like Sunak has the momentum currently but if Boris could get over the threshold he might think he is more popular with the members than with his fellow MPs.

[DMC]

21 minutes ago, Werthead said:

It's worth remembering that British people don't need to pay for private health insurance

While this is an important distinction, it should also be noted that members of Congress pay very little for their health insurance.  As far as I can tell, the only substantial perk MPs receive that MCs don't is the maintaining of a constituency residence or residence in London.

[Which Tyler]

2 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Is being an MP a part time or a full time position?  Can the average person afford unpaid time off of work to be an MP?

Is that a serious question?

Can the average person "afford" to take time off work in order to double or triple their salary (plus exceedingly generous expenses and pension provisions)?

 

Oh, and it's technically full time, but realistically part-time enough for backbenchers to keep up professional registrations etc, absolutely full time for front benchers (who earn double that)

58 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

iImust admit though I'm surprised at the pay rates you've cited for teachers and nurses. Those seem absurdly low, and I'm assuming that's pre-tax. 

That was my jumping in point - it felt like you were assuming cost of living as about the same in the UK as in the US, and that £84k would go about as far as $84k in the US (State dependant) - which it just isn't.

£84k pa is around the 95% percentile of earners in the UK (whilst, as discussed above, is about the 50% percentile in the US)

[Derfel Cadarn]

Dan Hodges of the Mail on Sundaynis claiming on Twotter that he’s hearinf that Sunak and Johnson met, and that Johnson isn’t running.

Possible he knows there’s no point with most of his MP’s hostile, and is trying to trade for something. House of Lords maybe? Knighthood? Dropping of the ethics committee investigation?

[Varysblackfyre321]

20 hours ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

Populism? How can the failure of an unelected leader (a PM who did not win a general election) be a consequence of populism? Again, I can't read the articles.

She didn’t even seem lean into culture war issues which right wing populists utilize.

Which only left her horrendous economic ideas that data shows makes most people’s lives worse and can’t be defended with anything but a principle disgust towards the majority of people.

populism is morally neutral though

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

1 hour ago, Which Tyler said:

That was my jumping in point - it felt like you were assuming cost of living as about the same in the UK as in the US, and that £84k would go about as far as $84k in the US (State dependant) - which it just isn't.

£84k pa is around the 95% percentile of earners in the UK (whilst, as discussed above, is about the 50% percentile in the US)

It's not the real 50% percentile though in the US. Those numbers are wildly distorted. 

[Maltaran]

1 hour ago, Derfel Cadarn said:

Dan Hodges of the Mail on Sundaynis claiming on Twotter that he’s hearinf that Sunak and Johnson met, and that Johnson isn’t running.

Possible he knows there’s no point with most of his MP’s hostile, and is trying to trade for something. House of Lords maybe? Knighthood? Dropping of the ethics committee investigation?

Foreign Secretary is what I’ve seen suggested on Twitter 

[DMC]

Individual median income in the US is about $54k.  $84k is at about the 77th percentile.  Median household income is about $71k, with $84k about at the 58th percentile.

[Which Tyler]

16 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

It's not the real 50% percentile though in the US. Those numbers are wildly distorted. 

Hence the word "about".

Out of interest though, what's the "real" 50th percentile? Preferably sourced, as all of mine have been.

 

What figures are wildly distorted, and how are they distorted?

1 minute ago, DMC said:

Individual median income in the US is about $54k.  $84k is at about the 77th percentile.  Median household income is about $71k, with $84k about at the 58th percentile.

Thank you - posted simultaneously.

[Pebble thats Stubby]

4 minutes ago, Maltaran said:

Foreign Secretary is what I’ve seen suggested on Twitter 

did not he have that job before?  and his crowning achievement was to Increase a bogus sentence of a foreign national and ditch his security detail so he could party with some Russians?

 

[dog-days]

18 minutes ago, Pebble thats Stubby said:

did not he have that job before?  and his crowning achievement was to Increase a bogus sentence of a foreign national and ditch his security detail so he could party with some Russians?

 

Yep. But appeal to Johnson would be the chance to play up to his Blighty-loving foreigner-bashing image. The Home Secretary gets the blame for everything, the Chancellor typically has a Treasury full of Civil Servants saying 'no, don't do that' plus will have a tricky and probably unpopular job given the current situation. Foreign Secretary lets Johnson be in government without all the unpleasantness of voters throwing cabbages at you because you slashed their income or told their dying sister that she'd have to go back to work. 

[Impmk2]

Realised the reason I had to double take at the pound/dollar conversion. It isn't right.

£84k is $95k. $10k probably doesn't change things too much but isn't completely insignificant. A year ago (in more normal economic times) it'd be closer to $120k, and as the US economy slows and dollar weakens you'd think it'll revert back closer to that.

[Deadlines? What Deadlines?]

6 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

She didn’t even seem lean into culture war issues which right wing populists utilize.

Which only left her horrendous economic ideas that data shows makes most people’s lives worse and can’t be defended with anything but a principle disgust towards the majority of people.

populism is morally neutral though

Let's face it, probably not even her ideas.

 

[polishgenius]

The principles on display here are breathtaking. 

[mormont]

Come on now, we all remember how gracefully Boris stepped down for the sake of unity. An example to us all.

[Heartofice]

On that note

 

[mormont]

Sunak has now officially declared, and will certainly make the threshold. So he's in.

Johnson hasn't declared and won't until he's sure he can make 100 nominations, which his camp insist he already has, but if so many of them aren't saying publicly, which means they're keeping their options open.

Mordaunt maybe hoped to be the compromise candidate but so far that idea has not taken off, to put it mildly.

Johnson's problem is finding 100 MPs willing to openly support him. Sunak's is stopping Johnson from finding those 100. His best chance is a coronation, Johnson's best chance is a membership vote. Sunak has 129 nominations but he can get 200 nominations, 250 even, without that mattering: if Johnson gets 100 it's down to the members and that will be close.

Johnson coming back will be eye-watering. The scratching around he'll have to do to find ministers, the number of rebellions he'll face, it'll be a wild ride. Sunak will be more able to actually run a government but will still find lots of dissent and will struggle.

What we sometimes forget, though, is that lots of voters mostly care about competence, not ideology. If Sunak can present himself as competent, he has a chance of winning the next election. Johnson has lost that battle with the public already. If he gets in, the Tories are done.

[DaveSumm]

1 hour ago, polishgenius said:

The principles on display here are breathtaking. 

Fuck me, listing his stepping down as an attribute and therefore, we need him back. 

Reminds me of the Simpsons episode where Sideshow Bob runs for mayor; “Mayor Quimby supports revolving door prisons. Mayor Quimby even released Sideshow Bob, a man twice convicted of attempted murder. 

Vote Sideshow Bob for Mayor.”

[Which Tyler]

28 minutes ago, mormont said:

If Johnson gets 100 it's down to the members and that will be close

I really can't see that.

If BJ is on the ticket for the members, it'll be a landslide.

 

 

I'm even starting to think that BJ winning might be what's best for the country. He'll be subject to a by-election within 6 weeks anyway, during which time he wouldn't be able to get anything done in parliament anyway, with all the rebels / abstentions.

It'd kill the Tory party for a generation.

 

Downside, of course, is that we actually need a government at the moment.