#lse

[bekahcathcart]

Should DCRs be legalised in Scotland?

Hi everyone, I am currently completing my master's in Public Policy and was hoping to ask anyone who is Scottish or a resident (lived here for 3+ years) to fill out my 3-question survey on the introduction of Drug Consumption Rooms in Scotland. Currently struggling for numbers so would so appreciate it! No prior knowledge is needed and shouldn't take more than 5 mins. Please feel free to share with friends/family, the more the merrier - Thank you so much!

[romanceclub-confessionss]

Confession:

"I'm genuinely happy to see more and more authors pay attention to female LIs. Arina (Theo, W: TC), Alexander (LfOS, LS&E), Langley (VfV), Dmitry (GC) and Vincy (Soulless, HoT). Even if fem LIs aren't too popular, it's still nice to see authors to care about them"

[kernel-emojis]

whew okay!! these took awhile to gain motivation for but >:)

Sign languages emojis! Please let me know if any of these are the incorrect acronyms/terms for the sign language, and feel free to request more from me!

We have: 1. American Sign Language (ASL) 2. British, Australian, and New Zealand Sign Language (BANZSL) 3. Chinese Sign Language (CSL) 4. French Sign Language (LSF) 5. Japanese Sign Language (JSL) 6. Levantine Arabic Sign Language (LASL) 7. Spanish Sign Language (LSE) 8. Mexican Sign Language (LSM) 9. Ukrainian Sign Language (USL) 10. Plains Sign Language/Hand Talk

[deafsnake]

Лейла

Первый арт к подборке: «Штирлицы, ч.1»

Этапы работы над артом:

[somin-yin]

I'm liking Johnny quite a lot, he makes me laugh and gives me Todd vibes because of his sense of humour ❤️ it was definitely a good decision to pursue him, and also he's a gentleman! what else can I ask for? ❤️

[hjohn3]

Why a Wealth Tax is Essential if Labour are to Deliver

‘Only the little people pay taxes’ - Leona Helmsley

Source: Bright Graeme Murray website

By Honest John

LABOUR ARE in a pickle. A pickle of their own making of course, but a pickle nonetheless . The huge majority that the party won last July, and now apparently under threat from a surging Reform U.K., was predicated on two explicit promises: to restore public services to at least functionality after 14 years of Tory assault, and to improve working class and lower middle class living standards after well over a decade of stagnation at best and retreat at worst. Much is made of Labour’s low share of the vote at the General Election to de-legitimise its actions, but the truth is, in our newish multi-party democracy, whether the public voted Labour, Liberal Democrat, Nationalist or Reform, they were united in a desire to get rid of the Conservatives, and they knew that the Tories would be replaced by Labour: getting on for 80% of those who voted therefore have a stake in a non-Tory future for the country, and that future is defined above all else by a restored public realm.

I believe Keir Starmer’s Labour is schizophrenic at heart, which explains much of its catastrophic messaging since it was elected and some of its more bizarre decisions, seemingly calculated to annoy as many voters as possible. The King’s Speech of July 2024, which receives far too little attention from political commentators and receives very little promotion by the government itself, reveals a social democratic impulse at heart of the Labour administration - whether it is a better funded elective NHS, improved workers’ and renters’ rights, a publicly owned railway and green energy provider, higher pay for public sector workers or a commitment to devolve political and fiscal power from Westminster to a local government defined by Mayoralties, the democratic socialist direction of travel is clear. Yet within the soul of Starmer himself, and a number of his ministers, most clearly represented by Chancellor Rachel Reeves, there is a neoliberal instinct. It is as though the new government can’t quite bring itself to believe that the old orthodoxy is dead, and that its job is to dust off Wilsonian and Keynesian social democracy and to upgrade it for the 2020s. It is this instinct that is behind the witless and repetitive messaging about the “£22bn black hole” in the public finances which Reeves claimed to have “discovered”; the politically suicidal retention of the cut to the Winter Fuel Allowance on the grounds of “affordability” and the head-scratching decision to support a third runway at Heathrow which, outside the Airport itself, no one seems to want. It also explains the constant parroting of the need for “growth”, like Liz Truss on steroids, without ever explaining how this growth will be generated, or even what it is for.

Crucially however, it is the neoliberal instinct of Starmer and Reeves that explains the allegedly “ironclad” fiscal rules the government has saddled itself with and the extraordinary commitments to raise neither income tax, National Insurance, VAT or even Corporation Tax in the run up to an election defined by the public’s wish to see more government spending on public services. Hence the pickle. I argued after October’s Budget that Reeves had produced an artful financial statement that maintains those fiscal promises, but still raised over £60bn through increased taxes on businesses and increased borrowing in an effort to meet those manifesto promises already legislated for. But how much easier would it have been if Reeves had not made commitments more suited to the austerity governments of David Cameron and Theresa May, than one whose stated purpose was to repair the damage inflicted on the country by the Tories and to “restore” Britain? In fact Reeves compounded her dilemma in the autumn by promptly taking to the airwaves to apologise for her Budget and promising never to do it again, which must be a first for a Chancellor and probably one of the most politically stupid promises to make when there were over four years of this Parliament to run.

The Budget, and for that matter, Labour’s legislative programme, only scratches the surface of the rebuilding of society required after probably the worst period of governance this country has seen since before the Second World War. Social care, criminal justice, the corporate con that is the British water industry, the green agenda, and now, of course, defence, are just some of the underfunded, neglected and yet crucial areas of public policy barely touched by the Budget. Therefore, of course a Labour Chancellor (probably not Reeves) will have to find a way to raise more revenue in order to deliver the change the public voted for. If reneging on the income tax, NI and VAT promises is out of the question, at least for now, then where does the government go? The answer, advocated for many years by left wing economists and, more recently by some not necessarily on the left, is for the U.K. to introduce a wealth tax.

The American businesswoman Leona Roberts Helmsley notoriously remarked, when being prosecuted by the US federal government for tax avoidance in 1989: “We don’t pay taxes; only the little people pay taxes,” and so summed up an entire social creed on the part of the wealthy. The long-deceased Helmsley was in fact ahead of her time: over the last 20 years, the net financial worth of the hyper wealthy either resident, or domiciled in, the U.K. has rocketed, particularly since the 2008 crash and the period of Tory rule since 2010. Aided by the side effects of the quantitative easing introduced by the Bank of England during the 2010s to keep inflation low, the rich shifted their wealth primarily from taxable cash, cash-realisable possessions, stock investments and shares dividends into assets - land, property and digital assets held in offshore accounts, most safely beyond the half-hearted reach of HMRC. Whereas tax on work (income tax) increased by nearly 3.5% between 2019 and 2024, the tax on business transactions, assets, land ownership and capital transfers remained static or, in the case of Corporation Tax, was actually reduced until May 2024 when Rishi Sunak belatedly increased the CT rate to 25% from its historically low rate of 19% which pertained for most of the Tory years. This flight of the hyper rich from income earned through salaries or dividends and into speculative assets has turbo charged wealth inequality in the U.K. in an almost unprecedented way: the wealthiest citizens are no longer millionaires but billionaires. According to the Equality Trust, the richest top fifth of the citizens and domiciles of the U.K. own 63% of the country’s wealth compared to 0.8% owned by the bottom fifth. The United Kingdom is believed to to be the most unequal country in Europe in terms of wealth distribution.

Social justice is an extremely good argument for the introduction of a wealth tax, but the urgent need for the taxation of wealth and assets is derives from the requirements for the government to increase its revenues in order to re-fund public services to the level it promised and to stimulate real growth and inward investment to improve the prospects of higher paid employment and improved living standards. Growth at the scale needed to refloat a British economy and its degraded public infrastructure outside the frictionless open markets of the EU, requires far more assertive and interventionist fiscal policy than anything thus far proposed by Reeves, with her increasingly desperate chatter about her growth mission which, it is now abundantly clear, is underwritten by precisely nothing.

The options for wealth taxes were set out most persuasively by the LSE report A Wealth Tax For The U.K. published in 2022. Put simply, the main different models of wealth tax which could be introduced in the U.K. according to the report’s authors include:-

a recurrent tax on personal wealth per individual;

a recurrent tax on assets (e.g. property, land, shareholding);

a one-off tax on the basis of wealth and asset value at a point in time (this would be to obviate tax avoidance behaviours).

The LSE report recommended a one-off tax on the grounds of acceptability to the public and because to the precedent of windfall taxes on the utilities which had attracted general public support. The authors estimate at a taxable rate of 1% on cash holdings and open market value of other assets, commencing at a wealth total of £500,000 per individual, up to £240bn could be raised as exchequer revenue. This figure would dwarf the sums raised by the Chancellor so far and provide major flexibility for the government to invest productively and end the tediously repeated assertion by commentators that “there is no money”. Personally, I would favour raising the wealth tax threshold to £2m worth of cash or assets, but levy the tax at 1% of calculated wealth over two years, raising close to £150bn each of the years concerned, which would affect less than 4m citizens out of a total U.K. population of 66m people. £300bn over two years would give the government a huge contribution to restoring in year budgets (including the notorious “black hole”). It could also provide the necessary stimulus to capital projects, businesses, the Green Prosperity Plan and inward investment that would boost the growth the country needs to make good the vandalism of the the Tory years.

Naturally there would be scepticism on the part of the public as to whether this additional government revenue would be spent wisely and on the priorities that the voters want. To mitigate this distrust I would hypothecate the wealth tax to be spent on social care, criminal justice, improving water industry standards leading to progressive nationalisation, and defence. The expenditure of the revenue raised through the wealth tax could be made publicly available to any citizen on request and would be subject to annual audits to ensure value for money. In time I would make a wealth tax on cash and assets over £2m an annual tax, but at a rate of 0.5% - reducing revenue to £75bn a year, but making the funds available to recurrent public sector budgets to help rebuild austerity-ravaged public services across the board.

The rich would find this mild intrusion on their fortunes intolerable and there would be ferocious attacks on the policy from the Right, claiming that a wealth tax would force “wealth creators” out of the country, destroy jobs and kill aspiration. All self-serving nonsense of course because the one thing the hyper wealthy are very good at is gaslighting their fellow-citizens as to their essential worth and value to the economy, when in fact private sector investment in the U.K. is the lowest in the G7 and has been for years. A Labour government who last summer proudly proclaimed that those with the widest shoulders should bear the greatest burden should have nothing to do with such “arguments” and dispense with the verities of neoliberalism once and for all.

In reality, Labour have little choice. Discernible improvement to living standards, pay and public services are essential if the government is to be re-elected four years’ time. I accept that significant increases to income tax are not politically possible; increases to NI contributions and VAT are also insufficiently progressive to be a long term solution. But, in conjunction with other recurrent revenue-raising measures such as increasing Corporation Tax to the same level as much of the EU and revaluation of Council Tax (which currently disproportionately favours the better off and has not been revalued since 1991), a one-off wealth tax over two years, followed by its annual continuance at a reduced rate could provide the billions needed to deliver the government’s King’s Speech and the raft of other measures needed to make the U.K. , once again, a more prosperous, fair and contented country with a public realm to be proud of.

A wealth tax could enable the real social transformation Labour says it wants and be emblematic of the end of a worldview, in the U.K. at least, so arrogantly articulated by Leona Helmsley all those years ago.

11th February 2025

Source: The LSE report A Wealth Tax For The U.K. by Arun Advani, Emma Chamberlain and Andy Summers.

[ryuzakienthusaist]

🕸🍢 # LAIN MB !!

[lilmeowmeowsagelesath]

idk if anyone has mentioned this yet but….

[subtitlesaddict]

As I'm swamped with exams, I don't have much time to practice/study languages at the moment BUT I FOUND A LOOPHOLE ☝️

I normally go with my brother to the library to study so I've started teaching him a bit of LSE (Spanish Sing Language) so we can communicate while in the library and don't disturb anyone ✨😌

It's easy stuff like "I'm going to the bathroom" or "I'm too tired" or stuff like that, but it's pretty fun and helps me remember my signs, I don't want to forget the little I know 🫠. My brother is enjoying it too, it's a bit of a break from studying so, we'll keep at it.

[omg-hellgirl]

While Keith merely seemed like “a Teddy Boy who'd spit in his beer to ensure nobody drank it” and had “no plans to work,” and Brian regarded music as an irreplaceable vocation, Mick talked often of becoming a lawyer or perhaps a journalist, as the LSE graduate Bernard Levin had done with spectacular success.

Philip Norman, Mick Jagger.

[romanceclub-confessionss]

Confession:

The way I closed the app so fast when in LSE we get caught by the manservant blood tentacles...I was at a family gathering. And now at 3 am. How did hr not understand that we could get horny from that ??? WE ARR NAKED-

[phvle]

Socionics Quadras — Delta

Delta, or the ‘fourth’ quadra, includes LSE, EII, IEE, and SLI.

Reinin caracterises this quadra as Judicious, Serious, and Aristocratic.

Dominant elements

The dominant IM elements of the Delta Quadra are Te, Fi, Ne, Si. Grouping together the elements of the Ego blocks of the Delta Quadra types, we get a picture of what aspects of life Delta Quadra types strive to bring to the forefront of life, as well as the kind of group atmosphere and lifestyle they pursue.

Te blocked with Si

Delta types make a point of talking about the rationale behind their actions and emphasizing the productiveness or unproductiveness of different ways of doing things - even in such emotional areas as personal relationships.

Delta types value peaceful, refreshing activities where they are doing something useful and balancing out their inner world at the same time.

Delta types have the philosophy that they will have to rely on their own industriousness to achieve their goals rather than on luck, speculation, group effort, or strong leadership.

Ne blocked with Fi

Delta types love to share personal experience mixed with their own sentiments regarding their experiences, but all in an insightful and non-dramatic manner.

Delta types like to talk about new beginnings, opportunities for personal growth, and their plans and prospects for the future.

Subdued elements

The subdued IM elements of the Delta Quadra are Fe, Ti, Se, Ni. Grouping together the elements of the Super-Ego blocks of the Delta Quadra types, we get a picture of what aspects of life Delta types strive to keep hidden, avoid, not focus attention on, and keep at the periphery of their lives.

Fe blocked with Ni

Delta types rarely display their deep passions and vision, preferring instead to talk in more neutral terms about what they want to do and why.

Delta types reject dramatism and emotional affect in favor of wry humor and understatement.

Delta types don’t tend to form or maintain groups based on fun, emotional interaction, but only take groups seriously that perform some common productive or restful activity.

Delta types generally dislike using poetic wording when describing their inner state, but talk simply about what they feel or their bodily sensations.

Se blocked with Ti

Delta types do not fare well in high-pressure situations where they are being forced to do things, are facing threatening opponents, or are submitted to rigorous discipline, but wear out quickly and look for a more peaceful and welcoming environment.

Group behavior

Groups made up of primarily Delta types tend to be focused on working on projects, enjoying physical recreation, or finding out interesting things about each other. Laughter is usually subdued and brief; instead, people smile a lot and try to be witty and welcoming. Groups need to be focused on some specific productive activity or topic of discussion, or else they fall apart. In Delta groups, there is a lot of splintering and decentralization. This allows for more focused and productive interaction with only those who share your particular interests or sentiments. People jump from small group to small group easily to keep up their interest level. No one demands that the entire group listen to one person or that everyone do the same thing. Delta Quadra types believe that if everyone just pursues their own interests and makes some accommodations for others, the group will be better off anyway. Delta Quadra types do not focusing on building group identity or unity of purpose, but prefer for the group to remain splintered and decentralized.

Romance styles

Delta romantic relationships usually begin simply as the encounter of two individuals interested in a relationship and each other in a particular moment, with very little in terms of outward demonstrations of “romance” in the “wooing” sense of the term or in strong external demonstrations of emotions. Deltas are more focused on the present moment than Gammas, and therefore even relationships of very strong attachment do not lead to constant concerns as to their longer-term practical feasibility. Deltas see as optimal romantic relationships those where partners spend time together on fun activities and sharing ideas of potential practical application. Romantic atmospheres are low-key, based on comfort but practicality.

Perception of other quadras

Alpha

Deltas tend to see Alpha types as fun company and interesting people to discuss ideas and prospects with, but naive and inconsistent in their personal and business relationships. Alpha types seem to lack the common sense to turn their fun and creative energy into something productive and often seem overly idealistic.

Beta

Deltas tend to see Beta types as people who “dream big” and always want to turn things into grandiose endeavors, yet can’t manage day-to-day affairs effectively. Also, Beta types seem unwilling to consider things from the point of view of others, which gives them a streak of meanness and cruelty.

Gamma

Deltas tend to see Gamma types as driven and reliable in personal and business relationships, but not sufficiently understanding of people who want to pursue their own individual path in life. Gamma types sometimes become too demanding and can have a streak of vindictiveness or spitefulness which prevents them from being accepting and forgiving.

Source: Wikisocion

[somin-yin]

I can't believe I want to romance a shadow!

And this song fits the scene pretty well:

I LOVED this scene hhhhh ❤️ I wonder what's the deal between them, perhaps MC is the reincarnation of the shadow's past lover or something? After all MC's original name is Mina like Bram Stoker Dracula's beloved, so that itself could be a hint :0 This story has suddenly become so interesting 😂 I'm also romancing Courtney, Sue and Chad but I'm eyeing Tony too (he knows something) so I'll see if I make a route for him too. I know many don't like the game dynamics because of the timed choices and everything but I'm really enjoying the little games/puzzles 🤷‍♀️❤️

I can already hear Chad saying this about me romancing the shadow 😂

Also this character is so handsome! (I hope the shadow's true form is similar) 😂

[arisveah]

having a panic attack on how i wouldnt be able to sign if my hands were tied behind my back, when clearly I'd have bigger problems if they were

[theuniversitychallengereview]

Box Office Quizzing

UCL vs LSE

Sometimes there are University Challenge matches that sound like football matches — for example, Leeds vs Liverpool, or Birmingham vs Cardiff.

Rarer than this are matches which sound like American Football matches, specifically collegiate games. There are no University Challenge teams who sound like teams in the NFL unless there is a college I’ve never heard of called something like the Oxford Otters, or the Manchester Bees.

But there are a few which sound like American colleges.

For example last week UCLA played USC.

This week’s University Challenge match is just about as close as you can get to something like that. UCL vs LSE.

I don’t know if there is any rivalry between these two universities, but for the purpose of this paragraph, I’m going to say it would be a grudge match of untold rage.

UCLA played USC at a stadium with a capacity of almost 90,000. This is the next step for University Challenge, I think. There is an audience in the studio for the live recordings, sure, but it’s not quite as large as that. Perhaps we need to start with slightly lower ambitions, but what would you say to this?

Have the semi-finals and final as a live broadcast in, say, a theatre. 5,000 capacity.

Or maybe just the final, but on the same day and at the same location as the Only Connect and Mastermind finals.

If that goes well we can up the capacity. I wouldn’t want a pay-per-view on something like Sky Sports, because that takes away from the purity of it. But the BBC would have to start bidding more for the rights, like they do for Wimbledon.

Think about it @BBC.

For now, the first of the second round matches, between UCL and LSE.

The University Challenge Review Subscribe for weekly reviews of University Challenge, an irreverant take on Britain's quirkiest quiz showwww.quizposting.com

Here’s your first starter for ten.

Nyang comes in early but his guess of Jane is wrong, and Holtermann Entwistle capitalises on the mistake. UCL take a hat-trick on composers and Jack continues their good start with My Neighbour Totoro. This good start continues a while longer, with two more starters from Jack and one from Prabhakar.

We had an incredible comeback last week, so could this be the beginning of one from LSE? No, it could not.

They took two bonuses to close the gap to 90, but Mandel stopped them in their tracks with 1314 on the next starter. 1314 being of course the year of the battle of Bannockburn, which is one of those facts I think I’ve known since I was about ten.

This wins them a bonus set on the song The Elements, which Daniel Radcliffe famously sung on the Graham Norton Show. The song was written in 1959, which astonished me because it feels like such a meme. Then again, they were really into goofy shit like this back in the day, weren’t they? The kind of thing that would pop up at Variety Shows.

/media/7342bfeeda8cf9ed86830d24f099c990

Perhaps I thought it was more recent because Radcliffe’s other party piece is Alphabet Aerobics by Blackalicious, which is a more recent song.

Nyang takes another starter for LSE, but they can’t maintain momentum into the music round.

Mandel takes his second of the night with magenta, and this opens the floodgates — the second half of the match belongs to him. It’s like he’d been hibernating and was awoken by the mention of Bannockburn because he took four more of the remaining starters. The rest of his team were similarly ruthless, allowing LSE only one more starter in what turned out to be a thrashing.

UCL 255–55 LSE

Tough on LSE there, who are a better team than the scoreline suggests, but UCL destroyed them on the buzzer and they couldn’t get a foothold in the match.

UCL look very strong going into the quarter-finals, though they may have to speed up their conferring if they are in closer matches. They took quite a while to come up with their answers on some of the bonuses, which won’t be tolerated in the later rounds.

Next week we have Durham vs Open (neither an American football nor a regular football match). The week after we have Exeter vs Bristol (which could just about be a game in League 1 or 2).

[lilmeowmeowsagelesath]

NICE 😈