Best Of

Evening all

I've just read Carney's speech which is intriguing in extremis. It is, as many speeches are, long on generalities and short on specifics. Long on platitudes and slogans, short on practical solutions but he's speaking at Davos where the platitude is king.

We aren't all Canada in terms of what we can bring to the table but every "middle" country (by which presumably he excludes the USA and China) has something to offer and it's a brave attempt to redefine bi-lateal and multi-lateral relationships. It's a damning indictment of how western (and other) countries have tried to appease both America and China in recent years.

It also redefines narrow notions of sovereignty which won't go down well with many here.

Whether it comes to be seen as the 2020s equivalent of Churchill's "Iron Curtain" speech from the winter of 1946 remains to be seen but it's a challenging series of ideas for many countries and a call perhaps to evolve from the post-1945 and even post-1989 mindsets to a more flexible inter-dependency and collaboration for the mid 21st century.

It's a useful prism to look at things, and make political choices. And challenges all our political parties in different ways. Essentially, he's saying we have to move at pace towards food and energy independence, and build up our militaries.

That has implications for the move away from North Sea oil and gas, our approach to agriculture, building up our infrastructure and indigenous industry, and being smart about how we strengthen our military and reduce dependence on the US. It must surely also have implications for our approach to welfare spending and business taxation.

A lot to ponder.

Evening all

I've just read Carney's speech which is intriguing in extremis. It is, as many speeches are, long on generalities and short on specifics. Long on platitudes and slogans, short on practical solutions but he's speaking at Davos where the platitude is king.

We aren't all Canada in terms of what we can bring to the table but every "middle" country (by which presumably he excludes the USA and China) has something to offer and it's a brave attempt to redefine bi-lateal and multi-lateral relationships. It's a damning indictment of how western (and other) countries have tried to appease both America and China in recent years.

It also redefines narrow notions of sovereignty which won't go down well with many here.

Whether it comes to be seen as the 2020s equivalent of Churchill's "Iron Curtain" speech from the winter of 1946 remains to be seen but it's a challenging series of ideas for many countries and a call perhaps to evolve from the post-1945 and even post-1989 mindsets to a more flexible inter-dependency and collaboration for the mid 21st century.

It's a useful prism to look at things, and make political choices. And challenges all our political parties in different ways. Essentially, he's saying we have to move at pace towards food and energy independence, and build up our militaries.

That has implications for the move away from North Sea oil and gas, our approach to agriculture, building up our infrastructure and indigenous industry, and being smart about how we strengthen our military and reduce dependence on the US. It must surely also have implications for our approach to welfare spending and business taxation.

A lot to ponder.

Yes, but I wonder to what extent it is a wake up call to those of us who have blithely assumed all our lives that the US was always there for us?

Evening all

I've just read Carney's speech which is intriguing in extremis. It is, as many speeches are, long on generalities and short on specifics. Long on platitudes and slogans, short on practical solutions but he's speaking at Davos where the platitude is king.

We aren't all Canada in terms of what we can bring to the table but every "middle" country (by which presumably he excludes the USA and China) has something to offer and it's a brave attempt to redefine bi-lateal and multi-lateral relationships. It's a damning indictment of how western (and other) countries have tried to appease both America and China in recent years.

It also redefines narrow notions of sovereignty which won't go down well with many here.

Whether it comes to be seen as the 2020s equivalent of Churchill's "Iron Curtain" speech from the winter of 1946 remains to be seen but it's a challenging series of ideas for many countries and a call perhaps to evolve from the post-1945 and even post-1989 mindsets to a more flexible inter-dependency and collaboration for the mid 21st century.

There was a paricularly striking line to the effect that those seeking greater sovereignity were likely to end up with greater subservience. That will certainly resonate with many here who have engaged so often and so passionately in sovereignity debates in a somewhat different context.

NEW: Westminster voting intention

🟣 RFM: 26% (-3)
🔴 LAB: 21% (+1)
🔵 CON: 20% (+2)
🟠 LDM: 14% (+1)
🟢 GRN: 10% (-2)

16-19 Jan, 1,585 respondents (GB)
Changes with 26-28 Nov

https://x.com/focaldatahq/status/2013974760833585283?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

So confirmed, no bounce for Reform from Jenrick's defection and that new Focaldata is even worse for Farage than YG and MiC were with Reform actually losing 3% of their voteshare since gaining Jenrick and Rosindell.

Also a far better poll for Kemi with the Tories the biggest gainers, up 2%. Good poll for Starmer as well with Labour up 1% and also just 5% behind Reform.

Good for Davey with the LDs up 1% as well and bad for Polanski with the Greens down 2%

Jenrick's flounce is starting to look seriously ill-timed.

Evening all

I've just read Carney's speech which is intriguing in extremis. It is, as many speeches are, long on generalities and short on specifics. Long on platitudes and slogans, short on practical solutions but he's speaking at Davos where the platitude is king.

We aren't all Canada in terms of what we can bring to the table but every "middle" country (by which presumably he excludes the USA and China) has something to offer and it's a brave attempt to redefine bi-lateal and multi-lateral relationships. It's a damning indictment of how western (and other) countries have tried to appease both America and China in recent years.

It also redefines narrow notions of sovereignty which won't go down well with many here.

Whether it comes to be seen as the 2020s equivalent of Churchill's "Iron Curtain" speech from the winter of 1946 remains to be seen but it's a challenging series of ideas for many countries and a call perhaps to evolve from the post-1945 and even post-1989 mindsets to a more flexible inter-dependency and collaboration for the mid 21st century.

BREAKING: Sweden’s pension fund Alecta has divested most of its U.S. Treasury holdings, citing increased risk and unpredictability in U.S. politics. The sell-off totaled roughly 70–80 billion SEK ($7.7–8.8B) - Reuters
https://x.com/FaytuksNetwork/status/2013954270010200224

There we go. It can be done. Dump the fuckers. Quick - before the price gets really low.

Its a valid question though. When there is a run on a collapsing company / country, who does buy their shit?

We hold way too many dollars to dump like that.

Not if you unwind. Trade oil in EUR/RMB. Start selling treasuries. Blanket policy not to buy any more treasuries. Start loading up on GBP/EUR etc

The UK is the second largest overseas holder of US treasuries after Japan, I think ?
@rcs1000 will know a great deal more than me about the implications of that.

we are their lapdog and will get fcuked over

I sincerely hope you're not a dog owner

No dogs for me

..

Looks painful