Best Of

At least 4 Israelis have died in the latest missile attack from Iran.

No matter what Trump says, it'll be very hard for the Israeli government to ignore this & agree to Trump's demand for an immediate ceasefire.

At least four people were killed in southern Israel when a ballistic missile fired from Iran hit an apartment block before the two countries confirmed that they had agreed to a cease-fire on Tuesday, according to the Israeli authorities.

The missile was one of about 20 fired in at least four barrages across the country in the hours surrounding the truce that was first announced by President Trump, according to Israeli officials. The Israeli military also said it struck missile launchers in western Iran that were poised to fire at Israel and had intercepted at least 15 drones that Iran launched overnight.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/24/world/middleeast/israel-iran-beersheba-strike.html?smid=url-share

I hope Netanyahu ignores Trump and thereby totally loses US support.

What a childishly nihilistic position

We all need Trump’s ceasefire to work. Even if that means Trump gets a “triumph” to gloat about

It has been rather instructive listening to some of the takes on these developments. I think Trump is bonkers, but the same people criticising him for trying for a ceasefire were criticising him a day or so back for the rush to war.

I get it, the guy is a spanner. But there’s more at stake here than just how bad Trump is.

Re the benefits debate, remember the extraordinary degraded 1960s hillybilly primitives in Appalachia, that I discovered yesterday? Duddie’s Branch

Here’s how they related to welfare:

“Gazaway documented how residents of Duddies had developed elaborate systems for maximizing government assistance, treating welfare not as temporary aid but as a permanent economic strategy requiring careful cultivation.

“ Families shared information about eligibility requirements, helped each other navigate bureaucratic systems, and viewed successful welfare applications as achievements worthy of celebration. This adaptation to the welfare system represented a rational response to an environment where traditional economic opportunities had vanished, though Gazaway and other observers often interpreted it as evidence of cultural pathology.”

I heard a talk from Fraser Nelson a few weeks ago. The assumption is that welfare seekers are somehow feckless. It’s not true: they are rational economic maximisers like the rest of us.

He gave an example of a woman in her 30s. Child of 11. Lives on a really bad estate. She is frustrated by not having a job. However:

- in order to get a job she would need to earn the equivalent of £40k pre-tax
- If she gives up her welfare and the job doesn’t work out then it will take her several months to get back on welfare
- At the moment she can be home when her kid gets back from school, help him do his homework and keep him from mixing with troublemakers
- Realistically the only job she would be likely to get is a minimum wage inherently unstable job. Probably a dead end in terms of career progression
- Her assessment is that although she wants a job the costs and the risks are high and the potential upside low. Consequently the rational decision for her (and I agree) is to remain on welfare despite her personal frustrations

That is the system we need to solve. It’s not easy but it was what IDS was trying to do with UC before Osborne used it as an excuse to cut welfare spending

Basically you need to make sure that work always pays meaningfully more than welfare and that there are robust social systems in place to eg take care of the kids and that there is an opportunity for career progression