Josem

It is entirely run by volunteers, they don't handle much money. The Government directions on when to register as a charity are online here: https://www.gov.im/media/1371015/guidance-on-making-an-application-to-register-a-charity-261120.pdf - if you are an institution and want to say that you are a charity, then you are required to be registered. Given that there's a threat of jail time for failing to register, it is very likely that people will err on the side of over-registration, rather than under-registration. Further guidance is provided online here: https://www.gov.im/media/1371013/guidance-on-establishing-a-charity-v2-march-2021.pdf

The problem is not that the AG is overstaffed, the problem is that the regulations are overly cumbersome. The AML and KYC stuff might be reasonable for big and well-resourced charities, but they are excessive for trivially small charities. One charity I'm involved in has a turnover of something in the order of £50/year. There simply is no reasonable money laundering fear with such trivially small amounts of money. Similarly, the processes impose too much work on AG staff: charities should upload their relevant documentation publicly in some fashion, and then anyone wanting to review the documentation could just go to the relevant website and review the documents in a self-service style... rather than requiring an AG staff member to send the document to the person who wants to review and see. This is what happens with the Companies Registry, for example.

I'm not familiar with the authorisation process, but the road closure order is here: https://one.network/?tmi=GB22237579 and https://one.network/?tm=GB127774360

It isn't possible to get around it. After it was listed, there was a planning application submitted (and approved!) to redevelop the building, keeping the shell there. But the building is in such a state, that when they brought in the appropriate folks to implement that approved application, they realised that it wasn't safe to do so. Hence, the later application to demolish (which has been rejected by the Govt). The building can't be knocked down, because of the heritage protection. The building can't be used without knocking it down, because of the safety risks. If anyone thinks they have an idea on what they can do, the property is available through Cowley Groves.

Here's actual data on the issue as it relates to the Isle of Man: https://taxpayersalliance.im/isle-of-man-benefits-over-time/ In short, for the period from 2016 to 2021, there was a big increase in people receiving Disability Living Allowance, and a big reduction in number of pensioners receiving Income Support payment.

I think the thing that aggravates the various keyboard warriors is that while they wiffle waffle and talk, I take action. None of their abuse has any substance or meaning. Not long after I arrived on the island, I was the target of homophobic abuse. Then - as demonstrated in this thread and elsewhere - I was falsely accused in the reverse direction. It's just noise from angry little men. The worst lot are the preening politicians in Tynwald: They spout self-aggrandising crap in Tynwald and on social media about caring for refugees, but as far as I can tell, not a single member of Tynwald took a single refugee into their home (not even the members who own multiple properties!). Virtue signaling is when people talk about stuff but don't actually do anything about it - the clowns who talk about poverty, but have never created a business, never created a job, never even done relatively easy stuff like volunteering for the food bank. Others post on social media about how "we" should take in refugees, but don't actually provide a space for refugees to live when the opportunity arises. Others talk about how "we" should do more to care for the homeless but don't try to provide housing or even do simple things like volunteer for homeless charities. It is revealing that when they talk about "we" helping people in need, they never seem to include themselves in taking action.

I am not selling a bed; I am giving it away. Next time I share something on social media, I will give all due consideration to the stylistic preferences of ManxForums users.

I distributed the press release that sparked the latest round of reporting, I don't know what else you would expect to be done here.

No: the appeal was heard by Sarah Maltby MHK who made the final decision on behalf of the Minister for DEFA: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cpwgx1991ego

I was hosting a refugee in my apartment through 2022-2023. He has now moved to London. Thus, I no longer needed the bed frame and mattress he was sleeping on. Consequently, I wanted to give the bed frame and mattress away. To do that, I posted a picture of it on the various Facebook buy/sell pages. Depending on where you're from, the size of the bed frame and mattress is commonly described as either a "King-sized single" or "Euro single".

Writing an article about the GDP of the 2021/22 being "up" 10.3% compared to the previous year, without even mentioning that the "previous year" was the COVID year of multiple lockdowns, is absurd. 2020/21 is such a big outlier in modern economic history that it is absurd to make comparisons to it without highlighting the fact. A more reasonable benchmark would be the 2019/20 year, immediately prior to the major COVID impacts. Every time that people write about the 2020/21 financial year, it should come with a giant asterisk: "THERE WAS COVID LOCKDOWNS HERE."

Strongly concur. More frequent reminders that politicians are our representatives, not our rules, would be good.

That's obviously false - I'm glad to have contributed many positive proposals that would have been useful and offset many of the problems that the Government is now facing. I've published almost 800 articles on my own website with literally hundreds of positive proposals contained therein. For example, while the Government increases taxes on working families, for the last two years I advocated removing the 10% tax bracket in its entirety. See here (2022) and here (2023). You could do this by moving the 20% bracket to be marginally lower than it currently is, such that high earners continue paying the same tax rate, but low earners get a tax cut. The cost of this was under £3m in the 2018-19 tax year, which is roughly what the Government spends on heritage railways. The benefit of abolishing the 10% tax bracket would be the lowest-paid workers would essentially receive a 100% income tax cut, encouraging more people to get into the workforce, earn more money, get out of welfare, and reduce inflation by increasing labour supply by Manx workers. By encouraging people to get into work, we might also save some money on welfare spending (because they wouldn't need it! good!) and that would further reduce the cost of such an improvement to our tax system. Similarly, the people of Braddan sure would have benefited if the Government had introduced my proposal to "Cap all local government rates, charges and taxes at inflation, subject to a local vote". It is - of course - reasonable for people to disagree with my positive proposals to improve our community. But to say that I don't have such ideas? Absurd.

Especially since the minimum wage is £10.75.

The "higher" income tax rate takes effect from £21,000, which is almost exactly equal to the full-time minimum wage. Further, the minimum wage is likely to increase soon, pushing more of such people to paying more of the higher tax rate. Further, because the tax free and "standard rate" allowances remain stuck at the same low level for two years of very high inflation, workers on the minimum wage are suffering the most from this tax bracket creep.

It used to be normal - before 2013 - for many more than 250 homes a year to be built in the Isle of Man. From 2005 to 2012, there were more than 250 homes completed in the Isle of Man every calendar year except 2011. Since 2013*, there has never been 250 homes completed in the Isle of Man in a calendar year. The data with underlying sources is published here: https://taxpayersalliance.im/new-data-reveals-collapse-in-manx-housing-construction/ This is what makes me so angry about the false claims that there's a lot of house building on the Isle of Man. There isn't! It's even more extraordinary when the Government has agreed to try to slam in an extra 20% people into our island (equal to putting in two extra Ramseys) when there aren't even enough homes being built for current families and residents. *I don't yet have data for 2022 or 2023, but I'd be very confident that there hasn't been a return to the home building halcyon days of 2005 or 2009.

But the Government support for the establishment of the club was essentially zero?

I don't know if you've ever been to the Isle of Man, but this is obviously false as it relates to the Isle of Man: very little of the countryside is built on. Roughly 4% of the land of the Isle of Man is used for housing. Roughly 88% of the land of the Isle of Man is protected under biosphere care/core areas, and used for various "green" uses (farmland; forestry; parks; etc. etc.). The remaining 8% of the land of the Isle of Man is used for transport, commercial, government, recreational and industrial uses. It is, of course, important to have homes for cows and sheep on the Isle of Man. But it is also incredibly important to have homes for humans, and stopping the provision of homes for humans based on the false idea that so much of our land is built upon is immoral.

Of course not - as I detail very clearly online here: https://michaeljosem.com/product/isle-of-man-israel-flag-pins/ Rather, I'm a few hundred pounds in the hole here, because I've obviously had to pay for the production up-front. But friendship and peace is a good cause, and worth it!

Why would I object? There's a lot of terrible noises and dumb things said at various events held there, why should it be any different for this bunch of political freaks? I'm very consistent for many years in opposing discrimination on the basis of political belief in the provision of government services. Further, if people want to support a charity like "Medical Aid for Palestinians", which was founded in part by a lunatic woman who promoted Ku Klux Klan leaders, then that's up to them. Obviously, I don't support charities founded by deranged conspiracy theorists, but I guess, birds of a feather flock together. (I assume, of course, that the normal commercial arrangements apply, and they're not taking some extra or special taxpayer-funded subsidy.)

I, for one, am shocked to learn that a BBC Director formerly helped to produce a show with Andrew Neil. The horror! Further, I am shocked to learn that the same Andrew Neil supported the appointment of Shamir Shah as BBC Chair who - you will not believe - received a letter about the BBC Director! Terrible! Can you believe it? Samir Shah allegedly received a LETTER! RECEIVED A LETTER!

Yes: this is super important! Genuine expertise is achieved by doing two things: 1) Giving people skin in the game (rewards for doing a good job, and being held accountable for a bad job) 2) Repeated practice with good feedback. This is why carpenters, pilots, basketballers, and surgeons can become experts. A pilot will do a huge amount of practice (often in a simulator) before being allowed to fly an airliner, and will (often) die when they crash the plane. This downside threat of crashing the plane is (usually!) very effective at discouraging pilots from crashing planes. This is why politicians and bureaucrats cannot become experts: because they are not held accountable, and because they don't have repeated practice with good feedback. But in the civil service? Did anyone do any practice on Liverpool landing stage, or the Prom? Was anyone held accountable? No. So, we have poor outcomes delivered by fake experts.

Term limits for civil "servants" may help to improve much of this. Injecting people from high accountability cultures (eg, businesses) would be a breath of fresh air for the civil service and might help spark some more fundamental reforms.

I think this is exactly the problem. Healthy democracies have dispersed power through different parts/branches/arms of Government Here in the Isle of Man, despite the claims of a "tricameral" parliament, we have very concentrated political power: The Executive dominates the House of Keys, and the Legislative Council (and therefore Tynwald) is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the House of Keys. The judges are appointed by the same mob, with the CM and President of Tynwald occupying two of the three positions on the selection panel of the First Deemster. Given the relatively small size of the Isle of Man community, we do not have much in the way of other institutions to provide other ideas and other feedback into our democracy. Further, the House of Keys is currently proposing to abolish the one role in the Legislative Council who is appointed independently: the Bishop.

I think this is very true, and very underappreciated in our community.