Best Of

On topic, why would Farage want to lead the Tories? It is already a 50/50 toss up who will lead the forthcoming Tory-Reform administration. Reform could be running Wales soon. Kemi is going to have to be brilliant and make the most of all her opportunities not to see the Tories go the way of the Liberals.

I agree, I'd say there's a real risk the Tories become the UUP to Reform's DUP.

However, and it's a big however, the Tories can also fish for LD (home counties) and Labour (switchers and floating voters as well) so they can face and pull in multiple directions, if they get the mix and tone right.

Not sure Badenoch is quite the right candidate to go fishing for LD and centrist Labour votes. Davey is a more conservative leader and overall safer bet.

Davey is anything but conservative. He's a socialist in a yellow suit with a flying bird on it.

Not at all.

For example the LDs oppose the abolition of AR on farms and imposition of VAT on private schools.

Davey certainly wasn't a Socialist when in government either.

It will be tough to expand the number of LD seats at the next GE, as there will surely be some dead cat bounce for the Tories, but it isn't impossible. There is not a lot of love out there for either of the big two parties. We may well be in one of those decades where the tectonic plates of party politics shift.

I suggest you read the interviews with him on his background and political philosophy, which was so left-wing the interviewer even asked him why he didn't join the Labour Party then - to which he gave some weakish answer about how he didn't like its tradition.

He's a Lefty through and through.

Don't confuse political opportunism for where his real sympathies lie, and he'd be delighted to prop up a Labour administration that fell short next time.

One of the interesting curiosities of modern politics is that Conservatives don’t look or act conservative. It’s all topsy turvey

On the contrary they seem determined to trash the country rather than conserve it.

It's to do now, with party loyalty running vertically through classes, rather than horizontally, across them.

People are still used to the idea of upper middle class people being overwhelmingly Conservative, and working class people being mainly Labour (with a substantial Conservative minority).

When in reality, the Conservatives have very little in common now, with much of the Establishment, and Labour have very little in common now, with broad swathes of working class Britain.

And, the same is true of the US, France, and other rich world democracies. Quite often now, the most solidly left-leaning constituencies are the most well-heeled.

It's fascinating to consider why that's the case.

Luxury beliefs of the university educated, especially women. They have to distinguish themselves from the hoi poloi who have always had small-c conservative views. Used to be done by owning a Jaguar, etc.

Luxury beliefs come a lot cheaper than luxury living or even traditional middle class living in southern England.

I wonder how much resentment there is among many recent graduates that they're not going to get the lifestyle they expected, that their parents had or what many of their age group who didn't go to university now has.

There's a lot of resentment around. Saw a Mumsnet post from a 40-something who had worked their way up to an income of £75k, and feels their standard of living doesn't match up to their parents who had a similar inflation-adjusted salary.

We could argue about why that is (housing?) and what to do about it, but people aren't happy and the spectacular Tory defeat was not the cathartic experience the country was looking for.

As I've said in the past, we have so much more to spend money on. In the mid-1980s, when I was growing up, we did not need mobile phones or contracts. All we needed to watch TV was a TV licence; not expensive contracts to Sky/Netflix/Prime etc. You were very lucky if you had a computer in the home; now everyone needs at least a tablet. Wristwatches have got more complex and expensive. People eat out much more AFACIT, and coffee-shop visits are often obligatory. You do not need many subscriptions to services to start spending £50a month, or more, on them.

Yes, housing and other similar costs to back then may have got more expensive, but I cannot help but think that we simply have too many costs our parents never had, and we may not always need.

Modern life is very expensive - and more so if you let it.

Yes. I was trying to think of a single word to sum up something like that. Companies have had a few more decades experience in learning how to sell to us, and they seem quite adept at making sure everyone spends all their money, regardless of how much of it they have.

Edit: though, to pick up on one point, coffee shop visits have replaced pub visits for a lot of people. Similarly Netflix stands in for visiting the cinema. It's not like people in the 80s lived like frugal monks.

Not one word, but "Desire inflation"? We have so much more stuff we can buy, and is desirable but not necessary, than was the case.

Good point about pubs and coffee shops; except I guess people also drink alcohol at home instead of the pub. Have drinking levels gone down over the decades?

And I'd say comparatively, people in the 1980s were living like frugal monks. My son (10 yo) cannot imagine how I coped not having a computer before I was 12. And I didn't get on the Internet until I was 16!

I guess that these days I would be classed as a member of the 'FIRE' community.

Previously this would have been just 'Yorkshire'.

Mrs Flatlander and I don't really like spending money on stuff. The right thing, with a purpose, yes, not a problem. If things need doing on the house we will do them ourselves (except gas, obvs).

Although we are tied down due to supporting old people, which does restrict our outgoings, I think last year between us we spent less than 15k total, including all bills.

It always amazes us how much people manage to spend on things that don't really make them happier.

We do have some friends who are similar, despite being in the 100k bracket (we are not, but aren't in poverty).

I went for a long walk yesterday in the sun. It must have cost about 3 quid in fuel. Certainly didn't want for any entertainment.

Admittedly housing costs are the one thing that can't be ignored. Here they aren't insane. Perhaps when you are spending stupid amounts just for a roof over your head the relative cost of other things seems much lower?

The last bit likely has a feedback loop.

When you have a nice house and garden then a drink or meal at home is pleasant and cheap.

When you're renting a room in Walthamstow there must be a greater desire to drink/eat out with the resulting higher cost.

Am I the only one thinking the Jaguar ad - sorry JaGUar (or some ther wanky mix of capital and lower case) is emblematic of Starmer's Britain - wanting to be different but having no idea of how to deliver? Whilst having no product to actually sell...

I haven't seen the controversial new ad but one branding problem it won't solve is the fact that it's pronounced jag-you-are over here and jag-wah across the pond, and heaven knows how it would be pronounced by a Spanish speaker.

Maybe they should rebrand themselves as just "jag" ? Lowercase seems trendy these days...

Someone has improved the Jaguar ad with AI:

https://x.com/marcus_byrne/status/1859931383831081188

On topic, why would Farage want to lead the Tories? It is already a 50/50 toss up who will lead the forthcoming Tory-Reform administration. Reform could be running Wales soon. Kemi is going to have to be brilliant and make the most of all her opportunities not to see the Tories go the way of the Liberals.

I agree, I'd say there's a real risk the Tories become the UUP to Reform's DUP.

However, and it's a big however, the Tories can also fish for LD (home counties) and Labour (switchers and floating voters as well) so they can face and pull in multiple directions, if they get the mix and tone right.

Not sure Badenoch is quite the right candidate to go fishing for LD and centrist Labour votes. Davey is a more conservative leader and overall safer bet.

Davey is anything but conservative. He's a socialist in a yellow suit with a flying bird on it.

Not at all.

For example the LDs oppose the abolition of AR on farms and imposition of VAT on private schools.

Davey certainly wasn't a Socialist when in government either.

It will be tough to expand the number of LD seats at the next GE, as there will surely be some dead cat bounce for the Tories, but it isn't impossible. There is not a lot of love out there for either of the big two parties. We may well be in one of those decades where the tectonic plates of party politics shift.

I suggest you read the interviews with him on his background and political philosophy, which was so left-wing the interviewer even asked him why he didn't join the Labour Party then - to which he gave some weakish answer about how he didn't like its tradition.

He's a Lefty through and through.

Don't confuse political opportunism for where his real sympathies lie, and he'd be delighted to prop up a Labour administration that fell short next time.

One of the interesting curiosities of modern politics is that Conservatives don’t look or act conservative. It’s all topsy turvey

On the contrary they seem determined to trash the country rather than conserve it.

It's to do now, with party loyalty running vertically through classes, rather than horizontally, across them.

People are still used to the idea of upper middle class people being overwhelmingly Conservative, and working class people being mainly Labour (with a substantial Conservative minority).

When in reality, the Conservatives have very little in common now, with much of the Establishment, and Labour have very little in common now, with broad swathes of working class Britain.

And, the same is true of the US, France, and other rich world democracies. Quite often now, the most solidly left-leaning constituencies are the most well-heeled.

It's fascinating to consider why that's the case.

Luxury beliefs of the university educated, especially women. They have to distinguish themselves from the hoi poloi who have always had small-c conservative views. Used to be done by owning a Jaguar, etc.

Luxury beliefs come a lot cheaper than luxury living or even traditional middle class living in southern England.

I wonder how much resentment there is among many recent graduates that they're not going to get the lifestyle they expected, that their parents had or what many of their age group who didn't go to university now has.

There's a lot of resentment around. Saw a Mumsnet post from a 40-something who had worked their way up to an income of £75k, and feels their standard of living doesn't match up to their parents who had a similar inflation-adjusted salary.

We could argue about why that is (housing?) and what to do about it, but people aren't happy and the spectacular Tory defeat was not the cathartic experience the country was looking for.

As I've said in the past, we have so much more to spend money on. In the mid-1980s, when I was growing up, we did not need mobile phones or contracts. All we needed to watch TV was a TV licence; not expensive contracts to Sky/Netflix/Prime etc. You were very lucky if you had a computer in the home; now everyone needs at least a tablet. Wristwatches have got more complex and expensive. People eat out much more AFACIT, and coffee-shop visits are often obligatory. You do not need many subscriptions to services to start spending £50a month, or more, on them.

Yes, housing and other similar costs to back then may have got more expensive, but I cannot help but think that we simply have too many costs our parents never had, and we may not always need.

Modern life is very expensive - and more so if you let it.

Yes. I was trying to think of a single word to sum up something like that. Companies have had a few more decades experience in learning how to sell to us, and they seem quite adept at making sure everyone spends all their money, regardless of how much of it they have.

Edit: though, to pick up on one point, coffee shop visits have replaced pub visits for a lot of people. Similarly Netflix stands in for visiting the cinema. It's not like people in the 80s lived like frugal monks.

Not one word, but "Desire inflation"? We have so much more stuff we can buy, and is desirable but not necessary, than was the case.

Good point about pubs and coffee shops; except I guess people also drink alcohol at home instead of the pub. Have drinking levels gone down over the decades?

And I'd say comparatively, people in the 1980s were living like frugal monks. My son (10 yo) cannot imagine how I coped not having a computer before I was 12. And I didn't get on the Internet until I was 16!

I guess that these days I would be classed as a member of the 'FIRE' community.

Previously this would have been just 'Yorkshire'.

Mrs Flatlander and I don't really like spending money on stuff. The right thing, with a purpose, yes, not a problem. If things need doing on the house we will do them ourselves (except gas, obvs).

Although we are tied down due to supporting old people, which does restrict our outgoings, I think last year between us we spent less than 15k total, including all bills.

It always amazes us how much people manage to spend on things that don't really make them happier.

We do have some friends who are similar, despite being in the 100k bracket (we are not, but aren't in poverty).

I went for a long walk yesterday in the sun. It must have cost about 3 quid in fuel. Certainly didn't want for any entertainment.

Admittedly housing costs are the one thing that can't be ignored. Here they aren't insane. Perhaps when you are spending stupid amounts just for a roof over your head the relative cost of other things seems much lower?

Am I the only one thinking the Jaguar ad - sorry JaGUar (or some ther wanky mix of capital and lower case) is emblematic of Starmer's Britain - wanting to be different but having no idea of how to deliver? Whilst having no product to actually sell...

I haven't seen the controversial new ad but one branding problem it won't solve is the fact that it's pronounced jag-you-are over here and jag-wah across the pond, and heaven knows how it would be pronounced by a Spanish speaker.

They could do what Jif did with their ad campaign showing bemused Europeans going "Heef?" as an explanation as to why they changed their name to Cif.

On the new ad, or at least the first one, it got people talking but for all the 'copy nothing' stuff it looked like a completely stale set of stock 'edgy' costuming and the like, probably sat on the ad company's plans for years until someone finally said yes to it.

On topic, why would Farage want to lead the Tories? It is already a 50/50 toss up who will lead the forthcoming Tory-Reform administration. Reform could be running Wales soon. Kemi is going to have to be brilliant and make the most of all her opportunities not to see the Tories go the way of the Liberals.

I agree, I'd say there's a real risk the Tories become the UUP to Reform's DUP.

However, and it's a big however, the Tories can also fish for LD (home counties) and Labour (switchers and floating voters as well) so they can face and pull in multiple directions, if they get the mix and tone right.

Not sure Badenoch is quite the right candidate to go fishing for LD and centrist Labour votes. Davey is a more conservative leader and overall safer bet.

Davey is anything but conservative. He's a socialist in a yellow suit with a flying bird on it.

Not at all.

For example the LDs oppose the abolition of AR on farms and imposition of VAT on private schools.

Davey certainly wasn't a Socialist when in government either.

It will be tough to expand the number of LD seats at the next GE, as there will surely be some dead cat bounce for the Tories, but it isn't impossible. There is not a lot of love out there for either of the big two parties. We may well be in one of those decades where the tectonic plates of party politics shift.

I suggest you read the interviews with him on his background and political philosophy, which was so left-wing the interviewer even asked him why he didn't join the Labour Party then - to which he gave some weakish answer about how he didn't like its tradition.

He's a Lefty through and through.

Don't confuse political opportunism for where his real sympathies lie, and he'd be delighted to prop up a Labour administration that fell short next time.

One of the interesting curiosities of modern politics is that Conservatives don’t look or act conservative. It’s all topsy turvey

On the contrary they seem determined to trash the country rather than conserve it.

It's to do now, with party loyalty running vertically through classes, rather than horizontally, across them.

People are still used to the idea of upper middle class people being overwhelmingly Conservative, and working class people being mainly Labour (with a substantial Conservative minority).

When in reality, the Conservatives have very little in common now, with much of the Establishment, and Labour have very little in common now, with broad swathes of working class Britain.

And, the same is true of the US, France, and other rich world democracies. Quite often now, the most solidly left-leaning constituencies are the most well-heeled.

It's fascinating to consider why that's the case.

On topic, why would Farage want to lead the Tories? It is already a 50/50 toss up who will lead the forthcoming Tory-Reform administration. Reform could be running Wales soon. Kemi is going to have to be brilliant and make the most of all her opportunities not to see the Tories go the way of the Liberals.

I agree, I'd say there's a real risk the Tories become the UUP to Reform's DUP.

However, and it's a big however, the Tories can also fish for LD (home counties) and Labour (switchers and floating voters as well) so they can face and pull in multiple directions, if they get the mix and tone right.

Not sure Badenoch is quite the right candidate to go fishing for LD and centrist Labour votes. Davey is a more conservative leader and overall safer bet.

Davey is anything but conservative. He's a socialist in a yellow suit with a flying bird on it.

Not at all.

For example the LDs oppose the abolition of AR on farms and imposition of VAT on private schools.

Davey certainly wasn't a Socialist when in government either.

It will be tough to expand the number of LD seats at the next GE, as there will surely be some dead cat bounce for the Tories, but it isn't impossible. There is not a lot of love out there for either of the big two parties. We may well be in one of those decades where the tectonic plates of party politics shift.

I suggest you read the interviews with him on his background and political philosophy, which was so left-wing the interviewer even asked him why he didn't join the Labour Party then - to which he gave some weakish answer about how he didn't like its tradition.

He's a Lefty through and through.

Don't confuse political opportunism for where his real sympathies lie, and he'd be delighted to prop up a Labour administration that fell short next time.

One of the interesting curiosities of modern politics is that Conservatives don’t look or act conservative. It’s all topsy turvey

On the contrary they seem determined to trash the country rather than conserve it.

It's to do now, with party loyalty running vertically through classes, rather than horizontally, across them.

People are still used to the idea of upper middle class people being overwhelmingly Conservative, and working class people being mainly Labour (with a substantial Conservative minority).

When in reality, the Conservatives have very little in common now, with much of the Establishment, and Labour have very little in common now, with broad swathes of working class Britain.

And, the same is true of the US, France, and other rich world democracies. Quite often now, the most solidly left-leaning constituencies are the most well-heeled.

It's fascinating to consider why that's the case.

Luxury beliefs of the university educated, especially women. They have to distinguish themselves from the hoi poloi who have always had small-c conservative views. Used to be done by owning a Jaguar, etc.

I think that's what a lot of Jaguar fans have picked up on: the company is dominated by such types who deliberately want to triangulate against them for those reasons.

I think that "elite overproduction" is one reason. The Greens in particular, pick up support from people who are very well-educated, but in relatively poorly-paying occupations. Revolutions are almost always driven by people who are just outside the magic circle of power and wealth, rather than the genuinely poor.

So, you have a lot of elite-adjacent people who really detest their own society, along with its history and culture.

Also economics isn't really the dividing line it once was. No genuintely socialist party can expect to come to power now, and nor can any party that believes in radically cutting back the public sector. A form of social democracy prevails in most rich world democracies. So, people seek other dividing lines.

My parents and I were close friends with a Russian WHO translator in Denmark who was later alleged by a defector to be a KGB agent (WHO didn't take any action, and we shrugged it off) - he said wryly that his own experience was that he'd come to feel that Scandinavian social democracy was the best balance that could be achieved - generally private ownership but high taxation and strong social support.

Progress, of sorts.

I think 4-5 years ago Warner Bros would have absolutely distanced themselves from her views:

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/society/article/warner-bros-defends-jk-rowling-trans-views-l9dg0hn60

If they were anti-gay views, would you say the same?

If someone didn't agree with homosexuality because of religious views and they were a talented and gifted writer, then yes. If they were arguing for a pogrom against gay people, or violence, then no.

We've got to get away from this idea that if you don't have the right views you are to be denied employment or income.

I hate that form of coercion, which is what it is.

Thanks for the answer, but I fundamentally disagree with this. For one thing, being a 'talented and gifted writer' seems to be a bit of an odd clause to include. Views do not become 'good' just because someone can write or speak well; likewise, someone's views do not become 'bad' because they are dyslexic or a poor orator. All those skills do is potentially make the views more compelling to the audience: it does not make the views themselves good or bad.

I agree we need to be careful about people who do not have the 'right' views being denied employment. But we also need an environment in workplaces where people are not routinely abused for being different, whether that is because they are disabled, or female, or non-white, or gay. Or even male and white.

So where does the balance lie?

True. Social pressure not to speak out against the social norm has always been there, including in the 70s and 80s when most workplaces were dominated by white men smoking all day, lunchtime in the pub, spending their day ogling the girlie calendars on the wall and discussing the weekend's Benny Hill. Back then it was the women and minorities who didn't risk speaking out.

Is Badenoch better suited to be Reform leader? Perhaps they could swap.

If you have to ask that question, then you don't get Kemi Badenoch or chances her chances of staying the course as Conservative leader until the next GE. She gave a very good speech at the Farmers protest in London, she was totally on top her brief when it came to understanding and articulating the wider long term issues surrounding this terrible Labour tax policy for the farming community, far more so than Nigel Farage or even Jeremy Clarkson on the day.

Yes, she did a good job in the farmers' protest - to be fair it was the Tories' comfort zone, but Kemi made the most of it, and as you say, seemed the main political spokesperson on the day. I would like some follow up with a mini farming and food manifesto with some solid measures aimed at supporting farmers to deliver more good quality British food (about the only thing we still make here).

On topic, why would Farage want to lead the Tories? It is already a 50/50 toss up who will lead the forthcoming Tory-Reform administration. Reform could be running Wales soon. Kemi is going to have to be brilliant and make the most of all her opportunities not to see the Tories go the way of the Liberals.

I agree, I'd say there's a real risk the Tories become the UUP to Reform's DUP.

However, and it's a big however, the Tories can also fish for LD (home counties) and Labour (switchers and floating voters as well) so they can face and pull in multiple directions, if they get the mix and tone right.

Not sure Badenoch is quite the right candidate to go fishing for LD and centrist Labour votes. Davey is a more conservative leader and overall safer bet.

Davey is anything but conservative. He's a socialist in a yellow suit with a flying bird on it.

Not at all.

For example the LDs oppose the abolition of AR on farms and imposition of VAT on private schools.

Davey certainly wasn't a Socialist when in government either.

It will be tough to expand the number of LD seats at the next GE, as there will surely be some dead cat bounce for the Tories, but it isn't impossible. There is not a lot of love out there for either of the big two parties. We may well be in one of those decades where the tectonic plates of party politics shift.

I suggest you read the interviews with him on his background and political philosophy, which was so left-wing the interviewer even asked him why he didn't join the Labour Party then - to which he gave some weakish answer about how he didn't like its tradition.

He's a Lefty through and through.

Don't confuse political opportunism for where his real sympathies lie, and he'd be delighted to prop up a Labour administration that fell short next time.

One of the interesting curiosities of modern politics is that Conservatives don’t look or act conservative. It’s all topsy turvey

On the contrary they seem determined to trash the country rather than conserve it.

It's to do now, with party loyalty running vertically through classes, rather than horizontally, across them.

People are still used to the idea of upper middle class people being overwhelmingly Conservative, and working class people being mainly Labour (with a substantial Conservative minority).

When in reality, the Conservatives have very little in common now, with much of the Establishment, and Labour have very little in common now, with broad swathes of working class Britain.

And, the same is true of the US, France, and other rich world democracies. Quite often now, the most solidly left-leaning constituencies are the most well-heeled.

It's fascinating to consider why that's the case.

Luxury beliefs of the university educated, especially women. They have to distinguish themselves from the hoi poloi who have always had small-c conservative views. Used to be done by owning a Jaguar, etc.

I think that's what a lot of Jaguar fans have picked up on: the company is dominated by such types who deliberately want to triangulate against them for those reasons.

I think that "elite overproduction" is one reason. The Greens in particular, pick up support from people who are very well-educated, but in relatively poorly-paying occupations. Revolutions are almost always driven by people who are just outside the magic circle of power and wealth, rather than the genuinely poor.

So, you have a lot of elite-adjacent people who really detest their own society, along with its history and culture.

Also economics isn't really the dividing line it once was. No genuintely socialist party can expect to come to power now, and nor can any party that believes in radically cutting back the public sector. A form of social democracy prevails in most rich world democracies. So, people seek other dividing lines.

That's a good analysis.

I'm astonished at how extreme I find the views of some of my peer group but they seem to be seen as normal by most.

Do you wonder how many Jaguars are driven by women or men under 50?

Well, I'm one of them. And I bought mine in my 30s.

Jaguar are targeting a market that simply doesn't exist and, to the extent it does, it's the distinct Britishness and heritage of the marque that attracts customers to it as a luxury brand, just as for RR or Bentley.

You see: I knew I'd win you round.

You've said exactly what I did.

So under that Royal Blue exterior you've got a sense of humour. Using it you should enjoy the ad. Jaguar have become the Daily Express of motor cars. They aren't selling to women or men under 50 (except you) If you don't like the new ad you're not their target market. They've taken their lead from Virgin and they're aiming for the same result

Everyone doesnt like the ad.

So we can conclude their target market doesn't exist.

I like the ad. I don`t like their cars. More precisely, the shape of their cars.