"It is baffling (albeit a relief) to me that David Cameron and George Osborne have not even tried to identify themselves with the Lib Dem-sponsored Coalition policy of increasing the income tax threshold to benefit the low-paid"

Tories should go one better and link the tax threshold to the minimum wage.

What does the minimum wage pay on a typical working week over the course of a year?

Somewhere in the region of £11,000 I believe:

£6.08 x 37.5 hours x 48 weeks = £10,944.

The tax threshold should be linked to the minimum wage.

"Ensure that the UK asylum system takes full account of the persecution that minority groups face in countries where sharia is enforced so that victims of sharia receive a fair hearing of their case."

Very much agreed.

"Does it really matter what these affectionate people do — so long as they don’t do it in the streets and frighten the horses!"

Mrs Patrick Campbell - 1865 to 1940 - RIP

"why the iPad is becoming kind of a Trojan Horse for Apple."

Great article,

The point about it being a trojan for mac sales is particularly pertinent, because the first thing people do with an ipad is buy some media from itunes to 'consume'. At that point they have an investment in itunes, and by extension the Apple walled-garden, which lowers the percieved cost of entry for macbook purchases.

Apple have also used the Ipad/Air release to limit the percieved use of tablets, and thus protect their margins on macbooks.
http://jedibeeftrix.wordpress.com/2010/10/31/ipad...

According to my copy of the New Scientist there are now three different mechanisms by which the sun is now thought to impact earth's climate, via mechanisms surrounding cloud formation and influenced by cosmic rays.

Notably; mention of the fact that the GCM's used to create projections for the 5th IPCC report in 2014 will now include such mechanisms.

A lot of people have received a lot of abuse from the catastrophe activists over the last few years for suggesting exactly these things, now its mainstream accepted theory in the process of being tested for the level of impact it has on earths climate, will they now apologise?

I understand the new scientist taking a very pro IPCC line over the past decade, they are a scientific magazine and should be expected to defend the scientific method: create a theory, test it for validity, accept it until new testing disputes its validity, or new theories better explain the observed results. there is no other way to properly conduct science.

However, the IPCC isn't just laboratory science, it results in policy that has the potential to seriously impact the wellbeing and welfare of humanity for generations to come, so for this reason cost-benefit should be applied to policy that results from IPCC reports.

Trying to retrofit the precautionary principle into scientific method has been a disaster for public trust in science generally, not just the the creation of sensible climate policy.

"Warwick Lightfoot is publishing “Sorry we have no money: Britain’s economic problem” (Searching Finances 2010) to argue the case that any country which allows public spending to go above 35% of National Income will grow less quickly and will be less well off than one which keeps control of its public spending."

This is a message that needs to be absorbed, understood, and accepted much more widely. If we wish to reach the year 2050 with an GDP/capita of circa $80,000 (25%above France and Germany according to Cargegie) and do without the 'helping' hand of of rampant inflation then we will require a tax regime that collects somewhere between 35% and 40% of GDP, not 45% plus.

Regardless of the platform the lib-dem's will campaign upon I am yet to be convinced that Clegg has any expectation of winning, or whether this is merely a vehicle to enable proportional reform he can win; a reformed House of Lords elected by PR.
http://jedibeeftrix.wordpress.com/2010/09/02/the-...

"We are sceptics of the Brussels bureaucracy and legislative machine, not of our geographical or cultural position."

Does this mean that you believe Brussel's is capable of meeting the aims and expectations of the various different peoples in a manner that can be termed "representative", and to a degree that can be termed "effective"?

In short, were Brussel's a little more efficient; would you deem it to be "legitimate"?

Reply: No, it means what it says. I want less government not more efficient government from the EU

Hah, brilliant, thoroughly agreed!

Winning can be defined as preventing groups from directly exporting violence or incubating groups that export violence, this can be achieved by continuous cruise missile / uav / special forces strikes, or it can be achieved by creating a space for a representative government with a monopoly on violence.

The choice really lies with the Afghans, they are on the whole an electorate deemed to be adult and of sound mind, and they should be treated as such.

The alternative is a dire prescription for the future of governance..........