“The blob” is a contemptible concept, being an information free substitute for any genuine analysis of what it purportedly labels. One of Gove’s laziest ideas.
It was a brilliant debating technique which has enough truth in it that everyone immediately knows what he is talking about. But it is not a policy for education, the economy or anything else.
There is definite evidence of systemic, protected policy at The Treasury & DfE
The DfE institutional policy appears to be insane. It’s not a definite attempt to prevent the education of children - it’s totally gonzo. To the point where you start wondering which is worse - Cummings or The Experts.
The experts are teachers, and nobody ever asks us.
The DfE are experts in being patronising twats, fucking things up and getting drunk. Not education.
Edit - also I would suggest 'appears to be' is superfluous.
How's that rocket coming?
I would think, personally, that an expert in education would have the following
1) taught in the current system 2) academic study on education theories and ideas - particularly other systems around the world. Actually experience of other systems, extra points 3) taken said theory into the classroom themselves. 4) has a list of what they got wrong.
If I were education minister, I would want several policy generation groups, composed of such people, with a levening of outside experts from IT, law, health, logistics etc
Say at least 3 separate groups - base them separately and try to avoid group think from one group getting to all the others.
Thinking maybe 20 or so per group…
Take their recommendations, build some well organised experiments in attempting to improve education. Experiments run by a separate group with a specific remit for that. Measure the results.
I think it needs to come from the desired outcomes of the education policy. How many plumbers, scientists, chefs do we need? What core principles would we like to instil? What does someone's level of literacy and numeracy need to be at the earliest point that they can leave education? Start from there, and work back. Otherwise you have the very vague idea of 'improving things'. That's vulnerable to all sorts of different influences that are a distraction from (or even opposed to) what should be the core mission.
This is a rather depressing thread. The key point, for me, anyways, is that there will be a group, and you can argue how big it will be, who simply will be unable to make ends meet this winter. Which means either their energy, rent, or Council Tax, or all, will not be paid. Not due to fecklessness, but because their income simply won't cover all of it. Tax cuts aren't relevant here. What is proposed to be done? Cos someone, somewhere, won't be getting paid? In several weeks of a leadership campaign, I haven't heard this question asked in those terms, let alone answered.
Jake Berry on Sky News. Truss to offer hope not handouts.
And will the energy companies accept "hope" in payment for providing heating?
The strange thing is we all know the reality is that they will need to offer massive subsidies on heating this winter. Why not get ahead of the curve and own it rather than spend the next three months saying help is a bad thing and then do a last minute u-turn?
There is something very frivolous about this campaign. They are not addressing the very real concerns people have and are making ludicrous promises to a narrow group people that will either harm the rest of us or that they will have to break pretty soon after taking office.
It is fundamentally unserious.
FWIW Husband is voting Sunak. But with no enthusiasm at all. Like choosing between being infested with fleas or lice.
The trouble with Sunak is he's clearly saying stuff he doesn't believe just to win the Leadership election.
That's an open goal for Keir Starmer.
Except that Keir did exactly the same during his leadership campaign. And to a much greater extent.
And now, unbelievably, poses as Mr Integrity.
Evidence? I'm not saying you are wrong, but I don't remember.
What needs to happen with energy bills: a legal non-payment scheme.
Its very simple - people cannot pay these bills. The cap will be higher than wages / UC so that 100% of income would not pay the bill.
So the bills will not be paid. What must happen is that (a) people do not get cut off and (b) people do not accrue thousands of unpayable debt.
Sorry energy companies, you are about to take the fall. Profit and Loss.
Graduated price per kwh. The more you use the more you pay per unit. For example 1000kwh £x / kwh 1001 to 2500kwh £x + 30% /kwh and so on Make it cheap for smaller users and more per kwh for heavy consumers.
Jake Berry on Sky News. Truss to offer hope not handouts.
And will the energy companies accept "hope" in payment for providing heating?
The strange thing is we all know the reality is that they will need to offer massive subsidies on heating this winter. Why not get ahead of the curve and own it rather than spend the next three months saying help is a bad thing and then do a last minute u-turn?
There is something very frivolous about this campaign. They are not addressing the very real concerns people have and are making ludicrous promises to a narrow group people that will either harm the rest of us or that they will have to break pretty soon after taking office.
It is fundamentally unserious.
FWIW Husband is voting Sunak. But with no enthusiasm at all. Like choosing between being infested with fleas or lice.
The trouble with Sunak is he's clearly saying stuff he doesn't believe just to win the Leadership election.
That's an open goal for Keir Starmer.
Except that Keir did exactly the same during his leadership campaign. And to a much greater extent.
And now, unbelievably, poses as Mr Integrity.
God, you make a little joke against your party and now look.
You can, of course, build a political strategy centred on lies and delusions. But you cannot run a successful economy on the back of them. This is the problem Liz Truss faces. The real world is unforgiving. And it’s fast approaching.
Which is the real tragedy of the demise of the clown; the Tories have learned nothing from it, at all.
You see, posts like this make me want to re-vote for Truss. I still have my paper ballot.
It's noteworthy that all the anti-Truss comments on here are from non-Tories, and similar with 'likes' for Rishi.
That makes me wonder if I made the right decision.
Sunak could win the next election. Truss cannot. So it depends if you want to be a purist and lose or not...
Apart from Leon, who is hoping she will make BDSM compulsory, do we actually have any Truss supporters in here?
Bartholomew is the big Truss fan. I'm surprised there aren't more.
Given the hard time they'd get if they posted here there'll be lurking/staying silent.
This board hates Truss.
Andrew Neil has a good take on this. It’s a good take because it agrees with what I’ve been saying for weeks!
Rishi is the ‘blob’ candidate, and the same blob that got Johnson are coming for Truss straight away
“But it is not Starmer Truss has to worry about. It is what is best described as the Left Blob, which is now omnipresent in British public life, dominant in the citadels of power, including most of the media (above all the broadcasters), the Civil Service, the NHS, the legal system (including the judiciary), education (especially the universities), social media, most public bodies and private charities.”
You forgot to mention the Illuminati, the deep state conspiracy and the lizard aliens?
The Tories have been in power for 12 years and are still convinced a "Left Blob" runs the country. It is a bonkers obsession that just shows up their delusional paranoia and insecurity.
If the leftish blob truly rules the government after 12 years of Tory govt then the entire set of Tory MPs over that time should resign en masse for gross incompetence.
Yeah but, it's the predominantly left wing media and socio-political undercurrents on social media and in life, like leftie teachers ( @ydoethur has a lot of explaining to do) and university lecturers who delivered us both Vote Leave and Johnson victories.
If Andrew Neil rounded up the entire leftie blob and sent it to a Siberian Gulag, he would still have a problem with left-wingers undermining Tory Governments.
This is a rather depressing thread. The key point, for me, anyways, is that there will be a group, and you can argue how big it will be, who simply will be unable to make ends meet this winter. Which means either their energy, rent, or Council Tax, or all, will not be paid. Not due to fecklessness, but because their income simply won't cover all of it. Tax cuts aren't relevant here. What is proposed to be done? Cos someone, somewhere, won't be getting paid? In several weeks of a leadership campaign, I haven't heard this question asked in those terms, let alone answered.
What will happen is this.
For some unfathomable reason, Tory leaders can't say that subsidies are necessary or helpful even in extreme times. So we will get told how we can't afford it, tough decisions need to be made, people need to make sacrifices. Over time this position will unravel for the reasons you explain. The govt will eventually pay or somehow subsidise 80%+ of the increase for the poorest and maybe 20-40% of the increase for the average Joe (or Josephine) and instantly forget all the arguments it has been making during the summer and autumn.
“The blob” is a contemptible concept, being an information free substitute for any genuine analysis of what it purportedly labels. One of Gove’s laziest ideas.
It was a brilliant debating technique which has enough truth in it that everyone immediately knows what he is talking about. But it is not a policy for education, the economy or anything else.
There is definite evidence of systemic, protected policy at The Treasury & DfE
The DfE institutional policy appears to be insane. It’s not a definite attempt to prevent the education of children - it’s totally gonzo. To the point where you start wondering which is worse - Cummings or The Experts.
The experts are teachers, and nobody ever asks us.
The DfE are experts in being patronising twats, fucking things up and getting drunk. Not education.
Edit - also I would suggest 'appears to be' is superfluous.
How's that rocket coming?
I would think, personally, that an expert in education would have the following
1) taught in the current system 2) academic study on education theories and ideas - particularly other systems around the world. Actually experience of other systems, extra points 3) taken said theory into the classroom themselves. 4) has a list of what they got wrong.
If I were education minister, I would want several policy generation groups, composed of such people, with a levening of outside experts from IT, law, health, logistics etc
Say at least 3 separate groups - base them separately and try to avoid group think from one group getting to all the others.
Thinking maybe 20 or so per group…
Take their recommendations, build some well organised experiments in attempting to improve education. Experiments run by a separate group with a specific remit for that. Measure the results.
I think it needs to come from the desired outcomes of the education policy. How many plumbers, scientists, chefs do we need? What core principles would we like to instil? What does someone's level of literacy and numeracy need to be at the earliest point that they can leave education? Start from there, and work back. Otherwise you have the very vague idea of 'improving things'. That's vulnerable to all sorts of different influences that are a distraction from (or even opposed to) what should be the core mission.
Indeed - further, the policy objectives need to relate to what the experimental evidence says is possible. See TSR.2
You can, of course, build a political strategy centred on lies and delusions. But you cannot run a successful economy on the back of them. This is the problem Liz Truss faces. The real world is unforgiving. And it’s fast approaching.
Which is the real tragedy of the demise of the clown; the Tories have learned nothing from it, at all.
You see, posts like this make me want to re-vote for Truss. I still have my paper ballot.
It's noteworthy that all the anti-Truss comments on here are from non-Tories, and similar with 'likes' for Rishi.
That makes me wonder if I made the right decision.
There are plenty of anti Truss comments on PB from current and recent Tories. The biggest concern I would have about her ability to change her deeply held convictions. She says she is on a political journey. I wonder where that journey will take her once elected to the top job.
Well, quite. I just don't know what I will get. And I will also be culpable if I vote for her.
I don't need that on my conscience.
Plato argued that our political leaders should be older, because you could choose them on based on what they had done with their lives rather than just on what they promise to do.
On that basis neither candidate is stellar and it makes me wish once more that Ben Wallace had stayed in the race.
It seems the only way you can really succeed in politics these days is to assiduously network at university, join the youth branch, train up, get a job in Westminster/union/campaign group/think-tank and then convert to the candidates list.
If I ever did it (which I won't) I probably wouldn't do it until my 50s, and then only for 10-15 years.
Yes, you should wait until you've veered to the right, as apparently everybody does as they get older.
This is a rather depressing thread. The key point, for me, anyways, is that there will be a group, and you can argue how big it will be, who simply will be unable to make ends meet this winter. Which means either their energy, rent, or Council Tax, or all, will not be paid. Not due to fecklessness, but because their income simply won't cover all of it. Tax cuts aren't relevant here. What is proposed to be done? Cos someone, somewhere, won't be getting paid? In several weeks of a leadership campaign, I haven't heard this question asked in those terms, let alone answered.
Don't worry the Chancellor is on the case. Oh wait, actually he appears to be in Aruba.
In Sunak and Truss the Tories have 2 articulate, well educated, moderately competent potential leaders. They both have flaws, and both will seriously struggle to cope with the problems we have right now. Sunak is the more small c Conservative one, dubious about the ability of the state to do much and keener to leave things to private enterprise and the hidden hand of the market. Truss is keener to have government do things, to take more risks and will undoubtedly be more activist.
Have either of them got a real handle on the mess that they are inheriting with inflation rampant, QE, high taxes but very poorly performing public services, low productivity and investment, an ongoing balance of payments problem, Andrew Bailey, Ukraine, gas prices, etc etc? Not really, but then who does?
Shouldn't that be 'the mess the they helped to create'?
Not really in that most of the mess predates their time in politics. But I would agree that so far they have done little to address it. IT was famously a temporary measure to fund the Napoleonic wars. Most things in government start with temporary measures that become permanent. But the emergency steps taken after the GFC have become our economic policy for the last 14 years, and not just in this country. However justifiable they were at the time they were not a long term solution and they are now breaking down.
QE and near zero interest rates - aka plentiful cheap-as-chips money - is the drug that's kept us living beyond our means for years. It's only tenable if inflation is being prevented by other macro factors. Now inflation's here the drug can't be continued because the side effects are too severe and too risky, therefore we'll have to come off it and IMO there is no way, no way at all, to do this without a world of pain. People have to get poorer. So for me the key thing is to drop the fairytales and concentrate on making sure the loss is skewed towards those most able to bear it.
But, as someone said in 2008, how do you get re-elected afterwards?
Part of the UK's problem is that, apart from a blip in 2013-4 (the only that meant EIC never became PM), we haven't had decent economic growth at all since 2008- it's never really been safe to tighten the screw.
“The blob” is a contemptible concept, being an information free substitute for any genuine analysis of what it purportedly labels. One of Gove’s laziest ideas.
It was a brilliant debating technique which has enough truth in it that everyone immediately knows what he is talking about. But it is not a policy for education, the economy or anything else.
There is definite evidence of systemic, protected policy at The Treasury & DfE
The DfE institutional policy appears to be insane. It’s not a definite attempt to prevent the education of children - it’s totally gonzo. To the point where you start wondering which is worse - Cummings or The Experts.
The experts are teachers, and nobody ever asks us.
The DfE are experts in being patronising twats, fucking things up and getting drunk. Not education.
Edit - also I would suggest 'appears to be' is superfluous.
How's that rocket coming?
I would think, personally, that an expert in education would have the following
1) taught in the current system 2) academic study on education theories and ideas - particularly other systems around the world. Actually experience of other systems, extra points 3) taken said theory into the classroom themselves. 4) has a list of what they got wrong.
If I were education minister, I would want several policy generation groups, composed of such people, with a levening of outside experts from IT, law, health, logistics etc
Say at least 3 separate groups - base them separately and try to avoid group think from one group getting to all the others.
Thinking maybe 20 or so per group…
Take their recommendations, build some well organised experiments in attempting to improve education. Experiments run by a separate group with a specific remit for that. Measure the results.
Difficult to do when you’ve committed to cutting civil service jobs.
It’s a bit like how the Government promised a world-leading health security agency, then cut the money, and now monkeypox is out of control. There’s no interest in doing things well.
I notice Mike was equating the Red Wall constituencies with deprived, urban areas.
A mistake.
The Conservative gains of 2019, and in particular the Conservative voters within them, tend to be neither deprived nor urban.
There are a few exceptions - Stoke Central especially - but overall they are rather more affluent and rural than the stereotypical view southerners like Mike have of old mining areas somewhere up the M1.
They also have no more inclination to have money spent on inner cities than do the residents of Tunbridge Wells.
You can, of course, build a political strategy centred on lies and delusions. But you cannot run a successful economy on the back of them. This is the problem Liz Truss faces. The real world is unforgiving. And it’s fast approaching.
Which is the real tragedy of the demise of the clown; the Tories have learned nothing from it, at all.
You see, posts like this make me want to re-vote for Truss. I still have my paper ballot.
It's noteworthy that all the anti-Truss comments on here are from non-Tories, and similar with 'likes' for Rishi.
That makes me wonder if I made the right decision.
There are plenty of anti Truss comments on PB from current and recent Tories. The biggest concern I would have about her ability to change her deeply held convictions. She says she is on a political journey. I wonder where that journey will take her once elected to the top job.
Well, quite. I just don't know what I will get. And I will also be culpable if I vote for her.
I don't need that on my conscience.
Plato argued that our political leaders should be older, because you could choose them on based on what they had done with their lives rather than just on what they promise to do.
On that basis neither candidate is stellar and it makes me wish once more that Ben Wallace had stayed in the race.
It seems the only way you can really succeed in politics these days is to assiduously network at university, join the youth branch, train up, get a job in Westminster/union/campaign group/think-tank and then convert to the candidates list.
If I ever did it (which I won't) I probably wouldn't do it until my 50s, and then only for 10-15 years.
Yes, you should wait until you've veered to the right, as apparently everybody does as they get older.
I've become less ideologically neo-liberal since I was a teenager.
That's because its downsides are now very apparent to me.
But, there's a strong strand of opinion in the Tory party that applies, "what would Thatcher do?" to any and every problem, as if it's still 1983, and dismisses any challenge with "Wet".
You can, of course, build a political strategy centred on lies and delusions. But you cannot run a successful economy on the back of them. This is the problem Liz Truss faces. The real world is unforgiving. And it’s fast approaching.
Which is the real tragedy of the demise of the clown; the Tories have learned nothing from it, at all.
You see, posts like this make me want to re-vote for Truss. I still have my paper ballot.
It's noteworthy that all the anti-Truss comments on here are from non-Tories, and similar with 'likes' for Rishi.
That makes me wonder if I made the right decision.
Sunak could win the next election. Truss cannot. So it depends if you want to be a purist and lose or not...
Apart from Leon, who is hoping she will make BDSM compulsory, do we actually have any Truss supporters in here?
Bartholomew is the big Truss fan. I'm surprised there aren't more.
Given the hard time they'd get if they posted here there'll be lurking/staying silent.
This board hates Truss.
Andrew Neil has a good take on this. It’s a good take because it agrees with what I’ve been saying for weeks!
Rishi is the ‘blob’ candidate, and the same blob that got Johnson are coming for Truss straight away
“But it is not Starmer Truss has to worry about. It is what is best described as the Left Blob, which is now omnipresent in British public life, dominant in the citadels of power, including most of the media (above all the broadcasters), the Civil Service, the NHS, the legal system (including the judiciary), education (especially the universities), social media, most public bodies and private charities.”
You forgot to mention the Illuminati, the deep state conspiracy and the lizard aliens?
The Tories have been in power for 12 years and are still convinced a "Left Blob" runs the country. It is a bonkers obsession that just shows up their delusional paranoia and insecurity.
If the leftish blob truly rules the government after 12 years of Tory govt then the entire set of Tory MPs over that time should resign en masse for gross incompetence.
Yeah but, it's the predominantly left wing media and socio-political undercurrents on social media and in life, like leftie teachers ( @ydoethur has a lot of explaining to do) and university lecturers who delivered us both Vote Leave and Johnson victories.
If Andrew Neil rounded up the entire leftie blob and sent it to a Siberian Gulag, he would still have a problem with left-wingers undermining Tory Governments.
So the problem is that left wingers exist? Well sure, but not sure why that either makes them a blob or gives them great power, when they are out of office for over a decade? I can't remember Blair complaining that there were lots of right wingers around, on boards of directors, running institutions or whatever. Perhaps he or his supporters had an equivalent bogeyman but if so it passed me by.
The point about *both* candidates is that they are not talking about the people at risk this winter, they are trying to woo the people not at risk. So the winner becomes PM far too late to do anything with the mindset that whatever action they take needs to benefit the people who don't need help.
Another thing that worries me about both the candidates is that both of them are saying "I will do" this that and the other. It is not a matter of "I will persuade" the Cabinet, the MPs, the Conservative Party, Parliament and least of all the country.
What they are both seeking to become is a dictator - following in Johnson's footsteps, of course - and forgetting that this country is supposed to be a democracy.
I want neither of them as prime minister, and the only way to get that is to kick the Tories out of office as soon as may be.
You make a good point. It would be refreshing if Sunak/Truss were to say: "Under my leadership, I will appoint the most talented people to my Cabinet. We shall return to Cabinet government and a respect for parliamentary democracy, in which both short-term and long-term decisions are debated fully, first in Cabinet, then in Parliament. I shall lead, but I'll listen and won't dictate".
For all his weaknesses, I suspect there is much more chance of Starmer leading a government that returns to that sort of model.
Yes, it'd be disappointing if PM Starmer - which btw I think is closing in on racing certainty - doesn't go at least some way back towards that.
“The blob” is a contemptible concept, being an information free substitute for any genuine analysis of what it purportedly labels. One of Gove’s laziest ideas.
It was a brilliant debating technique which has enough truth in it that everyone immediately knows what he is talking about. But it is not a policy for education, the economy or anything else.
There is definite evidence of systemic, protected policy at The Treasury & DfE
The DfE institutional policy appears to be insane. It’s not a definite attempt to prevent the education of children - it’s totally gonzo. To the point where you start wondering which is worse - Cummings or The Experts.
The experts are teachers, and nobody ever asks us.
The DfE are experts in being patronising twats, fucking things up and getting drunk. Not education.
Edit - also I would suggest 'appears to be' is superfluous.
How's that rocket coming?
Are teachers the experts? They are practitioners and must of course be consulted. Take medicine as an analogy. If the GP or physician with prescription pad is the equivalent of the teacher, who are the analogues of the chemists, biochemists and molecular biologists in the university and drug company research labs? Maybe we should chuck more research grants at psychologists.
Good morning, and a good point. One of the issues I used to face in talking to GP's was that their experience of patients was in fact quite limited. Their experience related to their own patients, who might or might not be typical of the population at large. I suspect the same applies to teachers, although they do have the advantage of a different cohort of students coming through each year. My wife certainly used to say that each batch of infants she was presented with were different! One year will go along with a disruptive element, the next wouldn't!
In Sunak and Truss the Tories have 2 articulate, well educated, moderately competent potential leaders. They both have flaws, and both will seriously struggle to cope with the problems we have right now. Sunak is the more small c Conservative one, dubious about the ability of the state to do much and keener to leave things to private enterprise and the hidden hand of the market. Truss is keener to have government do things, to take more risks and will undoubtedly be more activist.
Have either of them got a real handle on the mess that they are inheriting with inflation rampant, QE, high taxes but very poorly performing public services, low productivity and investment, an ongoing balance of payments problem, Andrew Bailey, Ukraine, gas prices, etc etc? Not really, but then who does?
Shouldn't that be 'the mess the they helped to create'?
Not really in that most of the mess predates their time in politics. But I would agree that so far they have done little to address it. IT was famously a temporary measure to fund the Napoleonic wars. Most things in government start with temporary measures that become permanent. But the emergency steps taken after the GFC have become our economic policy for the last 14 years, and not just in this country. However justifiable they were at the time they were not a long term solution and they are now breaking down.
QE and near zero interest rates - aka plentiful cheap-as-chips money - is the drug that's kept us living beyond our means for years. It's only tenable if inflation is being prevented by other macro factors. Now inflation's here the drug can't be continued because the side effects are too severe and too risky, therefore we'll have to come off it and IMO there is no way, no way at all, to do this without a world of pain. People have to get poorer. So for me the key thing is to drop the fairytales and concentrate on making sure the loss is skewed towards those most able to bear it.
Lower house prices and fewer foreign holidays have various economic, social and environmental benefits as well.
But there are millions of people who think they need higher house prices and/or think they are entitled to more foreign holidays.
You can, of course, build a political strategy centred on lies and delusions. But you cannot run a successful economy on the back of them. This is the problem Liz Truss faces. The real world is unforgiving. And it’s fast approaching.
Which is the real tragedy of the demise of the clown; the Tories have learned nothing from it, at all.
You see, posts like this make me want to re-vote for Truss. I still have my paper ballot.
It's noteworthy that all the anti-Truss comments on here are from non-Tories, and similar with 'likes' for Rishi.
That makes me wonder if I made the right decision.
There are plenty of anti Truss comments on PB from current and recent Tories. The biggest concern I would have about her ability to change her deeply held convictions. She says she is on a political journey. I wonder where that journey will take her once elected to the top job.
Well, quite. I just don't know what I will get. And I will also be culpable if I vote for her.
I don't need that on my conscience.
Plato argued that our political leaders should be older, because you could choose them on based on what they had done with their lives rather than just on what they promise to do.
On that basis neither candidate is stellar and it makes me wish once more that Ben Wallace had stayed in the race.
It seems the only way you can really succeed in politics these days is to assiduously network at university, join the youth branch, train up, get a job in Westminster/union/campaign group/think-tank and then convert to the candidates list.
If I ever did it (which I won't) I probably wouldn't do it until my 50s, and then only for 10-15 years.
Yes, you should wait until you've veered to the right, as apparently everybody does as they get older.
I've become less ideologically neo-liberal since I was a teenager.
That's because its downsides are now very apparent to me.
But, there's a strong strand of opinion in the Tory party that applies, "what would Thatcher do?" to any and every problem, as if it's still 1983, and dismisses any challenge with "Wet".
The problem is they don't ask what did MT do in 1979? And project that onto now. Without oil and a shed load of possible privatisations coming in the next decade.
“The blob” is a contemptible concept, being an information free substitute for any genuine analysis of what it purportedly labels. One of Gove’s laziest ideas.
It was a brilliant debating technique which has enough truth in it that everyone immediately knows what he is talking about. But it is not a policy for education, the economy or anything else.
There is definite evidence of systemic, protected policy at The Treasury & DfE
The DfE institutional policy appears to be insane. It’s not a definite attempt to prevent the education of children - it’s totally gonzo. To the point where you start wondering which is worse - Cummings or The Experts.
The experts are teachers, and nobody ever asks us.
The DfE are experts in being patronising twats, fucking things up and getting drunk. Not education.
Edit - also I would suggest 'appears to be' is superfluous.
How's that rocket coming?
Are teachers the experts? They are practitioners and must of course be consulted. Take medicine as an analogy. If the GP or physician with prescription pad is the equivalent of the teacher, who are the analogues of the chemists, biochemists and molecular biologists in the university and drug company research labs? Maybe we should chuck more research grants at psychologists.
I approve of more research grants. Good idea. (This is entirely unconnected to the fact that research grants fund a large chunk of my employment,)
Good research is rooted in engagement with the practitioners (teachers) and end users (pupils, families, society), so, yes, I think there is a place for (non-teaching) psychologists along side teachers and teacher-academics.
As ever it is the age old framing - "The Left" is Weak, physically and morally, yet simultaneously All Powerful and in total control degrading the morals of the nation and thwarting the True Rulers of the land.
I notice Mike was equating the Red Wall constituencies with deprived, urban areas.
A mistake.
The Conservative gains of 2019, and in particular the Conservative voters within them, tend to be neither deprived nor urban.
There are a few exceptions - Stoke Central especially - but overall they are rather more affluent and rural than the stereotypical view southerners like Mike have of old mining areas somewhere up the M1.
They also have no more inclination to have money spent on inner cities than do the residents of Tunbridge Wells.
This is so true. Also. If you break it down to ward level in the two I know best, Leigh and Blyth Valley, it is the relatively affluent and more rural bits of them that drove the Tory wins. New developments which wouldn't be out of place in Hertfordshire (apart from the prices).
You can, of course, build a political strategy centred on lies and delusions. But you cannot run a successful economy on the back of them. This is the problem Liz Truss faces. The real world is unforgiving. And it’s fast approaching.
Which is the real tragedy of the demise of the clown; the Tories have learned nothing from it, at all.
You see, posts like this make me want to re-vote for Truss. I still have my paper ballot.
It's noteworthy that all the anti-Truss comments on here are from non-Tories, and similar with 'likes' for Rishi.
That makes me wonder if I made the right decision.
I'm obviously an authentic non-Tory, but I try to be honest. My feeling at present is that the Conservatives are in any case going to have a period in Opposition, partly just the "time for a change" stuff, partly the economic position, partly the lack of potential coalition partners, and partly just weariness. I recognise the predominent "we must stop Labour message" as the mirror of ours in 2010 when we were similarly exhausted, and it isn't and shouldn't be enough.
Sunak, I think, would give us a run for our money and lose quite narrowly, but he's a known quantity and one that I think we can definitely beat. Truss is an enigma, and therefore something of a worry for Labour, though IMO she's more likely to surprise on the downside and give Labour a really big win. Balancing the two, I think from the Labour viewpoint it's pretty much a coin-flip. Truss, though, is unpredictable enough to do some structural damage to the economy, or do something weird that none of us have thought of, so from the UK viewpoint she's probably the riskier choice.
In Sunak and Truss the Tories have 2 articulate, well educated, moderately competent potential leaders. They both have flaws, and both will seriously struggle to cope with the problems we have right now. Sunak is the more small c Conservative one, dubious about the ability of the state to do much and keener to leave things to private enterprise and the hidden hand of the market. Truss is keener to have government do things, to take more risks and will undoubtedly be more activist.
Have either of them got a real handle on the mess that they are inheriting with inflation rampant, QE, high taxes but very poorly performing public services, low productivity and investment, an ongoing balance of payments problem, Andrew Bailey, Ukraine, gas prices, etc etc? Not really, but then who does?
Shouldn't that be 'the mess the they helped to create'?
Not really in that most of the mess predates their time in politics. But I would agree that so far they have done little to address it. IT was famously a temporary measure to fund the Napoleonic wars. Most things in government start with temporary measures that become permanent. But the emergency steps taken after the GFC have become our economic policy for the last 14 years, and not just in this country. However justifiable they were at the time they were not a long term solution and they are now breaking down.
QE and near zero interest rates - aka plentiful cheap-as-chips money - is the drug that's kept us living beyond our means for years. It's only tenable if inflation is being prevented by other macro factors. Now inflation's here the drug can't be continued because the side effects are too severe and too risky, therefore we'll have to come off it and IMO there is no way, no way at all, to do this without a world of pain. People have to get poorer. So for me the key thing is to drop the fairytales and concentrate on making sure the loss is skewed towards those most able to bear it.
Lower house prices and fewer foreign holidays have various economic, social and environmental benefits as well.
But there are millions of people who think they need higher house prices and/or think they are entitled to more foreign holidays.
The two are a bit linked. If you have disposable income and own your place, then spending it on improving the house might make more sense than going on holiday. If you rent because of high house prices, then better to spend it on travel.
In Sunak and Truss the Tories have 2 articulate, well educated, moderately competent potential leaders. They both have flaws, and both will seriously struggle to cope with the problems we have right now. Sunak is the more small c Conservative one, dubious about the ability of the state to do much and keener to leave things to private enterprise and the hidden hand of the market. Truss is keener to have government do things, to take more risks and will undoubtedly be more activist.
Have either of them got a real handle on the mess that they are inheriting with inflation rampant, QE, high taxes but very poorly performing public services, low productivity and investment, an ongoing balance of payments problem, Andrew Bailey, Ukraine, gas prices, etc etc? Not really, but then who does?
Shouldn't that be 'the mess the they helped to create'?
Not really in that most of the mess predates their time in politics. But I would agree that so far they have done little to address it. IT was famously a temporary measure to fund the Napoleonic wars. Most things in government start with temporary measures that become permanent. But the emergency steps taken after the GFC have become our economic policy for the last 14 years, and not just in this country. However justifiable they were at the time they were not a long term solution and they are now breaking down.
QE and near zero interest rates - aka plentiful cheap-as-chips money - is the drug that's kept us living beyond our means for years. It's only tenable if inflation is being prevented by other macro factors. Now inflation's here the drug can't be continued because the side effects are too severe and too risky, therefore we'll have to come off it and IMO there is no way, no way at all, to do this without a world of pain. People have to get poorer. So for me the key thing is to drop the fairytales and concentrate on making sure the loss is skewed towards those most able to bear it.
But, as someone said in 2008, how do you get re-elected afterwards?
Part of the UK's problem is that, apart from a blip in 2013-4 (the only that meant EIC never became PM), we haven't had decent economic growth at all since 2008- it's never really been safe to tighten the screw.
Yes, it's a tricky one.
Policies to (eg) hit the top 10% and (eg) protect the bottom quartile ought on the face of it to be popular since the winners outnumber the losers.
But there are 2 big problems with this. The top 10% are disproportionately influential in opinion setting. And political opponents will present as their alternative not a different way of spreading the pain but a pretence that it can be avoided - eg via "growing the economy" or "efficiencies" and the like.
You can, of course, build a political strategy centred on lies and delusions. But you cannot run a successful economy on the back of them. This is the problem Liz Truss faces. The real world is unforgiving. And it’s fast approaching.
Which is the real tragedy of the demise of the clown; the Tories have learned nothing from it, at all.
You see, posts like this make me want to re-vote for Truss. I still have my paper ballot.
It's noteworthy that all the anti-Truss comments on here are from non-Tories, and similar with 'likes' for Rishi.
That makes me wonder if I made the right decision.
There are plenty of anti Truss comments on PB from current and recent Tories. The biggest concern I would have about her ability to change her deeply held convictions. She says she is on a political journey. I wonder where that journey will take her once elected to the top job.
Well, quite. I just don't know what I will get. And I will also be culpable if I vote for her.
I don't need that on my conscience.
Plato argued that our political leaders should be older, because you could choose them on based on what they had done with their lives rather than just on what they promise to do.
On that basis neither candidate is stellar and it makes me wish once more that Ben Wallace had stayed in the race.
It seems the only way you can really succeed in politics these days is to assiduously network at university, join the youth branch, train up, get a job in Westminster/union/campaign group/think-tank and then convert to the candidates list.
If I ever did it (which I won't) I probably wouldn't do it until my 50s, and then only for 10-15 years.
Yes, you should wait until you've veered to the right, as apparently everybody does as they get older.
I've become less ideologically neo-liberal since I was a teenager.
That's because its downsides are now very apparent to me.
But, there's a strong strand of opinion in the Tory party that applies, "what would Thatcher do?" to any and every problem, as if it's still 1983, and dismisses any challenge with "Wet".
Well two things that Thatcher did in 1983 was subsidise the nationalised mining industry and have a top rate of income tax of 60% for people earning £32k.
You can, of course, build a political strategy centred on lies and delusions. But you cannot run a successful economy on the back of them. This is the problem Liz Truss faces. The real world is unforgiving. And it’s fast approaching.
Which is the real tragedy of the demise of the clown; the Tories have learned nothing from it, at all.
You see, posts like this make me want to re-vote for Truss. I still have my paper ballot.
It's noteworthy that all the anti-Truss comments on here are from non-Tories, and similar with 'likes' for Rishi.
That makes me wonder if I made the right decision.
There are plenty of anti Truss comments on PB from current and recent Tories. The biggest concern I would have about her ability to change her deeply held convictions. She says she is on a political journey. I wonder where that journey will take her once elected to the top job.
Well, quite. I just don't know what I will get. And I will also be culpable if I vote for her.
I don't need that on my conscience.
Plato argued that our political leaders should be older, because you could choose them on based on what they had done with their lives rather than just on what they promise to do.
On that basis neither candidate is stellar and it makes me wish once more that Ben Wallace had stayed in the race.
It seems the only way you can really succeed in politics these days is to assiduously network at university, join the youth branch, train up, get a job in Westminster/union/campaign group/think-tank and then convert to the candidates list.
If I ever did it (which I won't) I probably wouldn't do it until my 50s, and then only for 10-15 years.
Yes, you should wait until you've veered to the right, as apparently everybody does as they get older.
I've become less ideologically neo-liberal since I was a teenager.
That's because its downsides are now very apparent to me.
But, there's a strong strand of opinion in the Tory party that applies, "what would Thatcher do?" to any and every problem, as if it's still 1983, and dismisses any challenge with "Wet".
The problem is they don't ask what did MT do in 1979? And project that onto now. Without oil and a shed load of possible privatisations coming in the next decade.
Well, quite. Thatcher was an intensely practical politician and did deals when it suited her. She was also the first major Western leader to recognise the threat of climate change.
It's unlikely she'd pursue identical policies today, even though her values would be similar, and the idiots seems to forget that.
In Sunak and Truss the Tories have 2 articulate, well educated, moderately competent potential leaders. They both have flaws, and both will seriously struggle to cope with the problems we have right now. Sunak is the more small c Conservative one, dubious about the ability of the state to do much and keener to leave things to private enterprise and the hidden hand of the market. Truss is keener to have government do things, to take more risks and will undoubtedly be more activist.
Have either of them got a real handle on the mess that they are inheriting with inflation rampant, QE, high taxes but very poorly performing public services, low productivity and investment, an ongoing balance of payments problem, Andrew Bailey, Ukraine, gas prices, etc etc? Not really, but then who does?
Shouldn't that be 'the mess the they helped to create'?
Not really in that most of the mess predates their time in politics. But I would agree that so far they have done little to address it. IT was famously a temporary measure to fund the Napoleonic wars. Most things in government start with temporary measures that become permanent. But the emergency steps taken after the GFC have become our economic policy for the last 14 years, and not just in this country. However justifiable they were at the time they were not a long term solution and they are now breaking down.
QE and near zero interest rates - aka plentiful cheap-as-chips money - is the drug that's kept us living beyond our means for years. It's only tenable if inflation is being prevented by other macro factors. Now inflation's here the drug can't be continued because the side effects are too severe and too risky, therefore we'll have to come off it and IMO there is no way, no way at all, to do this without a world of pain. People have to get poorer. So for me the key thing is to drop the fairytales and concentrate on making sure the loss is skewed towards those most able to bear it.
Lower house prices and fewer foreign holidays have various economic, social and environmental benefits as well.
But there are millions of people who think they need higher house prices and/or think they are entitled to more foreign holidays.
"Don't it always seem to be, you don't what you got 'til it's gone.
Jake Berry on Sky News. Truss to offer hope not handouts.
And will the energy companies accept "hope" in payment for providing heating?
The strange thing is we all know the reality is that they will need to offer massive subsidies on heating this winter. Why not get ahead of the curve and own it rather than spend the next three months saying help is a bad thing and then do a last minute u-turn?
There is something very frivolous about this campaign. They are not addressing the very real concerns people have and are making ludicrous promises to a narrow group people that will either harm the rest of us or that they will have to break pretty soon after taking office.
It is fundamentally unserious.
FWIW Husband is voting Sunak. But with no enthusiasm at all. Like choosing between being infested with fleas or lice.
I haven’t watched the debates or hustings but on your concern about the frivolity wouldn’t it be helpful if the questioners asked detailed questions about key issues of the CofL instead of asking “what’s the naughtiest thing you’ve done” or “did you stab Boris in the back”?
It really doesn’t help that the media seems to be as childish as politics these days and as I wrote earlier, a return to the country being boring and serious would be welcome.
I remember that not that long ago the BBC put the no confidence debate from 1979 - which I vaguely remember as a child - up on iPlayer, and it is staggering to realise how serious and skilled (in terms of both the content and the technique of the debate) politics was back then. Similarly the sort of political programmes we got on the media - such as Walden's Weekend World with its weekly half hour analysis of some topical political issue followed by an in-depth long-interview with the politician responsible.
A little while ago I watched a 70s political drama called 'Bill Brand' ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Brand_(TV_series) ). It's remarkable in many ways - but one of the things that caught my attention was even in the dramatisation the political TV interviews & discussions are *serious*. The interviewer isn't trying to just get a gotcha! moment, or bickering about 'you said "potato" but your colleague said "potatoe"! What about that, eh?".
In Sunak and Truss the Tories have 2 articulate, well educated, moderately competent potential leaders. They both have flaws, and both will seriously struggle to cope with the problems we have right now. Sunak is the more small c Conservative one, dubious about the ability of the state to do much and keener to leave things to private enterprise and the hidden hand of the market. Truss is keener to have government do things, to take more risks and will undoubtedly be more activist.
Have either of them got a real handle on the mess that they are inheriting with inflation rampant, QE, high taxes but very poorly performing public services, low productivity and investment, an ongoing balance of payments problem, Andrew Bailey, Ukraine, gas prices, etc etc? Not really, but then who does?
Shouldn't that be 'the mess the they helped to create'?
Not really in that most of the mess predates their time in politics. But I would agree that so far they have done little to address it. IT was famously a temporary measure to fund the Napoleonic wars. Most things in government start with temporary measures that become permanent. But the emergency steps taken after the GFC have become our economic policy for the last 14 years, and not just in this country. However justifiable they were at the time they were not a long term solution and they are now breaking down.
QE and near zero interest rates - aka plentiful cheap-as-chips money - is the drug that's kept us living beyond our means for years. It's only tenable if inflation is being prevented by other macro factors. Now inflation's here the drug can't be continued because the side effects are too severe and too risky, therefore we'll have to come off it and IMO there is no way, no way at all, to do this without a world of pain. People have to get poorer. So for me the key thing is to drop the fairytales and concentrate on making sure the loss is skewed towards those most able to bear it.
Lower house prices and fewer foreign holidays have various economic, social and environmental benefits as well.
But there are millions of people who think they need higher house prices and/or think they are entitled to more foreign holidays.
You're going a bit Guru of Grim again with the foreign holidays (non) point but - YES - we really need lower house prices. I'd probably have this in my top 5 of things that would transform the country. So much better to achieve it with prices stable for many years while everything else goes up, rather than a crash, but the world doesn't tend to work like that unfortunately.
In Sunak and Truss the Tories have 2 articulate, well educated, moderately competent potential leaders. They both have flaws, and both will seriously struggle to cope with the problems we have right now. Sunak is the more small c Conservative one, dubious about the ability of the state to do much and keener to leave things to private enterprise and the hidden hand of the market. Truss is keener to have government do things, to take more risks and will undoubtedly be more activist.
Have either of them got a real handle on the mess that they are inheriting with inflation rampant, QE, high taxes but very poorly performing public services, low productivity and investment, an ongoing balance of payments problem, Andrew Bailey, Ukraine, gas prices, etc etc? Not really, but then who does?
Shouldn't that be 'the mess the they helped to create'?
Not really in that most of the mess predates their time in politics. But I would agree that so far they have done little to address it. IT was famously a temporary measure to fund the Napoleonic wars. Most things in government start with temporary measures that become permanent. But the emergency steps taken after the GFC have become our economic policy for the last 14 years, and not just in this country. However justifiable they were at the time they were not a long term solution and they are now breaking down.
QE and near zero interest rates - aka plentiful cheap-as-chips money - is the drug that's kept us living beyond our means for years. It's only tenable if inflation is being prevented by other macro factors. Now inflation's here the drug can't be continued because the side effects are too severe and too risky, therefore we'll have to come off it and IMO there is no way, no way at all, to do this without a world of pain. People have to get poorer. So for me the key thing is to drop the fairytales and concentrate on making sure the loss is skewed towards those most able to bear it.
Lower house prices and fewer foreign holidays have various economic, social and environmental benefits as well.
But there are millions of people who think they need higher house prices and/or think they are entitled to more foreign holidays.
The two are a bit linked. If you have disposable income and own your place, then spending it on improving the house might make more sense than going on holiday. If you rent because of high house prices, then better to spend it on travel.
That can certainly be a factor.
As can other things such as age and location.
But generally there will be a trend of more holidays among the more affluent.
In Sunak and Truss the Tories have 2 articulate, well educated, moderately competent potential leaders. They both have flaws, and both will seriously struggle to cope with the problems we have right now. Sunak is the more small c Conservative one, dubious about the ability of the state to do much and keener to leave things to private enterprise and the hidden hand of the market. Truss is keener to have government do things, to take more risks and will undoubtedly be more activist.
Have either of them got a real handle on the mess that they are inheriting with inflation rampant, QE, high taxes but very poorly performing public services, low productivity and investment, an ongoing balance of payments problem, Andrew Bailey, Ukraine, gas prices, etc etc? Not really, but then who does?
Shouldn't that be 'the mess the they helped to create'?
Not really in that most of the mess predates their time in politics. But I would agree that so far they have done little to address it. IT was famously a temporary measure to fund the Napoleonic wars. Most things in government start with temporary measures that become permanent. But the emergency steps taken after the GFC have become our economic policy for the last 14 years, and not just in this country. However justifiable they were at the time they were not a long term solution and they are now breaking down.
QE and near zero interest rates - aka plentiful cheap-as-chips money - is the drug that's kept us living beyond our means for years. It's only tenable if inflation is being prevented by other macro factors. Now inflation's here the drug can't be continued because the side effects are too severe and too risky, therefore we'll have to come off it and IMO there is no way, no way at all, to do this without a world of pain. People have to get poorer. So for me the key thing is to drop the fairytales and concentrate on making sure the loss is skewed towards those most able to bear it.
Lower house prices and fewer foreign holidays have various economic, social and environmental benefits as well.
But there are millions of people who think they need higher house prices and/or think they are entitled to more foreign holidays.
You're going a bit Guru of Grim again with the foreign holidays (non) point but - YES - we really need lower house prices. I'd probably have this in my top 5 of things that would transform the country for the better. So much better to achieve it with prices stable for many years while everything else goes up, rather than a crash, but the world doesn't tend to work like that unfortunately.
It isn't really a price problem though that is how it manifests. As I am fond of pointing out, if the Titanic was short of lifeboats (which I believe is true, doesn't matter if it isn't) it would be perverse of the officers to address the issue as one of how to make lifeboat places more *affordable* for the third class passengers.
In Sunak and Truss the Tories have 2 articulate, well educated, moderately competent potential leaders. They both have flaws, and both will seriously struggle to cope with the problems we have right now. Sunak is the more small c Conservative one, dubious about the ability of the state to do much and keener to leave things to private enterprise and the hidden hand of the market. Truss is keener to have government do things, to take more risks and will undoubtedly be more activist.
Have either of them got a real handle on the mess that they are inheriting with inflation rampant, QE, high taxes but very poorly performing public services, low productivity and investment, an ongoing balance of payments problem, Andrew Bailey, Ukraine, gas prices, etc etc? Not really, but then who does?
Shouldn't that be 'the mess the they helped to create'?
Not really in that most of the mess predates their time in politics. But I would agree that so far they have done little to address it. IT was famously a temporary measure to fund the Napoleonic wars. Most things in government start with temporary measures that become permanent. But the emergency steps taken after the GFC have become our economic policy for the last 14 years, and not just in this country. However justifiable they were at the time they were not a long term solution and they are now breaking down.
QE and near zero interest rates - aka plentiful cheap-as-chips money - is the drug that's kept us living beyond our means for years. It's only tenable if inflation is being prevented by other macro factors. Now inflation's here the drug can't be continued because the side effects are too severe and too risky, therefore we'll have to come off it and IMO there is no way, no way at all, to do this without a world of pain. People have to get poorer. So for me the key thing is to drop the fairytales and concentrate on making sure the loss is skewed towards those most able to bear it.
Lower house prices and fewer foreign holidays have various economic, social and environmental benefits as well.
But there are millions of people who think they need higher house prices and/or think they are entitled to more foreign holidays.
You're going a bit Guru of Grim again with the foreign holidays (non) point but - YES - we really need lower house prices. I'd probably have this in my top 5 of things that would transform the country. So much better to achieve it with prices stable for many years while everything else goes up, rather than a crash, but the world doesn't tend to work like that unfortunately.
I've just discovered that the government directly funds holidays for some deprived people:
Jake Berry on Sky News. Truss to offer hope not handouts.
And will the energy companies accept "hope" in payment for providing heating?
The strange thing is we all know the reality is that they will need to offer massive subsidies on heating this winter. Why not get ahead of the curve and own it rather than spend the next three months saying help is a bad thing and then do a last minute u-turn?
There is something very frivolous about this campaign. They are not addressing the very real concerns people have and are making ludicrous promises to a narrow group people that will either harm the rest of us or that they will have to break pretty soon after taking office.
It is fundamentally unserious.
FWIW Husband is voting Sunak. But with no enthusiasm at all. Like choosing between being infested with fleas or lice.
I haven’t watched the debates or hustings but on your concern about the frivolity wouldn’t it be helpful if the questioners asked detailed questions about key issues of the CofL instead of asking “what’s the naughtiest thing you’ve done” or “did you stab Boris in the back”?
It really doesn’t help that the media seems to be as childish as politics these days and as I wrote earlier, a return to the country being boring and serious would be welcome.
Yes. It beats me why being "a bit of a card" is thought to be part of the skillset needed for governing the country.
It’s been a bit like an inverse of the Blair “Cool Britannia” phase over last six or so years.
Then we had a fresh new government with ideas, looking professional and serious about running the country and the bands and celebs were crazy, partying, picking fights, getting up to mischief.
Recently it’s been the politicians acting like the celebs and bands with the celebs leading on poverty, cultural issues, environment etc.
Just waiting for a picture on a magazine cover of Boris and Carrie curled up together on a bed with a Union Jack duvet cover. Sorry for that grim image.
I also think that the fact that Government is essentially AWOL at the moment deserves more comment. If things were in fine shape then sure, everyone in politics could take August off. But Zahawi's comment that nobody is going to get any help for a month because Boris is away (where?) and decisions must await the new leader is quite unnerving. We should have a Government actively on the job until the moment when we have a new one. No private ubsiness would be run like this - "oh, we've not recruited the new CEO yet, so we won't take any decisions about the building that on fire."
Jake Berry on Sky News. Truss to offer hope not handouts.
And will the energy companies accept "hope" in payment for providing heating?
The strange thing is we all know the reality is that they will need to offer massive subsidies on heating this winter. Why not get ahead of the curve and own it rather than spend the next three months saying help is a bad thing and then do a last minute u-turn?
There is something very frivolous about this campaign. They are not addressing the very real concerns people have and are making ludicrous promises to a narrow group people that will either harm the rest of us or that they will have to break pretty soon after taking office.
It is fundamentally unserious.
FWIW Husband is voting Sunak. But with no enthusiasm at all. Like choosing between being infested with fleas or lice.
I haven’t watched the debates or hustings but on your concern about the frivolity wouldn’t it be helpful if the questioners asked detailed questions about key issues of the CofL instead of asking “what’s the naughtiest thing you’ve done” or “did you stab Boris in the back”?
It really doesn’t help that the media seems to be as childish as politics these days and as I wrote earlier, a return to the country being boring and serious would be welcome.
I remember that not that long ago the BBC put the no confidence debate from 1979 - which I vaguely remember as a child - up on iPlayer, and it is staggering to realise how serious and skilled (in terms of both the content and the technique of the debate) politics was back then. Similarly the sort of political programmes we got on the media - such as Walden's Weekend World with its weekly half hour analysis of some topical political issue followed by an in-depth long-interview with the politician responsible.
A little while ago I watched a 70s political drama called 'Bill Brand' ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Brand_(TV_series) ). It's remarkable in many ways - but one of the things that caught my attention was even in the dramatisation the political TV interviews & discussions are *serious*. The interviewer isn't trying to just get a gotcha! moment, or bickering about 'you said "potato" but your colleague said "potatoe"! What about that, eh?".
Well worth a watch.
I remember it quite well - Trevor Griffith's - a real socialist - wrote it. As a young man, I had quite a crush on Cherie Lunghi, who played Brand's lover.
The #UkrainianArmy is preparing to participate in the #Kherson referendum. We believe the vote will be nothing short of decisive. https://t.co/goNi3qaJEH
This is a column of Polish upgraded T72 tanks, and by the look of the fields a recent one, in broad daylight and ostensibly in Kherson Oblast. It is the new Tank Brigade, clearly not afraid of being seen or bombed.
Both sides are keying up Kherson to be the next battle. The Russians have shifted 20 or so BTGs from the Donbas too.
I think that the Ukranians choose to fight the next battle there, away from the urban areas of the Donbas, and with short supply lines of their own, and long, tenuous and vulnerable Russian supply lines, with the rivers and bridges limiting the Russian ability to counter manoeuvre. I expect targeted attrition of the Russians rather than an all out assault on Kherson City. Amnesty International should approve.
No, they'll accuse the Ukrainians of breaking international law by denying supplies to the Russians. I really don't know what planet Agnes Callamard is on.
Pro-Russian opinion is surprisingly common in France.
It's probably a holdover from the says when France had a very large and electorally successful communist party. Most ex-communists now vote RN.
In the runoff v Macron maybe, otherwise they would vote for Melenchon who is anti NATO as well as hard left
A lot of industrial seats that were once communist strongholds in the North, now vote RN.
I wonder if there's a bit more to it than that.
There's a strong current of opinion in France that believes they and Russia should be the leading powers that bookend Europe to contain Germany.
The French fought against the Russians in the Crimean War, but otherwise I think they'd always been friendly. There's a bit of a wider precedent for this, as I believe it was the French who were the first Western Christian power to do a deal with the Ottoman Empire - again, for the purpose of finding an ally against the Germans.
It sometimes seem to be the case that when people criticise a flaw that they see in others, it's because they recognise something in themselves. I wonder whether the French accusation of Perfidious Albion is as much a reflection of French behaviour as British?
This is a rather depressing thread. The key point, for me, anyways, is that there will be a group, and you can argue how big it will be, who simply will be unable to make ends meet this winter. Which means either their energy, rent, or Council Tax, or all, will not be paid. Not due to fecklessness, but because their income simply won't cover all of it. Tax cuts aren't relevant here. What is proposed to be done? Cos someone, somewhere, won't be getting paid? In several weeks of a leadership campaign, I haven't heard this question asked in those terms, let alone answered.
We'll see what happens with the emergency Budget.
I don't have much sense of whether the non-payment campaign is getting any traction. I've seen some discussion of it around, and people are very nervous of trashing their credit record.
If that does take-off then I'd expect a lot more energy company failures, which under the regulations, will result in the government stepping in and providing financing to ensure they can keep operating, and keep paying for energy imports.
The difficulty is then around people on pre-payment meters. If the non-payment campaign takes off and gains all the media attention, the people on pre-payment meters are really going to suffer.
You can, of course, build a political strategy centred on lies and delusions. But you cannot run a successful economy on the back of them. This is the problem Liz Truss faces. The real world is unforgiving. And it’s fast approaching.
Which is the real tragedy of the demise of the clown; the Tories have learned nothing from it, at all.
You see, posts like this make me want to re-vote for Truss. I still have my paper ballot.
It's noteworthy that all the anti-Truss comments on here are from non-Tories, and similar with 'likes' for Rishi.
That makes me wonder if I made the right decision.
Sunak could win the next election. Truss cannot. So it depends if you want to be a purist and lose or not...
Apart from Leon, who is hoping she will make BDSM compulsory, do we actually have any Truss supporters in here?
Bartholomew is the big Truss fan. I'm surprised there aren't more.
Given the hard time they'd get if they posted here there'll be lurking/staying silent.
This board hates Truss.
Andrew Neil has a good take on this. It’s a good take because it agrees with what I’ve been saying for weeks!
Rishi is the ‘blob’ candidate, and the same blob that got Johnson are coming for Truss straight away
“But it is not Starmer Truss has to worry about. It is what is best described as the Left Blob, which is now omnipresent in British public life, dominant in the citadels of power, including most of the media (above all the broadcasters), the Civil Service, the NHS, the legal system (including the judiciary), education (especially the universities), social media, most public bodies and private charities.”
You forgot to mention the Illuminati, the deep state conspiracy and the lizard aliens?
The Tories have been in power for 12 years and are still convinced a "Left Blob" runs the country. It is a bonkers obsession that just shows up their delusional paranoia and insecurity.
If the leftish blob truly rules the government after 12 years of Tory govt then the entire set of Tory MPs over that time should resign en masse for gross incompetence.
Yeah but, it's the predominantly left wing media and socio-political undercurrents on social media and in life, like leftie teachers ( @ydoethur has a lot of explaining to do) and university lecturers who delivered us both Vote Leave and Johnson victories.
If Andrew Neil rounded up the entire leftie blob and sent it to a Siberian Gulag, he would still have a problem with left-wingers undermining Tory Governments.
They can start with the real left-wingers, then get to work on dangerous centerists like myself, and finish up by getting HY to go through the Tory membership list crossing off all those who aren't proper Tories. That should throw up lots of people to dig a very long canal to somewhere.
Comments
The key point, for me, anyways, is that there will be a group, and you can argue how big it will be, who simply will be unable to make ends meet this winter. Which means either their energy, rent, or Council Tax, or all, will not be paid.
Not due to fecklessness, but because their income simply won't cover all of it. Tax cuts aren't relevant here.
What is proposed to be done? Cos someone, somewhere, won't be getting paid?
In several weeks of a leadership campaign, I haven't heard this question asked in those terms, let alone answered.
The more you use the more you pay per unit. For example
1000kwh £x / kwh
1001 to 2500kwh £x + 30% /kwh and so on
Make it cheap for smaller users and more per kwh for heavy consumers.
If Andrew Neil rounded up the entire leftie blob and sent it to a Siberian Gulag, he would still have a problem with left-wingers undermining Tory Governments.
For some unfathomable reason, Tory leaders can't say that subsidies are necessary or helpful even in extreme times.
So we will get told how we can't afford it, tough decisions need to be made, people need to make sacrifices.
Over time this position will unravel for the reasons you explain.
The govt will eventually pay or somehow subsidise 80%+ of the increase for the poorest and maybe 20-40% of the increase for the average Joe (or Josephine) and instantly forget all the arguments it has been making during the summer and autumn.
Oh wait, actually he appears to be in Aruba.
Part of the UK's problem is that, apart from a blip in 2013-4 (the only that meant EIC never became PM), we haven't had decent economic growth at all since 2008- it's never really been safe to tighten the screw.
It’s a bit like how the Government promised a world-leading health security agency, then cut the money, and now monkeypox is out of control. There’s no interest in doing things well.
A mistake.
The Conservative gains of 2019, and in particular the Conservative voters within them, tend to be neither deprived nor urban.
There are a few exceptions - Stoke Central especially - but overall they are rather more affluent and rural than the stereotypical view southerners like Mike have of old mining areas somewhere up the M1.
They also have no more inclination to have money spent on inner cities than do the residents of Tunbridge Wells.
That's because its downsides are now very apparent to me.
But, there's a strong strand of opinion in the Tory party that applies, "what would Thatcher do?" to any and every problem, as if it's still 1983, and dismisses any challenge with "Wet".
But there are millions of people who think they need higher house prices and/or think they are entitled to more foreign holidays.
Good research is rooted in engagement with the practitioners (teachers) and end users (pupils, families, society), so, yes, I think there is a place for (non-teaching) psychologists along side teachers and teacher-academics.
Also. If you break it down to ward level in the two I know best, Leigh and Blyth Valley, it is the relatively affluent and more rural bits of them that drove the Tory wins. New developments which wouldn't be out of place in Hertfordshire (apart from the prices).
Sunak, I think, would give us a run for our money and lose quite narrowly, but he's a known quantity and one that I think we can definitely beat. Truss is an enigma, and therefore something of a worry for Labour, though IMO she's more likely to surprise on the downside and give Labour a really big win. Balancing the two, I think from the Labour viewpoint it's pretty much a coin-flip. Truss, though, is unpredictable enough to do some structural damage to the economy, or do something weird that none of us have thought of, so from the UK viewpoint she's probably the riskier choice.
Policies to (eg) hit the top 10% and (eg) protect the bottom quartile ought on the face of it to be popular since the winners outnumber the losers.
But there are 2 big problems with this. The top 10% are disproportionately influential in opinion setting. And political opponents will present as their alternative not a different way of spreading the pain but a pretence that it can be avoided - eg via "growing the economy" or "efficiencies" and the like.
Which sounds good so the votes go there.
https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/whats-on/whats-on-news/gallery/queues-greet-snackfest-bus-newcastle-24673367
It's unlikely she'd pursue identical policies today, even though her values would be similar, and the idiots seems to forget that.
They paved paradise and put up a parking lot".
Well worth a watch.
As can other things such as age and location.
But generally there will be a trend of more holidays among the more affluent.
WEN HATRED
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/800-families-facing-tough-times-to-be-offered-holidays
I've no complaints about that as it seems like a socially and economically effective piece of spending.
But I hope its not given more publicity or everyone will end up feeling they're entitled to a taxpayer funded holiday.
I've just about got over it.
It sometimes seem to be the case that when people criticise a flaw that they see in others, it's because they recognise something in themselves. I wonder whether the French accusation of Perfidious Albion is as much a reflection of French behaviour as British?
I don't have much sense of whether the non-payment campaign is getting any traction. I've seen some discussion of it around, and people are very nervous of trashing their credit record.
If that does take-off then I'd expect a lot more energy company failures, which under the regulations, will result in the government stepping in and providing financing to ensure they can keep operating, and keep paying for energy imports.
The difficulty is then around people on pre-payment meters. If the non-payment campaign takes off and gains all the media attention, the people on pre-payment meters are really going to suffer.