Best Of

https://x.com/SecRubio/status/2003547575580815814

For far too long, ideologues in Europe have led organized efforts to coerce American platforms to punish American viewpoints they oppose. The Trump Administration will no longer tolerate these egregious acts of extraterritorial censorship.

Today, @StateDept will take steps to bar leading figures of the global censorship-industrial complex from entering the United States. We stand ready and willing to expand this list if others do not reverse course.

Europe (and us) are probably too censorious, but this just seems like yet another example of the Trump administration wanting to antagonise or even make enemies of it's allies, a la Denmark and Canada.

Even if you think they are being too cesnorious all the EU wants is for US social media platforms to deal with abuse and disinformation the same way that local media would have to. The US seems to have adopted a position that US companies need not comply with local laws, and should be free to act as the US alone sees fit. It's plainly nuts, and not something the US would tolerate as the TikTok debacle and others demonstrates.

I don't really see why anyone should be expected to 'deal with disinformation' on social media networks. It's an unfiltered jungle of opinion, and users should be aware of that and act accordingly. Caveat emptor.

https://x.com/SecRubio/status/2003547575580815814

For far too long, ideologues in Europe have led organized efforts to coerce American platforms to punish American viewpoints they oppose. The Trump Administration will no longer tolerate these egregious acts of extraterritorial censorship.

Today, @StateDept will take steps to bar leading figures of the global censorship-industrial complex from entering the United States. We stand ready and willing to expand this list if others do not reverse course.

For far too long, ideologues in Washington have pursued coordinated efforts to obstruct renewable energy projects they oppose, using federal authority to suppress innovation, distort energy markets, and limit domestic energy supply. The European Union will no longer ignore these egregious acts of policy-driven obstructionism.

Today, EU institutions will take steps to formally challenge the United States’ prohibition of new wind projects, measures that raise prices for American consumers, weaken grid resilience, and increase U.S. dependence on foreign energy sources. These actions undermine climate commitments, economic competitiveness, and the foundations of transatlantic cooperation. We stand ready and willing to escalate our response should these restrictions not be reconsidered.

I sometimes wonder if the fact I have zero chance of inheriting any assets affects my ability to get very worked up about the principle of inheritance taxation.

I'm evidently quite progressive when it comes to taxation, but I do find IHT very difficult to justify on both the principle and - in particular - the application. You typically pay it when you don't have the wherewithal or family trust to avoid it (e.g. the generous 7 year rule), or when you die suddenly. I'm not sure why that is taxable while the £10,000s that my parents have given me for housing and education is not.

A obvious political transaction to me is to replace IHT with a ongoing asset tax - particularly on housing. Or perhaps some sort of link to social care insurance.

I'm not particularly strongly concerned about "principles" in the taxation system. We have to collectively pay for the things we want the state to do, and exactly how we do that is then a mix of:

* What have we traditionally taxed?
* Does this tax seem to be mostly landing on people who the public thinks can afford to pay it?
* Are we having any excessive negative economic or other side effects?
* Is it something that's practically simple to tax (i.e. where the state can easily figure out the liability and extract the money)?
* Can we get general public consent for the idea of the tax?

"Fairness" and progressiveness matter for building consent and getting better outcomes, but sometimes practicality wins.

The quip about plucking the goose is getting at a fundamental reality, I think.

The government have spent it's first year and a half looking for trouble. If one of the Palestine Action people die of hunger strike it will be very serious for them. They seem to have gone out of their way to alienate people. Seeing Greta Thunburg arrested just makes them look ridiculous. People have been very patient with Starmer but I think it's now time to get themselves a LABOUR leader. I'd go with Streeting. As much to wash away the detritus that's attached to them as anything else

Leaving aside the merits of the PA proscription, is Greta Thunberg still flavour of the month? I don't seem to stumble upon news about her very much anymore, though I get the impression she has predominantly transitioned from environmental causes to the palestinian cause, so it feels like she needs to get arrested to get attention, which makes it less compelling than, say, reports than 100 grannies have been arrested for doign the same.

The government have spent it's first year and a half looking for trouble. If one of the Palestine Action people die on hunger strike it will be very serious for them. They seem to have gone out of their way to alienate people.

Seeing Greta Thunburg arrested just makes them look ridiculous. People have been very patient with Starmer but I think it's time to get themselves a LABOUR leader. I'd go with Streeting. As much to wash away the detritus that's attached to them as anything else

the hunger strikers. If they die their choice. I see one has stopped today. As for Greta, all performative