The students union exists to put pressure on the university, but at least in the UK it is essentially toothless, as the only thing universities care about is fees being paid, and if you don’t pay you are kicked out.
Anything they do at the request of the SU is essentially voluntary on the part of the university.
That’s why showing the expected outcome is also very important. It can feel very verbose, but the number of times I’ve been unclear as to if something worked because the documentation goes on immediately to the next step without demonstrating the success/failure states is extremely frustrating.
deleted by creator
It definitely can, but it won’t if you’re looking for it
So their tax is lower and their public services are better? Makes you wonder where all the US tax revenue is going…
Can you explain what this is, so that I don’t have to google it and end up on a list?
Good things have happened to Elon, therefore he must be a good person, otherwise my worldview is destroyed and there is no point being good.
Famous American spy James Bond…
Northern Ireland is a little different, but if any of the others want a hope in hell they’d need to join the EU, as they’d need to get grants to replace all the tax money generated by London.
This is where NI comes back in because you may have noticed having a land border with no infrastructure is a pretty massive issue for EU membership.
Scottish/Cornish independence is driven by the same blind nationalism and self-exceptionalism that created Brexit, as well as the same sentiments of ‘something has to change, might as well be that’. We need to stop this isolationism and embrace the union in a way that works for all the devolved nations, as well as push Westminster for a serious rejoin conversation for the whole UK before the next GE.
This 100%, too many musk fanboys don’t understand how much he is actually hindering innovation.
Even at SpaceX they make more progress when he isn’t involved.
Owning that much of a company that is valued that highly is still damaging to society, even if it isn’t liquid cash. Even putting aside their ability to take out loans with the shares as collateral, if the company is really worth that much it should be owned by a larger number of people with each taking a reasonably sized share to ensure that decisions are not made selfishly.
Taxing unrealised gains also hurt working class people dabbling in the stock market to try and improve their circumstance. IMO once you reach a net worth of $1B you get a pat on the back that you won captalism, and a 200% tax rate on anything beyond that to force you to give it up. No one person should own and control so much of a company if it truely has so much value, divide it among those that created the value i.e. the employees.
At least an expensive car is usually a better product though, so many of these t-shirts are simply cheap cotton but the price is $$$$ because the logo of a company that also makes actually expensive products is on it.
Makes sense, but to me going from 1.5% to 1.3% on a prediction for 3 years in the future seems like a pretty insignificant difference, especially since it will probably change between now and then.
£22B for the NHS is the best news I’ve heard in a while, and even then it is only barely keeping it in line with previous investment as a % of GDP. This investment is sorely needed so if taxes have to go up to pay for it they have to go up. If we want growth rejoin the EU and then our taxes can come down again, but none of the major parties are willing to have that conversation.
One of Harris and Trump is going to be the president. Sorry but that is the reality, the time for getting a better candidate has passed.
It is time to pick which one you want. If you don’t vote you don’t care so you accept either outcome.
Voting is not and should not be wholly endorsing the person, but securing the best outcome from the options. You want better options then go into politics yourself.
What’s the joke?
I agree with every point you made, and obviously this is better than having no cap at all, but this is exactly what makes the argument a false dichotomy, which the government is doing more than you were. Any positives are only relative to the single invented alternative, not any of the better solutions.
The simple fact is that public services like public transport, the NHS, postal service etc should not need to be profitable. They should never be expected to support themselves financially and should be funded by taxation on those who can most afford, not increasing the cost for use by those that most require its services.
Public services will continue to crack and fail until we have a government that understands this.
Thanks mate, edited
I get your frustration, but it is really important to keep spelling it out. I find it very frustrating to be on the receiving and of lines like I'm tired of explaining it to you people when I am earnestly engaging in a conversation for the first time, so I think it’s best to give people the benefit of the doubt that maybe they really don’t know, especially on forums where people other than those commenting will read it also.
Do you think the ruling class wants to see its own children fight in the coliseum for sport?