Holiday anecdote - I had dinner last night with 6 relatives and their friends in rural Blue Wall country. All of them are normally Tory - two are Countryside Alliance supporters and active in shooting and fishing. None of them will vote Conservative next week. They won't vote Labour either - variously Green and Independent. Not especially anti-Starmer, but too big a jump.
One - a Conservative party member till two years ago - said flatly, "Honour matters in Government, or it should. I don't vote for liars" - everyone nodded.
I wonder if some of the Blue Wall results will be quite startling.
Yeah, been pointing out to HYUFD for a year that this was gonna happen. And at GE 24, because I don't vote for people who prop up liars either, and Big_G_WestDevon has weeks left at best to get off his arse and off the fence and put a letter in.
Groovier people than me: is £55 really what it costs these days to see Nick Mason at Plymouth Pavilions? It is a long time since I went to a concert not a festival.
Quite reasonable. Most of the tickets for this year's Roxy Music tour (surely the last?) are higher than that.
Yes, back I the 90s you could usually see live music for less than the price of an album. A concert now costs five or six times as much as an album.
One reason that we see these dinosaurs touring their back catalogue is that they don't make money on streamed albums. Now they charge for the show, rather than tour at low cost to sell the album.
My first gig was UFO at Southampton Gaumont at £3.25 in 1980.
Mine was The Rolling Stones at the Chez Don in Dalston High Street - 7s6d to get in.
Beat that.
I paid £10.80 to see the Rolling Stones at the old Wembley stadium in 1982. I blew £30 that weekend on the town, staying with my brother at Uni.
I saw them there for a fiver in 1990. The reason being there was some kickball bollocks going on the same evening (Germany?) and people were virtually giving their tickets away. Most boring concert I have ever been to, partly but not only because Jagger wanted to pop backstage between numbers to watch the kickball on telly.
Wembley '82 was very lively. J Geils Band and Aswad as support too. Both were very good, though JGB only known for one song in the UK.
I was at that! My first sight in the flesh of a band I'd idolized for years. Opening bars of Under My Thumb, Jagger bounds on, I lost it. Started blubbing like a baby.
Groovier people than me: is £55 really what it costs these days to see Nick Mason at Plymouth Pavilions? It is a long time since I went to a concert not a festival.
Quite reasonable. Most of the tickets for this year's Roxy Music tour (surely the last?) are higher than that.
Yes, back I the 90s you could usually see live music for less than the price of an album. A concert now costs five or six times as much as an album.
One reason that we see these dinosaurs touring their back catalogue is that they don't make money on streamed albums. Now they charge for the show, rather than tour at low cost to sell the album.
My first gig was UFO at Southampton Gaumont at £3.25 in 1980.
Mine was The Rolling Stones at the Chez Don in Dalston High Street - 7s6d to get in.
Beat that.
My hand with Marillion at Birmingham Odeon just folded.
I love most live music, but Marillion would stretch me past breaking point. They are no Radiohead...
This was the Fish days.
And Peter Hammill was the support act.
I never really got Prog Rock, Pink Floyd excepted, though I did have a girlfriend who was really into Yes.
So was YOU saying yes to Yes, a stratagem for getting HER to say yes?
Groovier people than me: is £55 really what it costs these days to see Nick Mason at Plymouth Pavilions? It is a long time since I went to a concert not a festival.
Quite reasonable. Most of the tickets for this year's Roxy Music tour (surely the last?) are higher than that.
Yes, back I the 90s you could usually see live music for less than the price of an album. A concert now costs five or six times as much as an album.
One reason that we see these dinosaurs touring their back catalogue is that they don't make money on streamed albums. Now they charge for the show, rather than tour at low cost to sell the album.
My first gig was UFO at Southampton Gaumont at £3.25 in 1980.
Mine was The Rolling Stones at the Chez Don in Dalston High Street - 7s6d to get in.
Beat that.
My hand with Marillion at Birmingham Odeon just folded.
I love most live music, but Marillion would stretch me past breaking point. They are no Radiohead...
This was the Fish days.
And Peter Hammill was the support act.
I never really got Prog Rock, Pink Floyd excepted, though I did have a girlfriend who was really into Yes.
That's good - you'd have been less content if she'd been into No.
Groovier people than me: is £55 really what it costs these days to see Nick Mason at Plymouth Pavilions? It is a long time since I went to a concert not a festival.
Quite reasonable. Most of the tickets for this year's Roxy Music tour (surely the last?) are higher than that.
Yes, back I the 90s you could usually see live music for less than the price of an album. A concert now costs five or six times as much as an album.
One reason that we see these dinosaurs touring their back catalogue is that they don't make money on streamed albums. Now they charge for the show, rather than tour at low cost to sell the album.
My first gig was UFO at Southampton Gaumont at £3.25 in 1980.
Mine was The Rolling Stones at the Chez Don in Dalston High Street - 7s6d to get in.
Beat that.
My hand with Marillion at Birmingham Odeon just folded.
I love most live music, but Marillion would stretch me past breaking point. They are no Radiohead...
This was the Fish days.
And Peter Hammill was the support act.
I never really got Prog Rock, Pink Floyd excepted, though I did have a girlfriend who was really into Yes.
You mean she kept shouting out the name of the band whenever she got a bit, er, stimulated?
In more financial news, NYT reports in today's paper, that the company "Truth" Social merged with last fall, Digital World Acquisition, has seen its share price decline 13% since Musk's Twit bid (or visa versa).
He's pledged his Tesla shares as collateral on the Twitter deal and the fear is that, if he doesn't find partners to help finance the deal, there will be a massive overhang on the stock
Could this be part (or even most) of Musk's incentive for Twittering?
I wish him well but that is tinged with sadness, he should be standing and winning a safe Tory seat rather than being a novelty by-election candidate. The fact the Tories have no place for him should make them shudder. Hope he saves his deposit.
Groovier people than me: is £55 really what it costs these days to see Nick Mason at Plymouth Pavilions? It is a long time since I went to a concert not a festival.
Quite reasonable. Most of the tickets for this year's Roxy Music tour (surely the last?) are higher than that.
Yes, back I the 90s you could usually see live music for less than the price of an album. A concert now costs five or six times as much as an album.
One reason that we see these dinosaurs touring their back catalogue is that they don't make money on streamed albums. Now they charge for the show, rather than tour at low cost to sell the album.
My first gig was UFO at Southampton Gaumont at £3.25 in 1980.
Mine was The Rolling Stones at the Chez Don in Dalston High Street - 7s6d to get in.
Beat that.
My hand with Marillion at Birmingham Odeon just folded.
I love most live music, but Marillion would stretch me past breaking point. They are no Radiohead...
This was the Fish days.
And Peter Hammill was the support act.
I never really got Prog Rock, Pink Floyd excepted, though I did have a girlfriend who was really into Yes.
You mean she kept shouting out the name of the band whenever she got a bit, er, stimulated?
Sadly lost contact when she went off to art school and me to medical school. I don't think I have played "Tales from Topographic Oceans" since.
Groovier people than me: is £55 really what it costs these days to see Nick Mason at Plymouth Pavilions? It is a long time since I went to a concert not a festival.
Quite reasonable. Most of the tickets for this year's Roxy Music tour (surely the last?) are higher than that.
Yes, back I the 90s you could usually see live music for less than the price of an album. A concert now costs five or six times as much as an album.
One reason that we see these dinosaurs touring their back catalogue is that they don't make money on streamed albums. Now they charge for the show, rather than tour at low cost to sell the album.
My first gig was UFO at Southampton Gaumont at £3.25 in 1980.
Mine was The Rolling Stones at the Chez Don in Dalston High Street - 7s6d to get in.
Beat that.
I paid £10.80 to see the Rolling Stones at the old Wembley stadium in 1982. I blew £30 that weekend on the town, staying with my brother at Uni.
I saw them there for a fiver in 1990. The reason being there was some kickball bollocks going on the same evening (Germany?) and people were virtually giving their tickets away. Most boring concert I have ever been to, partly but not only because Jagger wanted to pop backstage between numbers to watch the kickball on telly.
Wembley '82 was very lively. J Geils Band and Aswad as support too. Both were very good, though JGB only known for one song in the UK.
Was that the Jagger in an American football outfit tour? Brother got 2 tickets for the Capitol theatre in Aberdeen but gave the other one to his g/f, the barsteward.
The start of the transition from making good albums to doing it all on tours for the Stones, arguably the first band to do it. Not great but I guess there's only so much good original music in a band.
I do believe Corbyn would have been a better PM than Johnson yes, that's a sincerely held view. Johnson is a 0, Corbyn a 0.1
Ukraine would have been screwed right now had Corbyn been in charge.
I get the sentiment but this is to overestimate the role of the British PM in the conflict.
I think that’s unfair on BJ (and the U.K.). It’s clear given the hesitancy of countries such as France and Germany - and indeed the US - that they would have been quietly satisfied for the Ukraine problem to go away with a swift Russian victory which would have led them to go “oh well”. Arguably, the U.K. was the one that stiffened the spines with its shipments, as well as giving the Eastern European / Baltic states one of the big NATO countries on their side.
I think that's broadly right, although I would also credit the Baltics and Poland too.
Edit to add: I think Italy, Japan and India also deserve far more opprobrium than they get. The last of them basically supports Russian actions, while Japan has upped purchases of Russian gas and Italy (along with Hungary) has been the most opposed to EU sanctions.
I think that's slightly unfair to India, who now find themselves in a uniquely difficult geopolitical situation. India had a strong relationship with Ukraine before the war and so really does not support the war, but they are so desperate to have Russian support in any future conflict with China that they can't say so.
Yet Russia and China are as thick as thieves, and if they end up in a war with China, it will be the West that they rely on for support.
Ironically, I think India are trapped in a post colonial/cold war era mindset and are struggling to adapt to the fact the world has changed, and now need to make some clearer choices.
TBF to India, it would be a v bad outcome for them if Russia falls entirely within China's orbit. They'd be surrounded by three potentially hostile nuclear powers - don't forget Pakistan.
Groovier people than me: is £55 really what it costs these days to see Nick Mason at Plymouth Pavilions? It is a long time since I went to a concert not a festival.
Quite reasonable. Most of the tickets for this year's Roxy Music tour (surely the last?) are higher than that.
Yes, back I the 90s you could usually see live music for less than the price of an album. A concert now costs five or six times as much as an album.
One reason that we see these dinosaurs touring their back catalogue is that they don't make money on streamed albums. Now they charge for the show, rather than tour at low cost to sell the album.
My first gig was UFO at Southampton Gaumont at £3.25 in 1980.
Mine was The Rolling Stones at the Chez Don in Dalston High Street - 7s6d to get in.
Beat that.
My hand with Marillion at Birmingham Odeon just folded.
JackW saw the young Mozart at one of Salieri’s soirées, allegedly.
NEXTA @nexta_tv · 8m #British Prime Minister Johnson was asked whether #Russia's military failures in #Ukraine might lead Putin to use tactical nuclear weapons there, and he answered, "No, I don't think so."
Groovier people than me: is £55 really what it costs these days to see Nick Mason at Plymouth Pavilions? It is a long time since I went to a concert not a festival.
Quite reasonable. Most of the tickets for this year's Roxy Music tour (surely the last?) are higher than that.
Yes, back I the 90s you could usually see live music for less than the price of an album. A concert now costs five or six times as much as an album.
One reason that we see these dinosaurs touring their back catalogue is that they don't make money on streamed albums. Now they charge for the show, rather than tour at low cost to sell the album.
My first gig was UFO at Southampton Gaumont at £3.25 in 1980.
Mine was The Rolling Stones at the Chez Don in Dalston High Street - 7s6d to get in.
Beat that.
I paid £10.80 to see the Rolling Stones at the old Wembley stadium in 1982. I blew £30 that weekend on the town, staying with my brother at Uni.
I saw them there for a fiver in 1990. The reason being there was some kickball bollocks going on the same evening (Germany?) and people were virtually giving their tickets away. Most boring concert I have ever been to, partly but not only because Jagger wanted to pop backstage between numbers to watch the kickball on telly.
Wembley '82 was very lively. J Geils Band and Aswad as support too. Both were very good, though JGB only known for one song in the UK.
Was that the Jagger in an American football outfit tour? Brother got 2 tickets for the Capitol theatre in Aberdeen but gave the other one to his g/f, the barsteward.
The start of the transition from making good albums to doing it all on tours for the Stones, arguably the first band to do it. Not great but I guess there's only so much good original music in a band.
Yes, American football pants as I remember. They mostly played old stuff, but Start Me Up was a single at the time. A very good cover version of Twenty Flight Rock was a surprise.
Groovier people than me: is £55 really what it costs these days to see Nick Mason at Plymouth Pavilions? It is a long time since I went to a concert not a festival.
Quite reasonable. Most of the tickets for this year's Roxy Music tour (surely the last?) are higher than that.
Yes, back I the 90s you could usually see live music for less than the price of an album. A concert now costs five or six times as much as an album.
One reason that we see these dinosaurs touring their back catalogue is that they don't make money on streamed albums. Now they charge for the show, rather than tour at low cost to sell the album.
My first gig was UFO at Southampton Gaumont at £3.25 in 1980.
Mine was The Rolling Stones at the Chez Don in Dalston High Street - 7s6d to get in.
Beat that.
I paid £10.80 to see the Rolling Stones at the old Wembley stadium in 1982. I blew £30 that weekend on the town, staying with my brother at Uni.
I saw them there for a fiver in 1990. The reason being there was some kickball bollocks going on the same evening (Germany?) and people were virtually giving their tickets away. Most boring concert I have ever been to, partly but not only because Jagger wanted to pop backstage between numbers to watch the kickball on telly.
Wembley '82 was very lively. J Geils Band and Aswad as support too. Both were very good, though JGB only known for one song in the UK.
Was that the Jagger in an American football outfit tour? Brother got 2 tickets for the Capitol theatre in Aberdeen but gave the other one to his g/f, the barsteward.
The start of the transition from making good albums to doing it all on tours for the Stones, arguably the first band to do it. Not great but I guess there's only so much good original music in a band.
Genuinely misread that as doing it on all fours, which took me aback
The Steel Wheels tour, the internet says. Can't rememeber a thing about it except being glad it was over. Cf Bertie Wooster's comment on a string quartet that "It had the quality which I have often noticed in string quartets of seeming to go on for much longer than it actually did."
Doubtful IF this is gonna impress the PB crowd, but yours truly attended several concerts at the farm of Bill Monroe - the Father of Bluegrass - in Bean Blossom, Indiana. Hosted by himself.
Don't recall the cover charge, but it was modest. So was the attendance.
Though on one memorable occasion, a bluegrass band from Manchester showed up from out of the blue, and played a very rousing bluegrass versions of "Falling" and "Like a Fox on the Run".
Believe it was that same night that me and my girl friend samples some excellent Tennessee moonshine, brought by ardent Bill Monroe fans from the great Volunteer State . . .smoother than a baby's bottom.
He's pledged his Tesla shares as collateral on the Twitter deal and the fear is that, if he doesn't find partners to help finance the deal, there will be a massive overhang on the stock
Could this be part (or even most) of Musk's incentive for Twittering?
Hello @SeaShantyIrish2 not sure what Musk is doing to be honest!!
I do believe Corbyn would have been a better PM than Johnson yes, that's a sincerely held view. Johnson is a 0, Corbyn a 0.1
Ukraine would have been screwed right now had Corbyn been in charge.
I get the sentiment but this is to overestimate the role of the British PM in the conflict.
I think that’s unfair on BJ (and the U.K.). It’s clear given the hesitancy of countries such as France and Germany - and indeed the US - that they would have been quietly satisfied for the Ukraine problem to go away with a swift Russian victory which would have led them to go “oh well”. Arguably, the U.K. was the one that stiffened the spines with its shipments, as well as giving the Eastern European / Baltic states one of the big NATO countries on their side.
I think that's broadly right, although I would also credit the Baltics and Poland too.
Edit to add: I think Italy, Japan and India also deserve far more opprobrium than they get. The last of them basically supports Russian actions, while Japan has upped purchases of Russian gas and Italy (along with Hungary) has been the most opposed to EU sanctions.
I think that's slightly unfair to India, who now find themselves in a uniquely difficult geopolitical situation. India had a strong relationship with Ukraine before the war and so really does not support the war, but they are so desperate to have Russian support in any future conflict with China that they can't say so.
Yet Russia and China are as thick as thieves, and if they end up in a war with China, it will be the West that they rely on for support.
Ironically, I think India are trapped in a post colonial/cold war era mindset and are struggling to adapt to the fact the world has changed, and now need to make some clearer choices.
Do they? They're a poor country and I'm sure will be grateful to get some goodies from a desperate Russia. I don't see how they are supporting Russia either as RCS suggests unless I've missed something.
That Charles Grant article reads like a love letter to Macron to me; he's hoping he'll fulfil the federalist agenda he's always dreamed of, even whilst he acknowledges (without blinking) that other EU nations are not in the same place at the same time.
It will be interesting to revisit the article in 5 years time to see how much of it actually happened. And on that which may, such as moves on defence and security, how far they did so without substantial British support.
Lots of Europeans and more specifically French government people just think saying "strategic autonomy" thousands of time will magically make it happen.
In finance, defence, semi-conductors, energy and a number of other key sectors the EU is significantly or wholly reliant on an external party. With no way out, on the last check, the City has been gaining market share of financial services.
On defence Eastern Europe will never agree to a France/Germany led defence of the realm without US and UK involvement, in fact given everything happening in Ukraine I'm almost certain that Eastern European countries would leave the EU if EU and NATO membership became mutually exclusive.
On energy there still seems to be a real lack of acceptance that relying on Russian energy was a bad idea in Germany, loads of German officials are still waiting for this to all die down so they can quietly forget to reform their energy sector.
Finally on semi-conductors, it's the one area where Europe could potentially win back a lot of market share, Intel already has manufacturing in Ireland but at the same time, they're not domestic and Biden has, realistically, purchased all of Intel's investment capacity for the next 5-8 years for domestic production. The other major semi-conductor powers are in Asia and will be significantly less helpful to the EU than Intel. The lack of key domestic players is the issue, same as the UK. Both parties would essentially be building an industry from scratch, the US, Korea, Taiwan and Japan already have significant domestic industries and national champions like Intel, Samsung, TSMC and Sony who invest billions of dollars per year into semi-conductor development and manufacturing and dominate specific sectors.
This kind of rhetoric may win over blinkered EUphiles or those vanishingly few people who still like Macron but the reality is that both the UK and EU will struggle to achieve anything like strategic autonomy in very many key sectors. What the UK lacks in autonomy we make up for in speed and having a dynamic economy that is able to move with the times, just talking about my little sector of tech start up investing and consulting, nothing like this industry exists anywhere in the EU.
I think the UK has largely accepted that strategic autonomy is unlikely in a lot of sectors, it means we have to make sure our alliances count. Hence AUKUS, potentially pulling Japan into it, the new bridging security agreement for Sweden to join NATO etc... The EU seems to behave as if it were a benevolent superpower asking for favours but giving nothing in return. As I've said on many occasions, I'd start looking to tie UK-EU defence and intelligence cooperation to very long term mutual recognition in agricultural standards, financial services standards and customs pre-clearance of UK goods in key sectors and push these into the TCA and extend the TCA break period to 5 years rather than 12 months. No more freebies.
Thanks. But that's what I meant - he has so far actually not resigned despite saying he would. He's had a couple of weeks I think to write to the Treasury to ask for his trip to the Hundreds.
Is Khan stalling or is Tory HQ telling him to delay so they can hold it at a better time?
He's pledged his Tesla shares as collateral on the Twitter deal and the fear is that, if he doesn't find partners to help finance the deal, there will be a massive overhang on the stock
Could this be part (or even most) of Musk's incentive for Twittering?
Hello @SeaShantyIrish2 not sure what Musk is doing to be honest!!
That Charles Grant article reads like a love letter to Macron to me; he's hoping he'll fulfil the federalist agenda he's always dreamed of, even whilst he acknowledges (without blinking) that other EU nations are not in the same place at the same time.
It will be interesting to revisit the article in 5 years time to see how much of it actually happened. And on that which may, such as moves on defence and security, how far they did so without substantial British support.
On defence Eastern Europe will never agree to a France/Germany led defence of the realm without US and UK involvement, in fact given everything happening in Ukraine I'm almost certain that Eastern European countries would leave the EU if EU and NATO membership became mutually exclusive.
That doesn't really match Zelensky accelerating membership of the EU, but not planning to join NATO.
Desperate to help their mate Bozza lug this dead cat a bit further onto the table.
The question we should all ask just why the speaker of the HOC thinks he can intervene on a question of free speech no matter how disgusting the mail story is
Sky's presenter posed exactly that question yesteday morning
Thanks. But that's what I meant - he has so far actually not resigned despite saying he would. He's had a couple of weeks I think to write to the Treasury to ask for his trip to the Hundreds.
Is Khan stalling or is Tory HQ telling him to delay so they can hold it at a better time?
Fact that Labour has yet to select its by-election candidate could be factor?
The heroic Swiss (from The Guardian). Harry Lime was right, after all.
Switzerland has vetoed the re-export of Swiss-made ammunition used in Gepard anti-aircraft systems that Germany is sending to Ukraine, the government said… .
Given we are fighting an existential war, what would be wrong with a bit of breach of contact? They can sue later. Fuck 'em.
'We' are not fighting an existential war, we're rightly giving lethal aid to a country that is. On the whole I'd feel things would have come to an undesirable pass if we were fighting such a war.
In this case, I think Lavrov is right. We are effectively belligerents. The US Secretary of State is openly talking about a military defeat of Russia, demilitarisation even.
Thats already happening. Russia has confirmed losses of more tanks in the last 2 months than they normally manufacture in 2 years.
And I read that their current tank production is stalled.
That Charles Grant article reads like a love letter to Macron to me; he's hoping he'll fulfil the federalist agenda he's always dreamed of, even whilst he acknowledges (without blinking) that other EU nations are not in the same place at the same time.
It will be interesting to revisit the article in 5 years time to see how much of it actually happened. And on that which may, such as moves on defence and security, how far they did so without substantial British support.
On defence Eastern Europe will never agree to a France/Germany led defence of the realm without US and UK involvement, in fact given everything happening in Ukraine I'm almost certain that Eastern European countries would leave the EU if EU and NATO membership became mutually exclusive.
That doesn't really match Zelensky accelerating membership of the EU, but not planning to join NATO.
Because NATO effectively provides the EU with a security guarantee. How long do you think those countries who rely on NATO would stick around if the EU refused the NATO guarantee in favour of its own defence force?
But you know that and want to look clever, thing is it's completely transparent. The EU has no answer to the concept of strategic autonomy. The US achieves it to an extent by having a military industrial economy that is absolutely gigantic, which major EU country or countries will spend 4-5% of GDP on defence?
That Charles Grant article reads like a love letter to Macron to me; he's hoping he'll fulfil the federalist agenda he's always dreamed of, even whilst he acknowledges (without blinking) that other EU nations are not in the same place at the same time.
It will be interesting to revisit the article in 5 years time to see how much of it actually happened. And on that which may, such as moves on defence and security, how far they did so without substantial British support.
On defence Eastern Europe will never agree to a France/Germany led defence of the realm without US and UK involvement, in fact given everything happening in Ukraine I'm almost certain that Eastern European countries would leave the EU if EU and NATO membership became mutually exclusive.
That doesn't really match Zelensky accelerating membership of the EU, but not planning to join NATO.
Because NATO effectively provides the EU with a security guarantee. How long do you think those countries who rely on NATO would stick around if the EU refused the NATO guarantee in favour of its own defence force?
But you know that and want to look clever, thing is it's completely transparent. The EU has no answer to the concept of strategic autonomy. The US achieves it to an extent by having a military industrial economy that is absolutely gigantic, which major EU country or countries will spend 4-5% of GDP on defence?
It doesnt match your EUphobia thoigh. Ukraine is joining the EU, not NATO.
Comments
I’d vote for him, were I a Yorkshireman.
The start of the transition from making good albums to doing it all on tours for the Stones, arguably the first band to do it. Not great but I guess there's only so much good original music in a band.
NEXTA
@nexta_tv
·
8m
#British Prime Minister Johnson was asked whether #Russia's military failures in #Ukraine might lead Putin to use tactical nuclear weapons there, and he answered, "No, I don't think so."
https://twitter.com/nexta_tv?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^author
The Steel Wheels tour, the internet says. Can't rememeber a thing about it except being glad it was over. Cf Bertie Wooster's comment on a string quartet that "It had the quality which I have often noticed in string quartets of seeming to go on for much longer than it actually did."
Don't recall the cover charge, but it was modest. So was the attendance.
Though on one memorable occasion, a bluegrass band from Manchester showed up from out of the blue, and played a very rousing bluegrass versions of "Falling" and "Like a Fox on the Run".
Believe it was that same night that me and my girl friend samples some excellent Tennessee moonshine, brought by ardent Bill Monroe fans from the great Volunteer State . . .smoother than a baby's bottom.
Just sayin'
BTW, Marjorie Taylor Greene wants to know, is "by-election" some kind of pervert code?
In finance, defence, semi-conductors, energy and a number of other key sectors the EU is significantly or wholly reliant on an external party. With no way out, on the last check, the City has been gaining market share of financial services.
On defence Eastern Europe will never agree to a France/Germany led defence of the realm without US and UK involvement, in fact given everything happening in Ukraine I'm almost certain that Eastern European countries would leave the EU if EU and NATO membership became mutually exclusive.
On energy there still seems to be a real lack of acceptance that relying on Russian energy was a bad idea in Germany, loads of German officials are still waiting for this to all die down so they can quietly forget to reform their energy sector.
Finally on semi-conductors, it's the one area where Europe could potentially win back a lot of market share, Intel already has manufacturing in Ireland but at the same time, they're not domestic and Biden has, realistically, purchased all of Intel's investment capacity for the next 5-8 years for domestic production. The other major semi-conductor powers are in Asia and will be significantly less helpful to the EU than Intel. The lack of key domestic players is the issue, same as the UK. Both parties would essentially be building an industry from scratch, the US, Korea, Taiwan and Japan already have significant domestic industries and national champions like Intel, Samsung, TSMC and Sony who invest billions of dollars per year into semi-conductor development and manufacturing and dominate specific sectors.
This kind of rhetoric may win over blinkered EUphiles or those vanishingly few people who still like Macron but the reality is that both the UK and EU will struggle to achieve anything like strategic autonomy in very many key sectors. What the UK lacks in autonomy we make up for in speed and having a dynamic economy that is able to move with the times, just talking about my little sector of tech start up investing and consulting, nothing like this industry exists anywhere in the EU.
I think the UK has largely accepted that strategic autonomy is unlikely in a lot of sectors, it means we have to make sure our alliances count. Hence AUKUS, potentially pulling Japan into it, the new bridging security agreement for Sweden to join NATO etc... The EU seems to behave as if it were a benevolent superpower asking for favours but giving nothing in return. As I've said on many occasions, I'd start looking to tie UK-EU defence and intelligence cooperation to very long term mutual recognition in agricultural standards, financial services standards and customs pre-clearance of UK goods in key sectors and push these into the TCA and extend the TCA break period to 5 years rather than 12 months. No more freebies.
Is Khan stalling or is Tory HQ telling him to delay so they can hold it at a better time?
Sky's presenter posed exactly that question yesteday morning
Even Johnson has condemned their sexism and misogyny, though I do not a few stone age PBers thought it a reasonable story to print.
Maybe they could buy some from Germany?
But you know that and want to look clever, thing is it's completely transparent. The EU has no answer to the concept of strategic autonomy. The US achieves it to an extent by having a military industrial economy that is absolutely gigantic, which major EU country or countries will spend 4-5% of GDP on defence?
Why is it that you attack our allies so much?