Jump to content

Adamski

Gold Members
  • Posts

    1,160
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by Adamski

  1. Thanks for the replies, everyone! Very much appreciated.

    We have a financial advisor who we have a good relationship with, but for some reason getting this info has been a bit less forthcoming.

    There's commentary around how it varies: I get that people's circumstances are different, some people do X, some people do Y, etc. However in getting my head around things like this I like a good bell curve: of course some people lie at the extremities, but I'd like to know what constitutes the top of the bell - what sort of % income or % mortgage repayments constitute 'average', and take it from there.

  2. I couldn't find a thread on this sort of thing, so I thought I'd start a new one.

    My partner and I are in the process of buying a house. We're looking into things like life cover, income protection, etc.

    Any advice on income protection? I know that the standard advice is along the lines of 'pay what you can afford', but it's something I've never had much cause to think about before, so it would be useful to know what constitutes a 'normal' amount. Protection against your full income? Protection against a percentage of your income? Enough to cover the mortgage?

    Or would there be a better way to make sure that we're covered if one of us died or got ill? We're both early 40s, in decent health, non smokers.

  3. One for my fellow 11-pointers on here - sounds like there's a few. A bit of number crunching here this evening.

    By my reckoning we need 13% (397 of 3051) of those with 12 points or more to not buy a ticket for Wembley for any 11 pointers to get one.

    If 33% (1007 of 3051) of those on 12 points or above don't buy for Wembley there's enough tickets for all the 11 pointers.

    Not sure what to make of that: 13% seems possible I guess (under 18s and people who can't/won't go for whatever reason), 33% seems pretty unlikely.

  4. 48 minutes ago, Distant Doonhamer said:


    Yes got email yesterday. Might be worth logging into your account. There is a section about contact preferences. Possibly you’ve ticked that you don’t want email contacts???

    All my settings look in order, and it’s definitely not gone to my junk mail. I’ll call them on Monday.

  5. So did everyone in the SSC receive emails about the ticket allocations yesterday? I ask as I didn't get one, I'm on 11 points so hoping I might have some chance of a ticket for Wembley and don't want to lose out due to the admin getting messed up.

  6. Someone at Westminster clearly orchestrated this to cover at least some of: looking tough on immigration; showing Scotland who is in charge; doing it in Sturgeon’s constituency; doing it on Eid; doing it while new MSPs are being sworn in.
     

    And Pollokshields said no. As someone said earlier in the thread, that’s Patel and the Home Office’s authority gone here. A demonstration of what will happen if the immigration vans show up again.

  7. 4 minutes ago, DeeTillEhDeh said:
    6 minutes ago, Scary Bear said:
    It’s a concern. The number of people who do this election after election with the same results is a mild annoyance. It’s almost like a large section of the electorate are not particularly politically engaged and just do the same thing at every election.

    Even after 22 years it never ceases to amaze the number of people who don't understand the list vote.

    I think people have to be at least moderately engaged in Scottish politics to 'get' the list vote completely. I've tried explaining it to (otherwise clued up) people over the past few days, and the bit where you introduce the concept of dividing the SNP vote by 8 or whatever is when their eyes glaze over. I'm not surprised that lots of people end up voting SNP/SNP thinking it's the best way to bring about independence.

  8. 6 minutes ago, Scary Bear said:

    It’s a concern. The number of people who do this election after election with the same results is a mild annoyance. It’s almost like a large section of the electorate are not particularly politically engaged and just do the same thing at every election.

    'Both Votes SNP' was front and centre in their campaign. There was no need for that. Actively encouraging votes for other parties would of course have drawn accusations of gaming the system, but I do wonder if just keeping fairly quiet about the list might have resulted in more pro-indy MSPs.

  9. List votes for Maryhill and Springburn:

    SNP ~ 13158 (47.1%, -0.5) Lab ~ 6722 (24.1%, -1.4) Con ~ 2984 (10.7%, +1) Green ~ 2847 (10.2%, +2.2) Lib Dem ~ 503 (1.8%, nc) Alba ~ 529 (1.9%, +1.9) AFU ~ 229 (0.8%, +0.8) Others ~ 961 (3.4%, -3.9).

    And Pollok:

    SNP ~ 16600 (49.1%, -1.2) Labour ~ 8899 (26.3%, +0.1) Conservative ~ 3832 (11.3%, +2.1) Green ~ 1975 (5.8%, +0.9) Lib Dem ~ 455 (1.3%, nc) Alba ~ 659 (1.9%, +1.9) AFU ~ 318 (0.9%, +0.9) Others ~ 1090 (3.2%, -4.9)

  10. 4 minutes ago, Saltire said:

    If that is replicated across Glasgow, Labour and the Greens will each pick up 3 list MSPs and the Tories 1 .

                                       
                                     

    image.png.467e080031cb7525eb003c2da07fa0e2.png

    I'd certainly be happy with that, although I suspect that the constituency is a touch more Green-friendly than most in the city.

  11. 5 minutes ago, sparky88 said:

    But this is the same reason that explains why t SNP will win every Scottish election til independence - as vote concentrated in one party.

    Yes, but tactical vote for the Greens on the list increases the pro-independence majority. I'd be surprised if they don't gain a few seats tomorrow.

  12. 9 minutes ago, oneteaminglasgow said:

    Pretty clear tactical voting from the yoons here.

    I fucking despise my neighbours. Electing the biggest c**t in Scottish politics.

    Mentioned this earlier in the thread, but there's not much scope to vote tactically in constituencies if you support independence. The list is a different matter though - fingers crossed that when it is counted it'll show that it's not just unionists who can vote tactically.

  13. 1 hour ago, craigkillie said:

     

    For every single fixture played, players can only travel to the match if they have a negative test within 168 hours (ie 1 week) of kick-off. I think clubs are testing twice a week, so any test that the Clyde players did in the latter part of last week would have been sufficient for last night's match.

    What has happened here, however, is that the Clyde players have taken their next set of routine tests after the game on Saturday, and the results of these happen to have arrived just before last night's match kicked off.

    To me, this seems to be the central point.

    Both teams had initially ticked all the necessary boxes to play last night.

    But...

    The results of the test that determined Clyde players' fitness to play their Thursday night game became available just before kick off, and those results highlighted a positive test.

    In light of the new evidence, not playing seems absolutely the right thing to do regardless of the football-related impacts.

×
×
  • Create New...