Grumble Thread

[Cockney Sparrow]

..........The Gift Aid add-on to entrance charges is another nudge scheme I dislike - fortunately I don't visit the kind of places that use it except once in a blue moon, because saying "No thank you I'll just pay the actual entrance fee" is not always accepted with good grace. I still don't see how that one works anyway as GiftAid is supposed to be linked to paying tax (children hardly ever pay tax but they are included in the arrangement - the view apparently is that the parents do)but the add-on arrangement, with no ID for tax status needed, seems to be just a way of getting a handout from public funds unrelated to tax actually paid by the individual. I have asked more than once for an explanation but not received an answer that makes sense to me - but perhaps that's my blind spot with matters numerical and financial.

I've been perplexed at entrances to galleries, museums, historic houses etc - why Gift Aiding my entrance fee ends up with a higher cost to me than declining. I came across a reference to an article with the explanation, in the Radio Times website of all places. Essentially, if I pay the standard £10 entrance charge, it cannot be a charitable donation. But if I pay an extra 10%, then HMRC accept that the whole £11 qualifies as a donation (and I can have the no charge entry if that is one of the terms of making the donation - which of course they would be sure to include).

https://www.radiotimesmoney.com/news/whats-the-difference-between-an-entrance-fee-and-a-donation/

I'm sure some legal minds thought long and hard over that before HMRC decided it was acceptable.........

I haven't yet agreed to pay the higher Gift aid charge - as often I'm a member - but I fully expect to give my details when I make the donation. When we visit country churches - some prosperous, many obviously struggling, I leave a cash donation in their Gift Aid envelopes - and I enter my name and address, which is required by HMRC;I expect a museum etc would need the same information to comply.

[kernelbogey]

. I don't wish to sound mean, but has anyone else noticed the ever-increasing number of TV ads devoted to charity work? ....

There is a huge slump in tv companies' revenue from advertising - partially as a result of the growth of online advertising (Google et al). I suspect, without any proof, that the tv companies offer charities bargain rates. I believe that they may be compelled by law and by their charters to broadcast a certain volume of advertising per hour.

[Dave2002]

There is a huge slump in tv companies' revenue from advertising - partially as a result of the growth of online advertising (Google et al). I suspect, without any proof, that the tv companies offer charities bargain rates. I believe that they may be compelled by law and by their charters to broadcast a certain volume of advertising per hour.

Why would there be charters requiring a volume of advertising per hour or any legal requirement?

Surely the adverts are just a consequence of the sad business model, which relies upon adverts - or at least people and companies paying to have adverts displayed. Pure capitalism - so companies that can't raise revenue this way have to find other models, or go bust.

[Serial_Apologist]

I was thinking of starting a thread called FLUFF...

....We've had a good innings - us the lucky generation....The next generation they say will be less well off and less upwardly mobile in general.....more likely to be employed by huge conglomerates - Big Pharma, Big Communications - Big Retail powered by interweb. China will be hugely involved in EV's , Semi Conductors, and Stuff. Employment and wages will be highly controlled.
If adverts really do reflect modern life,then folk will be dancing and parkouring everywhere; everyone will in general be mixed race. They will be very pleased that the cameras on their phones are able to make people and objects disappear, make everyone smile at the same time, make dogs not bark, babies speakwords - all will be fine. The Multi-nationals will sort it (sic) all out, and we'll all live in open plan houses with huge windows and our happy nuclear and extended families will visit for food and parlour games.
Where's the fluff....where's the fluff....my house is full of fluff....fluff from jumpers, socks, towels, blankets - skin/tissue/hair [long and short]....where is the fluff....I've got plenty , they've.... ....well they surely have fluff too at their actors houses....I'm not that house proud, but I am to a certain extent....but obviously not to the extent that keeps fluff at bay....if only we could commodify - add value....if everybody on the forum kept all their fluff and sent it to me, and after spinning it i was able to knit a jumper....hmmmmm, I've already got red fluff and torquiose fluff (grey and brown fluff goes without saying)....anybody got some interesting fluff....

I would like to suggest you set up a company then, and call it "Stuff the Fluff"

[french frank]

IWhere's the fluff...

In the phone charging port.

[Serial_Apologist]

Why would there be charters requiring a volume of advertising per hour or any legal requirement?

Surely the adverts are just a consequence of the sad business model, which relies upon adverts - or at least people and companies paying to have adverts displayed. Pure capitalism - so companies that can't raise revenue this way have to find other models, or go bust.

That might not of course apply to charities wishing to advertise. What should apply elsewhere is the number of TV commercials that do not change, sometimes for years, like the Flash mop one that really gets on my tits because of having to see that (in)famous tune by Queen, who presumably must have been paid enormous royalties for its repetitive use... or the company holding the rights on "Bohemian Rhapsody". In happier times a particular ad would be transmitted for maybe a couple of months before being replaced by a different one advertising the same product, it being realised that the same ad played over and over again obviously becomes boring, especially once any "joke" punch line in it has served its dreary purpose. Now they even bring them back after a period of public respite! The fact that adverts are not being changed casts a paradoxical light on Dave2002's observation above, and suggests there may not be as much money around for publication purposes in the company coffers these days.

[oddoneout]

I've been perplexed at entrances to galleries, museums, historic houses etc - why Gift Aiding my entrance fee ends up with a higher cost to me than declining. I came across a reference to an article with the explanation, in the Radio Times website of all places. Essentially, if I pay the standard £10 entrance charge, it cannot be a charitable donation. But if I pay an extra 10%, then HMRC accept that the whole £11 qualifies as a donation (and I can have the no charge entry if that is one of the terms of making the donation - which of course they would be sure to include).

https://www.radiotimesmoney.com/news/whats-the-difference-between-an-entrance-fee-and-a-donation/

I'm sure some legal minds thought long and hard over that before HMRC decided it was acceptable.........

I haven't yet agreed to pay the higher Gift aid charge - as often I'm a member - but I fully expect to give my details when I make the donation. When we visit country churches - some prosperous, many obviously struggling, I leave a cash donation in their Gift Aid envelopes - and I enter my name and address, which is required by HMRC;I expect a museum etc would need the same information to comply.

I've read that RT link and it still leaves unanswered the bit about ensuring those handing over the money are tax payers and therefore can Gift Aid.

But remember that if you don’t pay income tax, you cannot use gift aid for your donations.

On neither of the occasions I came across this was I asked about my tax paying status when I was directed towards the GA entry payment option, and I had no evidence that any form of proof/ID or whatever was taken to back up claims from others. When I said at one place that I wasn't a tax-payer and therefore it didn't apply I was given some irritable spiel about it not mattering if I was or not, and I was left in no doubt that by opting out I was depriving the organisation concerned of income. The other place just huffed when I requested the non GA charge and took my money without any further interaction - no smile or thank you or indication of where to go after passing through the pay point. Not good Visitor Service says I, having just retired after 15 years in such a job.
It just seems odd when the organisations I encounter that run GA schemes and ask me to consider doing so(I can't oblige as I'm not a tax payer) then would need various details before my money or donated items(to a charity shop) can be used in that way.

[Serial_Apologist]

I've read that RT link and it still leaves unanswered the bit about ensuring those handing over the money are tax payers and therefore can Gift Aid.

On neither of the occasions I came across this was I asked about my tax paying status when I was directed towards the GA entry payment option, and I had no evidence that any form of proof/ID or whatever was taken to back up claims from others. When I said at one place that I wasn't a tax-payer and therefore it didn't apply I was given some irritable spiel about it not mattering if I was or not, and I was left in no doubt that by opting out I was depriving the organisation concerned of income. The other place just huffed when I requested the non GA charge and took my money without any further interaction - no smile or thank you or indication of where to go after passing through the pay point. Not good Visitor Service says I, having just retired after 15 years in such a job.
It just seems odd when the organisations I encounter that run GA schemes and ask me to consider doing so(I can't oblige as I'm not a tax payer) then would need various details before my money or donated items(to a charity shop) can be used in that way.

I agree - incredibly bad PR.

[french frank]

If they're so clever, how come these developers just build new bugs into their bigger, better updates/upgrades?

[Old Grumpy]

Computer keypads:

Why, oh why -

• does the number pad have to be locked to numbers? - it should permanently be used for numbers - I am sick of filling in online forms and finding what should be numbers are an empty space with the cursor situated somewhere in the middle
• does the hash key have to be so big and situated right next to the enter(return) key so what I think will consist of consecutive lines of text constists of a string of expletives################?
• do the curved brackets (parentheses) have to be on the number line, rather than have their own keys like the square brackets (which I rarely use) so lines of text incorporate mysterious 9 and 0 characters where there should be brackets?

I could go on...

[eighthobstruction]

Computer keypads:

Why, oh why -

• does the number pad have to be locked to numbers? - it should permanently be used for numbers - I am sick of filling in online forms and finding what should be numbers are an empty space with the cursor situated somewhere in the middle
• does the hash key have to be so big and situated right next to the enter(return) key so what I think will consist of consecutive lines of text constists of a string of expletives################?
• do the curved brackets (parentheses) have to be on the number line, rather than have their own keys like the square brackets (which I rarely use) so lines of text incorporate mysterious 9 and 0 characters where there should be brackets?

I could go on...

So, you reckon these ############### are AI , taking over??.....I think they have very very small nanobots that can see the gaps....and report back. Once AI gets into your gut flora , things are really going pep up....

[Old Grumpy]

So, you reckon these ############### are AI , taking over??.....I think they have very very small nanobots that can see the gaps....and report back. Once AI gets into your gut flora , things are really going pep up....

I've already got them...


...I've had the Covid jab

[Sir Velo]

Perhaps a fellow forumite can remind me when the Highway code stopped advising that pedestrians walked on the side of the road facing oncoming traffic? This used to be Rule 2 in the Highway code. I can find no evidence of its withdrawal but it seems to be completely ignored by the vast majority of pedestrians, who seem blithely unaware that the rule exists to promote their safety.

Moreover, I hadn't appreciated that it was no longer a requirement to indicate left when leaving a roundabout or at a junction. Likewise, the number of users that join the carriageway without the courtesy of an indication. High time, methinks, for compulsory resits of the driving test theory every 10 years, and practical whenever totting up, say,6 points on the licence.

[vinteuil]

... but are the signals for the whip when driving horse-drawn vehicles still in place?

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Page:The_Highway_Code_1931.djvu/21

.

[Serial_Apologist]

... but are the signals for the whip when driving horse-drawn vehicles still in place?

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Page:The_Highway_Code_1931.djvu/21

.

Whips are only permitted in the Commons nowadays!