Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

The first post leadership polling not good for Truss – politicalbetting.com

245678

Comments

  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 19,932

    BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    So another loan scheme, this time mortgaging our children.

    Is cynical to believe that 2 years is in scope because Labour offered 1 year. Are they really that petty? Surely not.
  • kle4 said:

    Taz said:

    Foxy said:

    It's started.


    I expect that it will be a modest turnout. I am working this weekend, otherwise might have made the effort.
    Why would the EU take us back ?
    Net contributer.

    But it'd take several generations at least I think.
    I think you need to see forty-point leads for rejoin in opinion polls before the EU would risk it.
  • I like your talking points, nicely put!
    I remember the Farnham Herald from when we used to spend our summers at my grandparents' house. Frencham Pond, the Watercress Line, the Maltings... Happy days.
  • Jonathan said:

    BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    So another loan scheme, this time mortgaging our children.

    Is cynical to believe that 2 years is in scope because Labour offered 1 year. Are they really that petty? Surely not.
    Labour offered six months until April 23, and as I said earlier this scheme seems similar to the one Sturgeon supports and the one Germany has just put in place
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670

    Alistair said:

    I'm sure it's nothing to worry about but Binance have decided to auto-convert users stable coin assets into it's own stablecoin BUSD. I'm sure this happening after Binance has been seeing sustained massive withdrawls of USDC is a coincidence and everything is fine.

    https://www.binance.com/en/support/announcement/e62f703604a94538a1f1bc803b2d579f
    https://twitter.com/binance/status/1566818107758460929

    You're such a cynic.
    To be fair they said it was to help with liquidity. I forget if they said it was customers' liquidity that would be improved.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 36,825
    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    For a sense of how mad it is to look more than 10 years into the future, this is some stat

    China’s population is expected to halve - HALVE - by 2100, and the sharp decline starts now

    And at least ten other countries - big ones like Korea and Italy - are in the same boat

    https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1566806384838152193?s=21&t=MRZkjO8ld5QUWt5i1WHZeQ

    That's a lot of empty cities.
    Still a lot of people though.

    By 2100 the population of Africa will surpass that of Asia, and with global warming will mean massive migration to more temperate climes.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 30,637
    eek said:

    Leon said:

    2000 Dinghy People crossed at the weekend

    I quite like Priti Patel - or at least I weirdly fancy her - but she had one job, and she failed. Exeunt

    So how would you solve the problem in a way that doesn't break international and maritime law???
    Change the law. Quit the ECHR. Enact Rwanda

    The point about Rwanda is that you don’t actually have to send that many people. As soon as you start doing it with determination the boats will stop. No one will risk the crossing. Why pay £2000 and endanger your life only to end up in Africa?

    Is it cruel? Yes, no doubt. Does it stop something that simply cannot go on? Also yes. It is a necessary evil
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 8,574

    kle4 said:

    Taz said:

    Foxy said:

    It's started.


    I expect that it will be a modest turnout. I am working this weekend, otherwise might have made the effort.
    Why would the EU take us back ?
    Net contributer.

    But it'd take several generations at least I think.
    I think you need to see forty-point leads for rejoin in opinion polls before the EU would risk it.
    Didn't the EU recently ban new currencies from joiner nations or some similar thing?
  • eekeek Posts: 22,078
    Leon said:

    eek said:

    Leon said:

    2000 Dinghy People crossed at the weekend

    I quite like Priti Patel - or at least I weirdly fancy her - but she had one job, and she failed. Exeunt

    So how would you solve the problem in a way that doesn't break international and maritime law???
    Change the law. Quit the ECHR. Enact Rwanda

    The point about Rwanda is that you don’t actually have to send that many people. As soon as you start doing it with determination the boats will stop. No one will risk the crossing. Why pay £2000 and endanger your life only to end up in Africa?

    Is it cruel? Yes, no doubt. Does it stop something that simply cannot go on? Also yes. It is a necessary evil
    Enact Rwanda where we have been granted the right to send how many hundreds of refugees????
  • LeonLeon Posts: 30,637
    I guess one other solution to the Dinghy People would be the Texan Solution. Send them all to Scotland, which professes to want migrants desperately

    Well, here they are, Nicola

    Trouble is, most of them would rather be beheaded than live in Scotland. And who can blame them

    https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/8113251/afghanistan-refugee-taliban-scotland/
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    Jonathan said:

    BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    So another loan scheme, this time mortgaging our children.

    Is cynical to believe that 2 years is in scope because Labour offered 1 year. Are they really that petty? Surely not.
    It may look petty to you, from here. People who are no keener on freezing to death in 23-24 than they are in 22-23 will regard it as pretty substantial. The fact it makes SKS look a short sighted dick is a bonus.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 30,637
    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    For a sense of how mad it is to look more than 10 years into the future, this is some stat

    China’s population is expected to halve - HALVE - by 2100, and the sharp decline starts now

    And at least ten other countries - big ones like Korea and Italy - are in the same boat

    https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1566806384838152193?s=21&t=MRZkjO8ld5QUWt5i1WHZeQ

    That's a lot of empty cities.
    Still a lot of people though.

    By 2100 the population of Africa will surpass that of Asia, and with global warming will mean massive migration to more temperate climes.
    And what would you do about it?
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 19,932

    Jonathan said:

    BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    So another loan scheme, this time mortgaging our children.

    Is cynical to believe that 2 years is in scope because Labour offered 1 year. Are they really that petty? Surely not.
    Labour offered six months until April 23, and as I said earlier this scheme seems similar to the one Sturgeon supports and the one Germany has just put in place
    A massive transfer of wealth from the tax payer to the energy firms in the next two years to be paid back in future by the energy bill payer?

    Terrific.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 11,576
    Taz said:

    Foxy said:

    It's started.


    I expect that it will be a modest turnout. I am working this weekend, otherwise might have made the effort.
    Why would the EU take us back ?
    Because we would increase the size of the single market, and add to the spending money through contributions. You’d imagine they’d want to make it a bit harder to get cold feet though.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 36,825

    Foxy said:

    It's started.


    I expect that it will be a modest turnout. I am working this weekend, otherwise might have made the effort.
    Shame. The rage filled afternoon of some folk arguing over the numbers attending that big pro EU march in London was one of the highlights of Brexit.
    I didn't make the first surprisingly large march, but glad I made the two later marches. A great atmosphere and a real pleasure.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,650

    Jonathan said:

    BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    So another loan scheme, this time mortgaging our children.

    Is cynical to believe that 2 years is in scope because Labour offered 1 year. Are they really that petty? Surely not.
    Labour offered six months until April 23, and as I said earlier this scheme seems similar to the one Sturgeon supports and the one Germany has just put in place
    Starmer went too early and too shallow.
    From April 'your bills would be 4 etc times bigger under Labour'
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 19,932
    edited September 2022
    IshmaelZ said:

    Jonathan said:

    BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    So another loan scheme, this time mortgaging our children.

    Is cynical to believe that 2 years is in scope because Labour offered 1 year. Are they really that petty? Surely not.
    It may look petty to you, from here. People who are no keener on freezing to death in 23-24 than they are in 22-23 will regard it as pretty substantial. The fact it makes SKS look a short sighted dick is a bonus.
    Bless. Someone’s having a bad day. Sympathies.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 11,576
    Jonathan said:

    BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    So another loan scheme, this time mortgaging our children.

    Is cynical to believe that 2 years is in scope because Labour offered 1 year. Are they really that petty? Surely not.
    More likely a pragmatic realisation that the gas supply issue won’t be solved in a year. And the election in May 2024 will be held within the two year freeze.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 36,825
    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    For a sense of how mad it is to look more than 10 years into the future, this is some stat

    China’s population is expected to halve - HALVE - by 2100, and the sharp decline starts now

    And at least ten other countries - big ones like Korea and Italy - are in the same boat

    https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1566806384838152193?s=21&t=MRZkjO8ld5QUWt5i1WHZeQ

    That's a lot of empty cities.
    Still a lot of people though.

    By 2100 the population of Africa will surpass that of Asia, and with global warming will mean massive migration to more temperate climes.
    And what would you do about it?
    I don't think we can do much about it. I think we are too late to stop global climate change.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 30,637
    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    It's started.


    I expect that it will be a modest turnout. I am working this weekend, otherwise might have made the effort.
    Shame. The rage filled afternoon of some folk arguing over the numbers attending that big pro EU march in London was one of the highlights of Brexit.
    I didn't make the first surprisingly large march, but glad I made the two later marches. A great atmosphere and a real pleasure.
    And an utterly tragic waste of time, which paradoxically ensured we got a Hard Hard Brexit, as Remoanery people like you tried to cancel a democratic vote, sending Leavers understandably insane

    Well done. Really. Well done
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 82,567
    Shed a tear

    Footnote. The number of spoilt ballots, 654, was not much higher than 509 in 2019. So much for the Boris write-in campaign

    https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1566833665329565701?cxt=HHwWisC8wdm6wb4rAAAA
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 82,567
    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    For a sense of how mad it is to look more than 10 years into the future, this is some stat

    China’s population is expected to halve - HALVE - by 2100, and the sharp decline starts now

    And at least ten other countries - big ones like Korea and Italy - are in the same boat

    https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1566806384838152193?s=21&t=MRZkjO8ld5QUWt5i1WHZeQ

    That's a lot of empty cities.
    Still a lot of people though.

    By 2100 the population of Africa will surpass that of Asia, and with global warming will mean massive migration to more temperate climes.
    And what would you do about it?
    I don't think we can do much about it. I think we are too late to stop global climate change.
    I'm just hoping the major crisis hits home after I'm dead.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 30,637
    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    For a sense of how mad it is to look more than 10 years into the future, this is some stat

    China’s population is expected to halve - HALVE - by 2100, and the sharp decline starts now

    And at least ten other countries - big ones like Korea and Italy - are in the same boat

    https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1566806384838152193?s=21&t=MRZkjO8ld5QUWt5i1WHZeQ

    That's a lot of empty cities.
    Still a lot of people though.

    By 2100 the population of Africa will surpass that of Asia, and with global warming will mean massive migration to more temperate climes.
    And what would you do about it?
    I don't think we can do much about it. I think we are too late to stop global climate change.
    And the migrants? Are we also helpless?
  • Jonathan said:

    BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    So another loan scheme, this time mortgaging our children.

    Is cynical to believe that 2 years is in scope because Labour offered 1 year. Are they really that petty? Surely not.
    Labour offered six months until April 23, and as I said earlier this scheme seems similar to the one Sturgeon supports and the one Germany has just put in place
    So the taxpayer subsidises millionaire footballers’ energy bills rather than the excess profits of energy companies doing it. You must be outraged!

  • Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    It's started.


    I expect that it will be a modest turnout. I am working this weekend, otherwise might have made the effort.
    Shame. The rage filled afternoon of some folk arguing over the numbers attending that big pro EU march in London was one of the highlights of Brexit.
    I didn't make the first surprisingly large march, but glad I made the two later marches. A great atmosphere and a real pleasure.
    And an utterly tragic waste of time, which paradoxically ensured we got a Hard Hard Brexit, as Remoanery people like you tried to cancel a democratic vote, sending Leavers understandably insane

    Well done. Really. Well done
    We got a hard Brexit because of Theresa May's red lines and Boris Johnson's opportunism. No other principal reason.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 19,932

    Jonathan said:

    BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    So another loan scheme, this time mortgaging our children.

    Is cynical to believe that 2 years is in scope because Labour offered 1 year. Are they really that petty? Surely not.
    Labour offered six months until April 23, and as I said earlier this scheme seems similar to the one Sturgeon supports and the one Germany has just put in place
    Starmer went too early and too shallow.
    From April 'your bills would be 4 etc times bigger under Labour'
    Good luck with that one. Easy to deal with. Peoples bills were significantly lower under Labour when inflation was kept low. The only reason they’re capped at all is because Labour forced the issue. The Tories have mortgaged your children rather than deal with excess profits.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 82,567
    edited September 2022

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    It's started.


    I expect that it will be a modest turnout. I am working this weekend, otherwise might have made the effort.
    Shame. The rage filled afternoon of some folk arguing over the numbers attending that big pro EU march in London was one of the highlights of Brexit.
    I didn't make the first surprisingly large march, but glad I made the two later marches. A great atmosphere and a real pleasure.
    And an utterly tragic waste of time, which paradoxically ensured we got a Hard Hard Brexit, as Remoanery people like you tried to cancel a democratic vote, sending Leavers understandably insane

    Well done. Really. Well done
    We got a hard Brexit because of Theresa May's red lines and Boris Johnson's opportunism. No other principal reason.
    Ah, Leon's got half a point on this one. There were people willing to compromise, and could have overruled May's red lines, we saw parliament nearly do so, but there was a gang of extremists to match the ERG who decided to bet everything on winning it all. It was not coincidence that saw them walking through the lobbies with Rees-Mogg and Baker.

    That's not blame, its explanation.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 18,696

    BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    Depends on the level of the cap.

    But yeah, make millennials pay for it. Again.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    For a sense of how mad it is to look more than 10 years into the future, this is some stat

    China’s population is expected to halve - HALVE - by 2100, and the sharp decline starts now

    And at least ten other countries - big ones like Korea and Italy - are in the same boat

    https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1566806384838152193?s=21&t=MRZkjO8ld5QUWt5i1WHZeQ

    That's a lot of empty cities.
    Still a lot of people though.

    By 2100 the population of Africa will surpass that of Asia, and with global warming will mean massive migration to more temperate climes.
    And what would you do about it?
    I don't think we can do much about it. I think we are too late to stop global climate change.
    And the migrants? Are we also helpless?
    Last night to the flicks. All war films. One very good one of a ship full of refugees being bombed somewhere in the Mediterranean. Audience much amused by shots of a great huge fat man trying to swim away with a helicopter after him, first you saw him wallowing along in the water like a porpoise, then you saw him through the helicopters gunsights, then he was full of holes and the sea round him turned pink and he sank as suddenly as though the holes had let in the water, audience shouting with laughter when he sank. then you saw a lifeboat full of children with a helicopter hovering over it. there was a middle-aged woman might have been a jewess sitting up in the bow with a little boy about three years old in her arms. little boy screaming with fright and hiding his head between her breasts as if he was trying to burrow right into her and the woman putting her arms round him and comforting him although she was blue with fright herself, all the time covering him up as much as possible as if she thought her arms could keep the bullets off him. then the helicopter planted a 20 kilo bomb in among them terrific flash and the boat went all to matchwood. Then there was a wonderful shot of a child’s arm going up up up right up into the air a helicopter with a camera in its nose must have followed it up and there was a lot of applause from the party seats.
  • I wonder what the Queen will make of The Truss. I expect Truss to be very slightly frightened of her, despite having been a republican earlier on.

    Surely “because of” not “despite”…
  • Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    It's started.


    I expect that it will be a modest turnout. I am working this weekend, otherwise might have made the effort.
    Shame. The rage filled afternoon of some folk arguing over the numbers attending that big pro EU march in London was one of the highlights of Brexit.
    I didn't make the first surprisingly large march, but glad I made the two later marches. A great atmosphere and a real pleasure.
    And an utterly tragic waste of time, which paradoxically ensured we got a Hard Hard Brexit, as Remoanery people like you tried to cancel a democratic vote, sending Leavers understandably insane

    Well done. Really. Well done
    If Brexit is so good, why do Leavers keep trying to blame Remainers for it?
    I've not seen anyone do that in those terms, but surely it's a fair cop to blame unreconciled Remainers for the ongoing division, just as it was fair to blame Eurosceptics for stoking division while we were members.

    It will be interesting to see what the attendance is like for the march, but it's unlikely to come anywhere near the ones when Brexit was a live issue.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 36,825
    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    For a sense of how mad it is to look more than 10 years into the future, this is some stat

    China’s population is expected to halve - HALVE - by 2100, and the sharp decline starts now

    And at least ten other countries - big ones like Korea and Italy - are in the same boat

    https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1566806384838152193?s=21&t=MRZkjO8ld5QUWt5i1WHZeQ

    That's a lot of empty cities.
    Still a lot of people though.

    By 2100 the population of Africa will surpass that of Asia, and with global warming will mean massive migration to more temperate climes.
    And what would you do about it?
    I don't think we can do much about it. I think we are too late to stop global climate change.
    And the migrants? Are we also helpless?
    In practice, yes.

    These are people who walk across deserts, who travel across Med and Channel in overcrowded dinghies.

    The only viable way is to fine employers of illegal immigrants in a Swiss style system, but we should also encourage legal migration of appropriately qualified people.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 30,637
    edited September 2022

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    It's started.


    I expect that it will be a modest turnout. I am working this weekend, otherwise might have made the effort.
    Shame. The rage filled afternoon of some folk arguing over the numbers attending that big pro EU march in London was one of the highlights of Brexit.
    I didn't make the first surprisingly large march, but glad I made the two later marches. A great atmosphere and a real pleasure.
    And an utterly tragic waste of time, which paradoxically ensured we got a Hard Hard Brexit, as Remoanery people like you tried to cancel a democratic vote, sending Leavers understandably insane

    Well done. Really. Well done
    We got a hard Brexit because of Theresa May's red lines and Boris Johnson's opportunism. No other principal reason.
    i was going to type a long angry reply to this, but hey

    I’m drinking a MAHOOHOOHOOHOOHOOHOOHOOHOOSIVE gin and tonic on a delightful Portuguese patio, with a distant view of the sea. A fountain plays. Life, for the moment, is sweet. We Brexited. And they just brought me brilliant nibbles

    Rejoice




  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 43,344
    edited September 2022
    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    For a sense of how mad it is to look more than 10 years into the future, this is some stat

    China’s population is expected to halve - HALVE - by 2100, and the sharp decline starts now

    And at least ten other countries - big ones like Korea and Italy - are in the same boat

    https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1566806384838152193?s=21&t=MRZkjO8ld5QUWt5i1WHZeQ

    That's a lot of empty cities.
    Still a lot of people though.

    By 2100 the population of Africa will surpass that of Asia, and with global warming will mean massive migration to more temperate climes.
    And what would you do about it?
    I don't think we can do much about it. I think we are too late to stop global climate change.
    And the migrants? Are we also helpless?
    In practice, yes.

    These are people who walk across deserts, who travel across Med and Channel in overcrowded dinghies.

    The only viable way is to fine employers of illegal immigrants in a Swiss style system, but we should also encourage legal migration of appropriately qualified people.
    "In practice" means "given the constraints that we place upon ourselves", but those are voluntary. If we seriously wanted to stop it then we could.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 11,576

    BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    Depends on the level of the cap.

    But yeah, make millennials pay for it. Again.

    Yes. And then when you are old and grey your kids and grandkids will pay (and moan about it) for you. That’s why national economics is not the same as household budgets.
  • Jonathan said:

    BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    So another loan scheme, this time mortgaging our children.

    Is cynical to believe that 2 years is in scope because Labour offered 1 year. Are they really that petty? Surely not.
    Labour offered six months until April 23, and as I said earlier this scheme seems similar to the one Sturgeon supports and the one Germany has just put in place
    Starmer went too early and too shallow.
    From April 'your bills would be 4 etc times bigger under Labour'
    And they are refusing to lay out a response to what happens in April when domestic bills rise to £6,000
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 7,459
    edited September 2022
    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    It's started.


    I expect that it will be a modest turnout. I am working this weekend, otherwise might have made the effort.
    Shame. The rage filled afternoon of some folk arguing over the numbers attending that big pro EU march in London was one of the highlights of Brexit.
    I didn't make the first surprisingly large march, but glad I made the two later marches. A great atmosphere and a real pleasure.
    And an utterly tragic waste of time, which paradoxically ensured we got a Hard Hard Brexit, as Remoanery people like you tried to cancel a democratic vote, sending Leavers understandably insane

    Well done. Really. Well done
    We got a hard Brexit because of Theresa May's red lines and Boris Johnson's opportunism. No other principal reason.
    Ah, Leon's got half a point on this one. There were people willing to compromise, and could have overruled May's red lines, we saw parliament nearly do so, but there was a gang of extremists to match the ERG who decided to bet everything on winning it all. It was not coincidence that saw them walking through the lobbies with Rees-Mogg and Baker.
    That's to rewrite history. Grieve and the others only came in when May had already sufficiently caved in to the extremists on her side to be threatening no-deal as a negotiating tactic, and even then it was entirely a internal Tory affair of the ERG exerting greater influence than the One Nation group, later to be thrown out by Johnson. The only significant supplement to that was Corbyn offering no olive-branch to the remainers within the Tory Party, so in fact the forces of a more moderate Brexit were too weakly, rather than too strongly, organised throughout the Commons,
  • Jonathan Pie on great form for the NYT.

    https://twitter.com/nytopinion/status/1566773151819653120?s=21&t=LJbqJGlrBttIs6yoG0RtPw

    I’ll put Iain Martin down as ‘maybe’.

  • nico679nico679 Posts: 2,641
    If the UK was to leave the ECHR this would be a breach of the GFA .

    I know recent Tory governments don’t really care how many Treaties they trash but this would cause huge problems in NI .
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 18,696

    BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    Depends on the level of the cap.

    But yeah, make millennials pay for it. Again.

    Yes. And then when you are old and grey your kids and grandkids will pay (and moan about it) for you. That’s why national economics is not the same as household budgets.
    Rubbish. The middle aged and retired have been piling peacetime debt upon the young for nigh on 30 years.

    It isn’t sustainable.
  • Jonathan said:

    BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    So another loan scheme, this time mortgaging our children.

    Is cynical to believe that 2 years is in scope because Labour offered 1 year. Are they really that petty? Surely not.
    Labour offered six months until April 23, and as I said earlier this scheme seems similar to the one Sturgeon supports and the one Germany has just put in place
    So the taxpayer subsidises millionaire footballers’ energy bills rather than the excess profits of energy companies doing it. You must be outraged!

    As you know I want targeted help but they can be dealt with through the tax system
  • Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    It's started.


    I expect that it will be a modest turnout. I am working this weekend, otherwise might have made the effort.
    Shame. The rage filled afternoon of some folk arguing over the numbers attending that big pro EU march in London was one of the highlights of Brexit.
    I didn't make the first surprisingly large march, but glad I made the two later marches. A great atmosphere and a real pleasure.
    And an utterly tragic waste of time, which paradoxically ensured we got a Hard Hard Brexit, as Remoanery people like you tried to cancel a democratic vote, sending Leavers understandably insane

    Well done. Really. Well done
    When do you lot expect to recover your sanity? A wee dab of ECT perhaps?
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 3,232
    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    For a sense of how mad it is to look more than 10 years into the future, this is some stat

    China’s population is expected to halve - HALVE - by 2100, and the sharp decline starts now

    And at least ten other countries - big ones like Korea and Italy - are in the same boat

    https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1566806384838152193?s=21&t=MRZkjO8ld5QUWt5i1WHZeQ

    That's a lot of empty cities.
    Still a lot of people though.

    By 2100 the population of Africa will surpass that of Asia, and with global warming will mean massive migration to more temperate climes.
    And what would you do about it?
    I don't think we can do much about it. I think we are too late to stop global climate change.
    And the migrants? Are we also helpless?
    Essentially yes. There's a whole lot of empty rhetoric about putting a stop to irregular migration, but no likely UK Government - Tory or otherwise - is prepared to be nasty enough to do anything truly effective about the problem. The politicians know it and so do the migrants, which is why the flow continues entirely unchecked.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,650

    Jonathan said:

    BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    So another loan scheme, this time mortgaging our children.

    Is cynical to believe that 2 years is in scope because Labour offered 1 year. Are they really that petty? Surely not.
    Labour offered six months until April 23, and as I said earlier this scheme seems similar to the one Sturgeon supports and the one Germany has just put in place
    Starmer went too early and too shallow.
    From April 'your bills would be 4 etc times bigger under Labour'
    And they are refusing to lay out a response to what happens in April when domestic bills rise to £6,000
    Oh to be fair they are offering to insulate a few houses by 2040 or something
  • nico679 said:

    If the UK was to leave the ECHR this would be a breach of the GFA .

    I know recent Tory governments don’t really care how many Treaties they trash but this would cause huge problems in NI .

    I believe it would be sufficient to retain the ECHR in NI law, which is a separate jurisdiction.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 11,576
    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    It's started.


    I expect that it will be a modest turnout. I am working this weekend, otherwise might have made the effort.
    Shame. The rage filled afternoon of some folk arguing over the numbers attending that big pro EU march in London was one of the highlights of Brexit.
    I didn't make the first surprisingly large march, but glad I made the two later marches. A great atmosphere and a real pleasure.
    And an utterly tragic waste of time, which paradoxically ensured we got a Hard Hard Brexit, as Remoanery people like you tried to cancel a democratic vote, sending Leavers understandably insane

    Well done. Really. Well done
    We got a hard Brexit because of Theresa May's red lines and Boris Johnson's opportunism. No other principal reason.
    Ah, Leon's got half a point on this one. There were people willing to compromise, and could have overruled May's red lines, we saw parliament nearly do so, but there was a gang of extremists to match the ERG who decided to bet everything on winning it all. It was not coincidence that saw them walking through the lobbies with Rees-Mogg and Baker.

    That's not blame, its explanation.
    When the history of the period is written with proper hindsight, Brexit, and the type of Brexit we got, will be shown to have had many parents. Absolutely some hardline remainers gambled everything on overturning the vote, and as a result ended up with the situation we have now. I think an awful lot of leavers didn’t want to leave the single market, just the political machinery of the EU.
    We are where we are. Future governments can take a different direction.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 30,637
    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    For a sense of how mad it is to look more than 10 years into the future, this is some stat

    China’s population is expected to halve - HALVE - by 2100, and the sharp decline starts now

    And at least ten other countries - big ones like Korea and Italy - are in the same boat

    https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1566806384838152193?s=21&t=MRZkjO8ld5QUWt5i1WHZeQ

    That's a lot of empty cities.
    Still a lot of people though.

    By 2100 the population of Africa will surpass that of Asia, and with global warming will mean massive migration to more temperate climes.
    And what would you do about it?
    I don't think we can do much about it. I think we are too late to stop global climate change.
    And the migrants? Are we also helpless?
    In practice, yes.

    These are people who walk across deserts, who travel across Med and Channel in overcrowded dinghies.

    The only viable way is to fine employers of illegal immigrants in a Swiss style system, but we should also encourage legal migration of appropriately qualified people.
    To be fair, you are honest. That’s creditable


    The people who annoy me are the wets who pretend there is some really easy fix - “be nicer to France”, “check employee status” - which for some obscure reason we are not doing. There is no easy fix. Every viable fix is going to hurt people

    Yours would hurt British people and regular migrants, as the borders are essentially opened. Mine would hurt the dinghy people and those that profit from them
  • Jonathan said:

    BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    So another loan scheme, this time mortgaging our children.

    Is cynical to believe that 2 years is in scope because Labour offered 1 year. Are they really that petty? Surely not.
    Labour offered six months until April 23, and as I said earlier this scheme seems similar to the one Sturgeon supports and the one Germany has just put in place
    Starmer went too early and too shallow.
    From April 'your bills would be 4 etc times bigger under Labour'
    And they are refusing to lay out a response to what happens in April when domestic bills rise to £6,000
    Oh to be fair they are offering to insulate a few houses by 2040 or something
    If they can find the labour force - the demand is presently through the roof ( excuse the pun)
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    Jonathan said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Jonathan said:

    BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    So another loan scheme, this time mortgaging our children.

    Is cynical to believe that 2 years is in scope because Labour offered 1 year. Are they really that petty? Surely not.
    It may look petty to you, from here. People who are no keener on freezing to death in 23-24 than they are in 22-23 will regard it as pretty substantial. The fact it makes SKS look a short sighted dick is a bonus.
    Bless. Someone’s having a bad day. Sympathies.
    Yes. I would be tetchy too if I realised I supported a party leader who has just been effortlessly outplayed by liz bloody truss on her first day in the office. Don't you think it looks a bit half-arsed to propose to solve a 22-24 problem with a plan which dies of ehaustion half way through 23?
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,650

    Jonathan said:

    BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    So another loan scheme, this time mortgaging our children.

    Is cynical to believe that 2 years is in scope because Labour offered 1 year. Are they really that petty? Surely not.
    Labour offered six months until April 23, and as I said earlier this scheme seems similar to the one Sturgeon supports and the one Germany has just put in place
    Starmer went too early and too shallow.
    From April 'your bills would be 4 etc times bigger under Labour'
    And they are refusing to lay out a response to what happens in April when domestic bills rise to £6,000
    Oh to be fair they are offering to insulate a few houses by 2040 or something
    If they can find the labour force - the demand is presently through the roof ( excuse the pun)
    Poor old Keir, what a shame
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 19,932
    A bill of 90 billion to tie this in with the electoral cycle. For an electorate of roughly 45 million that’s two grand per vote. Truss is expensive.
  • Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    For a sense of how mad it is to look more than 10 years into the future, this is some stat

    China’s population is expected to halve - HALVE - by 2100, and the sharp decline starts now

    And at least ten other countries - big ones like Korea and Italy - are in the same boat

    https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1566806384838152193?s=21&t=MRZkjO8ld5QUWt5i1WHZeQ

    That's a lot of empty cities.
    Still a lot of people though.

    By 2100 the population of Africa will surpass that of Asia, and with global warming will mean massive migration to more temperate climes.
    And what would you do about it?
    I don't think we can do much about it. I think we are too late to stop global climate change.
    And the migrants? Are we also helpless?
    Why not just embrace them? They seem keen to be here and Liz Truss says the British are all slackers so we could probably do with a few extra hands to the pump.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 8,574
    IshmaelZ said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    For a sense of how mad it is to look more than 10 years into the future, this is some stat

    China’s population is expected to halve - HALVE - by 2100, and the sharp decline starts now

    And at least ten other countries - big ones like Korea and Italy - are in the same boat

    https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1566806384838152193?s=21&t=MRZkjO8ld5QUWt5i1WHZeQ

    That's a lot of empty cities.
    Still a lot of people though.

    By 2100 the population of Africa will surpass that of Asia, and with global warming will mean massive migration to more temperate climes.
    And what would you do about it?
    I don't think we can do much about it. I think we are too late to stop global climate change.
    And the migrants? Are we also helpless?
    Last night to the flicks. All war films. One very good one of a ship full of refugees being bombed somewhere in the Mediterranean. Audience much amused by shots of a great huge fat man trying to swim away with a helicopter after him, first you saw him wallowing along in the water like a porpoise, then you saw him through the helicopters gunsights, then he was full of holes and the sea round him turned pink and he sank as suddenly as though the holes had let in the water, audience shouting with laughter when he sank. then you saw a lifeboat full of children with a helicopter hovering over it. there was a middle-aged woman might have been a jewess sitting up in the bow with a little boy about three years old in her arms. little boy screaming with fright and hiding his head between her breasts as if he was trying to burrow right into her and the woman putting her arms round him and comforting him although she was blue with fright herself, all the time covering him up as much as possible as if she thought her arms could keep the bullets off him. then the helicopter planted a 20 kilo bomb in among them terrific flash and the boat went all to matchwood. Then there was a wonderful shot of a child’s arm going up up up right up into the air a helicopter with a camera in its nose must have followed it up and there was a lot of applause from the party seats.
    Why are you writing in the tone of a war diary?
  • Jonathan said:

    BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    So another loan scheme, this time mortgaging our children.

    Is cynical to believe that 2 years is in scope because Labour offered 1 year. Are they really that petty? Surely not.
    Labour offered six months until April 23, and as I said earlier this scheme seems similar to the one Sturgeon supports and the one Germany has just put in place
    So the taxpayer subsidises millionaire footballers’ energy bills rather than the excess profits of energy companies doing it. You must be outraged!

    As you know I want targeted help but they can be dealt with through the tax system

    You said helping millionaire footballers via a windfall tax was immoral. Now, it looks like the government will be using taxpayers’ money to do it instead. So it’s us helping the footballers now, not the energy companies. It’s a big win for them.

  • ChrisChris Posts: 9,073

    BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    Do people in general believe the cost of energy is going to come down dramatically of its own accord? If they don't, a temporary freeze to be paid for by higher bills in five or ten years' time may not sound that great.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 107,356
    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    For a sense of how mad it is to look more than 10 years into the future, this is some stat

    China’s population is expected to halve - HALVE - by 2100, and the sharp decline starts now

    And at least ten other countries - big ones like Korea and Italy - are in the same boat

    https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1566806384838152193?s=21&t=MRZkjO8ld5QUWt5i1WHZeQ

    That's a lot of empty cities.
    Still a lot of people though.

    By 2100 the population of Africa will surpass that of Asia, and with global warming will mean massive migration to more temperate climes.
    And what would you do about it?
    I don't think we can do much about it. I think we are too late to stop global climate change.
    And the migrants? Are we also helpless?
    Essentially yes. There's a whole lot of empty rhetoric about putting a stop to irregular migration, but no likely UK Government - Tory or otherwise - is prepared to be nasty enough to do anything truly effective about the problem. The politicians know it and so do the migrants, which is why the flow continues entirely unchecked.
    And why Farage may yet return again to the fray
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,666

    BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    Depends on the level of the cap.

    But yeah, make millennials pay for it. Again.
    Bonus points if you in the same breath say that borrowing would be unfair on future generations!
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 2,641

    nico679 said:

    If the UK was to leave the ECHR this would be a breach of the GFA .

    I know recent Tory governments don’t really care how many Treaties they trash but this would cause huge problems in NI .

    I believe it would be sufficient to retain the ECHR in NI law, which is a separate jurisdiction.
    I don’t think that works because the government is getting rid of the HRA .
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 47,316
    Leon said:

    For a sense of how mad it is to look more than 10 years into the future, this is some stat

    China’s population is expected to halve - HALVE - by 2100, and the sharp decline starts now

    And at least ten other countries - big ones like Korea and Italy - are in the same boat

    https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1566806384838152193?s=21&t=MRZkjO8ld5QUWt5i1WHZeQ

    Korea is not very big, and solving their population problem would likely be a matter of allowing more immigration.
    The wild card would be reunification with the bankrupt North.
  • Chris said:

    BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    Do people in general believe the cost of energy is going to come down dramatically of its own accord? If they don't, a temporary freeze to be paid for by higher bills in five or ten years' time may not sound that great.
    The 2 years will be used to address supply issues including storage which has just received permission to restart at a cost of 1.5 billion

    I would just say so many on here admire Germany who have just implemented a similar scheme, but it is rubbish if it adopted by the UK
  • Foxy said:

    It's started.


    I expect that it will be a modest turnout. I am working this weekend, otherwise might have made the effort.
    I had lunch today with someone who works closely with hospital doctors

    He said that they are working lots of overtime despite the pension issues. He thought it might be the NHS is allowing them to use their service companies to bill anything above the level at which pensions become an issue

    That would be a remarkably creative solution… any views?
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 35,876
    edited September 2022
    Omnium said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    For a sense of how mad it is to look more than 10 years into the future, this is some stat

    China’s population is expected to halve - HALVE - by 2100, and the sharp decline starts now

    And at least ten other countries - big ones like Korea and Italy - are in the same boat

    https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1566806384838152193?s=21&t=MRZkjO8ld5QUWt5i1WHZeQ

    That's a lot of empty cities.
    Still a lot of people though.

    By 2100 the population of Africa will surpass that of Asia, and with global warming will mean massive migration to more temperate climes.
    And what would you do about it?
    I don't think we can do much about it. I think we are too late to stop global climate change.
    And the migrants? Are we also helpless?
    Last night to the flicks. All war films. One very good one of a ship full of refugees being bombed somewhere in the Mediterranean. Audience much amused by shots of a great huge fat man trying to swim away with a helicopter after him, first you saw him wallowing along in the water like a porpoise, then you saw him through the helicopters gunsights, then he was full of holes and the sea round him turned pink and he sank as suddenly as though the holes had let in the water, audience shouting with laughter when he sank. then you saw a lifeboat full of children with a helicopter hovering over it. there was a middle-aged woman might have been a jewess sitting up in the bow with a little boy about three years old in her arms. little boy screaming with fright and hiding his head between her breasts as if he was trying to burrow right into her and the woman putting her arms round him and comforting him although she was blue with fright herself, all the time covering him up as much as possible as if she thought her arms could keep the bullets off him. then the helicopter planted a 20 kilo bomb in among them terrific flash and the boat went all to matchwood. Then there was a wonderful shot of a child’s arm going up up up right up into the air a helicopter with a camera in its nose must have followed it up and there was a lot of applause from the party seats.
    Why are you writing in the tone of a war diary?
    It's a section quoted from quite a famous book.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 107,356
    edited September 2022

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    It's started.


    I expect that it will be a modest turnout. I am working this weekend, otherwise might have made the effort.
    Shame. The rage filled afternoon of some folk arguing over the numbers attending that big pro EU march in London was one of the highlights of Brexit.
    I didn't make the first surprisingly large march, but glad I made the two later marches. A great atmosphere and a real pleasure.
    And an utterly tragic waste of time, which paradoxically ensured we got a Hard Hard Brexit, as Remoanery people like you tried to cancel a democratic vote, sending Leavers understandably insane

    Well done. Really. Well done
    We got a hard Brexit because of Theresa May's red lines and Boris Johnson's opportunism. No other principal reason.
    We got a hard Brexit because most Leave voters voted to end EU free movement and most Remainers were too focused on trying to stay in the full
    EU rather than just the EEA.

    However it could have been no trade deal with the EU at all and the hardest of Brexits, which we avoided
  • nico679 said:

    nico679 said:

    If the UK was to leave the ECHR this would be a breach of the GFA .

    I know recent Tory governments don’t really care how many Treaties they trash but this would cause huge problems in NI .

    I believe it would be sufficient to retain the ECHR in NI law, which is a separate jurisdiction.
    I don’t think that works because the government is getting rid of the HRA .
    The GFA just talks about incorporating the ECHR into NI law: "The British Government will complete incorporation into Northern Ireland law of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), with direct access to the courts, and remedies for breach of the Convention, including power for the courts to overrule Assembly legislation on grounds of inconsistency."
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 19,932
    IshmaelZ said:

    Jonathan said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Jonathan said:

    BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    So another loan scheme, this time mortgaging our children.

    Is cynical to believe that 2 years is in scope because Labour offered 1 year. Are they really that petty? Surely not.
    It may look petty to you, from here. People who are no keener on freezing to death in 23-24 than they are in 22-23 will regard it as pretty substantial. The fact it makes SKS look a short sighted dick is a bonus.
    Bless. Someone’s having a bad day. Sympathies.
    Yes. I would be tetchy too if I realised I supported a party leader who has just been effortlessly outplayed by liz bloody truss on her first day in the office. Don't you think it looks a bit half-arsed to propose to solve a 22-24 problem with a plan which dies of ehaustion half way through 23?
    So the Tories intend to attack Labour for spending and borrowing too little at the next general election. Interesting.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,666
    Surprised to see this polling - must worry her that twice as many conservative voters think she will be worse than Boris Johnson, and actually more than the general population!

    I am reasonably confident (say 70%) that Truss will prove to be a better PM and that whenever her tenure ends I will still hold that opinion.
  • Jonathan said:

    BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    So another loan scheme, this time mortgaging our children.

    Is cynical to believe that 2 years is in scope because Labour offered 1 year. Are they really that petty? Surely not.
    Labour offered six months until April 23, and as I said earlier this scheme seems similar to the one Sturgeon supports and the one Germany has just put in place
    So the taxpayer subsidises millionaire footballers’ energy bills rather than the excess profits of energy companies doing it. You must be outraged!

    As you know I want targeted help but they can be dealt with through the tax system

    You said helping millionaire footballers via a windfall tax was immoral. Now, it looks like the government will be using taxpayers’ money to do it instead. So it’s us helping the footballers now, not the energy companies. It’s a big win for them.

    I will not be persuaded that we should insulate the wealthy from this and await the announcement on measures for this winter

    As I understand it this is a long term measure and await the details
  • kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    It's started.


    I expect that it will be a modest turnout. I am working this weekend, otherwise might have made the effort.
    Shame. The rage filled afternoon of some folk arguing over the numbers attending that big pro EU march in London was one of the highlights of Brexit.
    I didn't make the first surprisingly large march, but glad I made the two later marches. A great atmosphere and a real pleasure.
    And an utterly tragic waste of time, which paradoxically ensured we got a Hard Hard Brexit, as Remoanery people like you tried to cancel a democratic vote, sending Leavers understandably insane

    Well done. Really. Well done
    We got a hard Brexit because of Theresa May's red lines and Boris Johnson's opportunism. No other principal reason.
    Ah, Leon's got half a point on this one. There were people willing to compromise, and could have overruled May's red lines, we saw parliament nearly do so, but there was a gang of extremists to match the ERG who decided to bet everything on winning it all. It was not coincidence that saw them walking through the lobbies with Rees-Mogg and Baker.

    That's not blame, its explanation.
    When the history of the period is written with proper hindsight, Brexit, and the type of Brexit we got, will be shown to have had many parents. Absolutely some hardline remainers gambled everything on overturning the vote, and as a result ended up with the situation we have now. I think an awful lot of leavers didn’t want to leave the single market, just the political machinery of the EU.
    We are where we are. Future governments can take a different direction.
    Theresa May's red line was leaving the single market. As soon as she became PM, just weeks after the referendum. Before a single Remoaner had Remoaned about anything. The deal we have now is very similar to the one Theresa May laid out, just with an extra layer of dishonesty about Northern Ireland. It's not Remainers' fault that May chucked away her majority then tried to force through a deal that nobody in their right mind could support, while whipping her MPs to vote down any compromise.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 19,932
    Passing through Horsham seeing ‘Mick Lynch for PM’ graffiti. Strange times.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    Jonathan said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Jonathan said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Jonathan said:

    BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    So another loan scheme, this time mortgaging our children.

    Is cynical to believe that 2 years is in scope because Labour offered 1 year. Are they really that petty? Surely not.
    It may look petty to you, from here. People who are no keener on freezing to death in 23-24 than they are in 22-23 will regard it as pretty substantial. The fact it makes SKS look a short sighted dick is a bonus.
    Bless. Someone’s having a bad day. Sympathies.
    Yes. I would be tetchy too if I realised I supported a party leader who has just been effortlessly outplayed by liz bloody truss on her first day in the office. Don't you think it looks a bit half-arsed to propose to solve a 22-24 problem with a plan which dies of ehaustion half way through 23?
    So the Tories intend to attack Labour for spending and borrowing too little at the next general election. Interesting.
    *Very* tetchy. I am not a tory and I haven't a clue, but why wouldn't they? People want the problem solved, not left unsolved because the solution would be too expensive, would be my guess. And a LOTO who doesn't realise that he can afford, within limits, to overpromise because he is not going to be called on to deliver...oh my.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    Omnium said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    For a sense of how mad it is to look more than 10 years into the future, this is some stat

    China’s population is expected to halve - HALVE - by 2100, and the sharp decline starts now

    And at least ten other countries - big ones like Korea and Italy - are in the same boat

    https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1566806384838152193?s=21&t=MRZkjO8ld5QUWt5i1WHZeQ

    That's a lot of empty cities.
    Still a lot of people though.

    By 2100 the population of Africa will surpass that of Asia, and with global warming will mean massive migration to more temperate climes.
    And what would you do about it?
    I don't think we can do much about it. I think we are too late to stop global climate change.
    And the migrants? Are we also helpless?
    Last night to the flicks. All war films. One very good one of a ship full of refugees being bombed somewhere in the Mediterranean. Audience much amused by shots of a great huge fat man trying to swim away with a helicopter after him, first you saw him wallowing along in the water like a porpoise, then you saw him through the helicopters gunsights, then he was full of holes and the sea round him turned pink and he sank as suddenly as though the holes had let in the water, audience shouting with laughter when he sank. then you saw a lifeboat full of children with a helicopter hovering over it. there was a middle-aged woman might have been a jewess sitting up in the bow with a little boy about three years old in her arms. little boy screaming with fright and hiding his head between her breasts as if he was trying to burrow right into her and the woman putting her arms round him and comforting him although she was blue with fright herself, all the time covering him up as much as possible as if she thought her arms could keep the bullets off him. then the helicopter planted a 20 kilo bomb in among them terrific flash and the boat went all to matchwood. Then there was a wonderful shot of a child’s arm going up up up right up into the air a helicopter with a camera in its nose must have followed it up and there was a lot of applause from the party seats.
    Why are you writing in the tone of a war diary?
    Google pretty much any sentence...
  • Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    For a sense of how mad it is to look more than 10 years into the future, this is some stat

    China’s population is expected to halve - HALVE - by 2100, and the sharp decline starts now

    And at least ten other countries - big ones like Korea and Italy - are in the same boat

    https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1566806384838152193?s=21&t=MRZkjO8ld5QUWt5i1WHZeQ

    That's a lot of empty cities.
    Still a lot of people though.

    By 2100 the population of Africa will surpass that of Asia, and with global warming will mean massive migration to more temperate climes.
    And what would you do about it?
    I don't think we can do much about it. I think we are too late to stop global climate change.
    And the migrants? Are we also helpless?
    Why not just embrace them? They seem keen to be here and Liz Truss says the British are all slackers so we could probably do with a few extra hands to the pump.
    I see the much talked about Australian points system has just got around to this way of thinking.
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 2,641

    nico679 said:

    nico679 said:

    If the UK was to leave the ECHR this would be a breach of the GFA .

    I know recent Tory governments don’t really care how many Treaties they trash but this would cause huge problems in NI .

    I believe it would be sufficient to retain the ECHR in NI law, which is a separate jurisdiction.
    I don’t think that works because the government is getting rid of the HRA .
    The GFA just talks about incorporating the ECHR into NI law: "The British Government will complete incorporation into Northern Ireland law of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), with direct access to the courts, and remedies for breach of the Convention, including power for the courts to overrule Assembly legislation on grounds of inconsistency."
    The incorporation of the ECHR into any new bill of rights will work differently to what was in the original HRA . There are more restrictions on what can go to court and will impact the NI human rights commission .
  • LeonLeon Posts: 30,637

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    It's started.


    I expect that it will be a modest turnout. I am working this weekend, otherwise might have made the effort.
    Shame. The rage filled afternoon of some folk arguing over the numbers attending that big pro EU march in London was one of the highlights of Brexit.
    I didn't make the first surprisingly large march, but glad I made the two later marches. A great atmosphere and a real pleasure.
    And an utterly tragic waste of time, which paradoxically ensured we got a Hard Hard Brexit, as Remoanery people like you tried to cancel a democratic vote, sending Leavers understandably insane

    Well done. Really. Well done
    We got a hard Brexit because of Theresa May's red lines and Boris Johnson's opportunism. No other principal reason.
    Ah, Leon's got half a point on this one. There were people willing to compromise, and could have overruled May's red lines, we saw parliament nearly do so, but there was a gang of extremists to match the ERG who decided to bet everything on winning it all. It was not coincidence that saw them walking through the lobbies with Rees-Mogg and Baker.

    That's not blame, its explanation.
    When the history of the period is written with proper hindsight, Brexit, and the type of Brexit we got, will be shown to have had many parents. Absolutely some hardline remainers gambled everything on overturning the vote, and as a result ended up with the situation we have now. I think an awful lot of leavers didn’t want to leave the single market, just the political machinery of the EU.
    We are where we are. Future governments can take a different direction.
    Theresa May's red line was leaving the single market. As soon as she became PM, just weeks after the referendum. Before a single Remoaner had Remoaned about anything. The deal we have now is very similar to the one Theresa May laid out, just with an extra layer of dishonesty about Northern Ireland. It's not Remainers' fault that May chucked away her majority then tried to force through a deal that nobody in their right mind could support, while whipping her MPs to vote down any compromise.
    That’ll be Theresa May the Remainer
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 19,932
    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    It's started.


    I expect that it will be a modest turnout. I am working this weekend, otherwise might have made the effort.
    Shame. The rage filled afternoon of some folk arguing over the numbers attending that big pro EU march in London was one of the highlights of Brexit.
    I didn't make the first surprisingly large march, but glad I made the two later marches. A great atmosphere and a real pleasure.
    And an utterly tragic waste of time, which paradoxically ensured we got a Hard Hard Brexit, as Remoanery people like you tried to cancel a democratic vote, sending Leavers understandably insane

    Well done. Really. Well done
    We got a hard Brexit because of Theresa May's red lines and Boris Johnson's opportunism. No other principal reason.
    Ah, Leon's got half a point on this one. There were people willing to compromise, and could have overruled May's red lines, we saw parliament nearly do so, but there was a gang of extremists to match the ERG who decided to bet everything on winning it all. It was not coincidence that saw them walking through the lobbies with Rees-Mogg and Baker.

    That's not blame, its explanation.
    When the history of the period is written with proper hindsight, Brexit, and the type of Brexit we got, will be shown to have had many parents. Absolutely some hardline remainers gambled everything on overturning the vote, and as a result ended up with the situation we have now. I think an awful lot of leavers didn’t want to leave the single market, just the political machinery of the EU.
    We are where we are. Future governments can take a different direction.
    Theresa May's red line was leaving the single market. As soon as she became PM, just weeks after the referendum. Before a single Remoaner had Remoaned about anything. The deal we have now is very similar to the one Theresa May laid out, just with an extra layer of dishonesty about Northern Ireland. It's not Remainers' fault that May chucked away her majority then tried to force through a deal that nobody in their right mind could support, while whipping her MPs to vote down any compromise.
    That’ll be Theresa May the Remainer
    Will Remainer Liz Truss clear up the mess?
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 2,641
    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    It's started.


    I expect that it will be a modest turnout. I am working this weekend, otherwise might have made the effort.
    Shame. The rage filled afternoon of some folk arguing over the numbers attending that big pro EU march in London was one of the highlights of Brexit.
    I didn't make the first surprisingly large march, but glad I made the two later marches. A great atmosphere and a real pleasure.
    And an utterly tragic waste of time, which paradoxically ensured we got a Hard Hard Brexit, as Remoanery people like you tried to cancel a democratic vote, sending Leavers understandably insane

    Well done. Really. Well done
    We got a hard Brexit because of Theresa May's red lines and Boris Johnson's opportunism. No other principal reason.
    Ah, Leon's got half a point on this one. There were people willing to compromise, and could have overruled May's red lines, we saw parliament nearly do so, but there was a gang of extremists to match the ERG who decided to bet everything on winning it all. It was not coincidence that saw them walking through the lobbies with Rees-Mogg and Baker.

    That's not blame, its explanation.
    When the history of the period is written with proper hindsight, Brexit, and the type of Brexit we got, will be shown to have had many parents. Absolutely some hardline remainers gambled everything on overturning the vote, and as a result ended up with the situation we have now. I think an awful lot of leavers didn’t want to leave the single market, just the political machinery of the EU.
    We are where we are. Future governments can take a different direction.
    Theresa May's red line was leaving the single market. As soon as she became PM, just weeks after the referendum. Before a single Remoaner had Remoaned about anything. The deal we have now is very similar to the one Theresa May laid out, just with an extra layer of dishonesty about Northern Ireland. It's not Remainers' fault that May chucked away her majority then tried to force through a deal that nobody in their right mind could support, while whipping her MPs to vote down any compromise.
    That’ll be Theresa May the Remainer
    Who over compensated and put her stupid red lines in place .
  • So, the Truss government will be borrowing tens of billions of pounds to subsidise energy companies and to give the highest paid hundreds of pounds more in their pay packets.

    Good dividing lines. A genuine battle of ideas. Labour should welcome this.
  • kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    It's started.


    I expect that it will be a modest turnout. I am working this weekend, otherwise might have made the effort.
    Shame. The rage filled afternoon of some folk arguing over the numbers attending that big pro EU march in London was one of the highlights of Brexit.
    I didn't make the first surprisingly large march, but glad I made the two later marches. A great atmosphere and a real pleasure.
    And an utterly tragic waste of time, which paradoxically ensured we got a Hard Hard Brexit, as Remoanery people like you tried to cancel a democratic vote, sending Leavers understandably insane

    Well done. Really. Well done
    We got a hard Brexit because of Theresa May's red lines and Boris Johnson's opportunism. No other principal reason.
    Ah, Leon's got half a point on this one. There were people willing to compromise, and could have overruled May's red lines, we saw parliament nearly do so, but there was a gang of extremists to match the ERG who decided to bet everything on winning it all. It was not coincidence that saw them walking through the lobbies with Rees-Mogg and Baker.

    That's not blame, its explanation.
    When the history of the period is written with proper hindsight, Brexit, and the type of Brexit we got, will be shown to have had many parents. Absolutely some hardline remainers gambled everything on overturning the vote, and as a result ended up with the situation we have now. I think an awful lot of leavers didn’t want to leave the single market, just the political machinery of the EU.
    We are where we are. Future governments can take a different direction.
    Theresa May's red line was leaving the single market. As soon as she became PM, just weeks after the referendum. Before a single Remoaner had Remoaned about anything. The deal we have now is very similar to the one Theresa May laid out, just with an extra layer of dishonesty about Northern Ireland. It's not Remainers' fault that May chucked away her majority then tried to force through a deal that nobody in their right mind could support, while whipping her MPs to vote down any compromise.
    Boris probably was and is a remainer so collectively we do share much of the blame!
  • I'd be interested to know if @MarqueeMark has seen any flickerings of interest in Tidal from the Truss camp. I'm hopeful there might be something a bit more imaginative from them in forthcoming energy announcements than 'possibly some nuclear arriving in about 20 years'.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 8,574
    IshmaelZ said:

    Omnium said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    For a sense of how mad it is to look more than 10 years into the future, this is some stat

    China’s population is expected to halve - HALVE - by 2100, and the sharp decline starts now

    And at least ten other countries - big ones like Korea and Italy - are in the same boat

    https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1566806384838152193?s=21&t=MRZkjO8ld5QUWt5i1WHZeQ

    That's a lot of empty cities.
    Still a lot of people though.

    By 2100 the population of Africa will surpass that of Asia, and with global warming will mean massive migration to more temperate climes.
    And what would you do about it?
    I don't think we can do much about it. I think we are too late to stop global climate change.
    And the migrants? Are we also helpless?
    Last night to the flicks. All war films. One very good one of a ship full of refugees being bombed somewhere in the Mediterranean. Audience much amused by shots of a great huge fat man trying to swim away with a helicopter after him, first you saw him wallowing along in the water like a porpoise, then you saw him through the helicopters gunsights, then he was full of holes and the sea round him turned pink and he sank as suddenly as though the holes had let in the water, audience shouting with laughter when he sank. then you saw a lifeboat full of children with a helicopter hovering over it. there was a middle-aged woman might have been a jewess sitting up in the bow with a little boy about three years old in her arms. little boy screaming with fright and hiding his head between her breasts as if he was trying to burrow right into her and the woman putting her arms round him and comforting him although she was blue with fright herself, all the time covering him up as much as possible as if she thought her arms could keep the bullets off him. then the helicopter planted a 20 kilo bomb in among them terrific flash and the boat went all to matchwood. Then there was a wonderful shot of a child’s arm going up up up right up into the air a helicopter with a camera in its nose must have followed it up and there was a lot of applause from the party seats.
    Why are you writing in the tone of a war diary?
    Google pretty much any sentence...
    Sorry!
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 19,093

    Jonathan said:

    BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    So another loan scheme, this time mortgaging our children.

    Is cynical to believe that 2 years is in scope because Labour offered 1 year. Are they really that petty? Surely not.
    Labour offered six months until April 23, and as I said earlier this scheme seems similar to the one Sturgeon supports and the one Germany has just put in place
    Starmer went too early and too shallow.
    From April 'your bills would be 4 etc times bigger under Labour'
    And they are refusing to lay out a response to what happens in April when domestic bills rise to £6,000
    Yes you have for weeks now made a compelling case that Truss' plan when it is revealed is head and shoulders better than anyone else's.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 19,932
    IshmaelZ said:

    Jonathan said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Jonathan said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Jonathan said:

    BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    So another loan scheme, this time mortgaging our children.

    Is cynical to believe that 2 years is in scope because Labour offered 1 year. Are they really that petty? Surely not.
    It may look petty to you, from here. People who are no keener on freezing to death in 23-24 than they are in 22-23 will regard it as pretty substantial. The fact it makes SKS look a short sighted dick is a bonus.
    Bless. Someone’s having a bad day. Sympathies.
    Yes. I would be tetchy too if I realised I supported a party leader who has just been effortlessly outplayed by liz bloody truss on her first day in the office. Don't you think it looks a bit half-arsed to propose to solve a 22-24 problem with a plan which dies of ehaustion half way through 23?
    So the Tories intend to attack Labour for spending and borrowing too little at the next general election. Interesting.
    *Very* tetchy. I am not a tory and I haven't a clue, but why wouldn't they? People want the problem solved, not left unsolved because the solution would be too expensive, would be my guess. And a LOTO who doesn't realise that he can afford, within limits, to overpromise because he is not going to be called on to deliver...oh my.
    If only life was as simple as writing a blank cheque for every problem. Tories used to care about sound money, as Sunak pointed out this is no longer true. Kicking the can down the road and mortgaging the kids doesn’t actually solve the problem.
  • Well if Liz freezes bills that’s a good start. Credit where it is due
  • LeonLeon Posts: 30,637
    Jonathan said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    It's started.


    I expect that it will be a modest turnout. I am working this weekend, otherwise might have made the effort.
    Shame. The rage filled afternoon of some folk arguing over the numbers attending that big pro EU march in London was one of the highlights of Brexit.
    I didn't make the first surprisingly large march, but glad I made the two later marches. A great atmosphere and a real pleasure.
    And an utterly tragic waste of time, which paradoxically ensured we got a Hard Hard Brexit, as Remoanery people like you tried to cancel a democratic vote, sending Leavers understandably insane

    Well done. Really. Well done
    We got a hard Brexit because of Theresa May's red lines and Boris Johnson's opportunism. No other principal reason.
    Ah, Leon's got half a point on this one. There were people willing to compromise, and could have overruled May's red lines, we saw parliament nearly do so, but there was a gang of extremists to match the ERG who decided to bet everything on winning it all. It was not coincidence that saw them walking through the lobbies with Rees-Mogg and Baker.

    That's not blame, its explanation.
    When the history of the period is written with proper hindsight, Brexit, and the type of Brexit we got, will be shown to have had many parents. Absolutely some hardline remainers gambled everything on overturning the vote, and as a result ended up with the situation we have now. I think an awful lot of leavers didn’t want to leave the single market, just the political machinery of the EU.
    We are where we are. Future governments can take a different direction.
    Theresa May's red line was leaving the single market. As soon as she became PM, just weeks after the referendum. Before a single Remoaner had Remoaned about anything. The deal we have now is very similar to the one Theresa May laid out, just with an extra layer of dishonesty about Northern Ireland. It's not Remainers' fault that May chucked away her majority then tried to force through a deal that nobody in their right mind could support, while whipping her MPs to vote down any compromise.
    That’ll be Theresa May the Remainer
    Will Remainer Liz Truss clear up the mess?
    I doubt it

    But here’s the thing: there isn’t that much mess

    Many of the initial issues are being quietly solved. Eg the border queues. As I said, at Lisbon airport they now have a special fast queue for people from UK, USA, Japan, etc, with e-passports, there’s a man who stamps every passport taking 2 seconds each

    It’s still slower than the EU queue but you wait about 3 minutes. It’s efficient. Why? Because Portugal REALLY wants UK (and other rich) tourists. So this makes sense. Only idiot bitter countries will continue to penalize Brits at the border. That is to say, France

    I predict all the other problems will melt away or be smoothed so they are generally not noticed

    But we will always have lost Freedom of Movement, and i regret that. But we have regained our proper democracy and we choose who rules us, that makes me happy, and is ultimately more important. That’s it. Brexit
  • Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    So another loan scheme, this time mortgaging our children.

    Is cynical to believe that 2 years is in scope because Labour offered 1 year. Are they really that petty? Surely not.
    Labour offered six months until April 23, and as I said earlier this scheme seems similar to the one Sturgeon supports and the one Germany has just put in place
    A massive transfer of wealth from the tax payer to the energy firms in the next two years to be paid back in future by the energy bill payer?

    Terrific.
    I don’t think so?

    The transfer is to current bill payers who would otherwise be paying

    Benefit to the energy companies would be (a) delta between compensated rate and what the price cap would have been; plus (b) profits on additional unit sales that would have otherwise been reduced because of pricing; plus (c) lower losses from bankrupt customers
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 8,574

    Well if Liz freezes bills that’s a good start. Credit where it is due

    It's a very bad idea to try to control prices. Bills, and help with bills may be a different thing.
  • Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    For a sense of how mad it is to look more than 10 years into the future, this is some stat

    China’s population is expected to halve - HALVE - by 2100, and the sharp decline starts now

    And at least ten other countries - big ones like Korea and Italy - are in the same boat

    https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1566806384838152193?s=21&t=MRZkjO8ld5QUWt5i1WHZeQ

    Korea is not very big, and solving their population problem would likely be a matter of allowing more immigration.
    The wild card would be reunification with the bankrupt North.
    S Korea seems a terrible place to have/be a child. And not the place to be a low skilled migrant.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 20,423
    eek said:

    Leon said:

    2000 Dinghy People crossed at the weekend

    I quite like Priti Patel - or at least I weirdly fancy her - but she had one job, and she failed. Exeunt

    So how would you solve the problem in a way that doesn't break international and maritime law???
    Illegal immigration is breaking the law.
  • BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    Depends on the level of the cap.

    But yeah, make millennials pay for it. Again.
    If it’s being repaid through energy bills the millennials will also be getting the benefit.

  • LeonLeon Posts: 30,637
    Jonathan said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Jonathan said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Jonathan said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Jonathan said:

    BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    So another loan scheme, this time mortgaging our children.

    Is cynical to believe that 2 years is in scope because Labour offered 1 year. Are they really that petty? Surely not.
    It may look petty to you, from here. People who are no keener on freezing to death in 23-24 than they are in 22-23 will regard it as pretty substantial. The fact it makes SKS look a short sighted dick is a bonus.
    Bless. Someone’s having a bad day. Sympathies.
    Yes. I would be tetchy too if I realised I supported a party leader who has just been effortlessly outplayed by liz bloody truss on her first day in the office. Don't you think it looks a bit half-arsed to propose to solve a 22-24 problem with a plan which dies of ehaustion half way through 23?
    So the Tories intend to attack Labour for spending and borrowing too little at the next general election. Interesting.
    *Very* tetchy. I am not a tory and I haven't a clue, but why wouldn't they? People want the problem solved, not left unsolved because the solution would be too expensive, would be my guess. And a LOTO who doesn't realise that he can afford, within limits, to overpromise because he is not going to be called on to deliver...oh my.
    If only life was as simple as writing a blank cheque for every problem. Tories used to care about sound money, as Sunak pointed out this is no longer true. Kicking the can down the road and mortgaging the kids doesn’t actually solve the problem.
    Do you have a better solution? I can’t see one

    More government borrowing of some sort was always the only answer, if we want to stop the economy collapsing
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 18,696
    edited September 2022

    BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    Depends on the level of the cap.

    But yeah, make millennials pay for it. Again.
    If it’s being repaid through energy bills the millennials will also be getting the benefit.

    The current asset rich should be paying. It shouldn't be coming out of the future income of the young, who already face a ridiculous cost of living.
  • eekeek Posts: 22,078

    BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    Depends on the level of the cap.

    But yeah, make millennials pay for it. Again.
    If it’s being repaid through energy bills the millennials will also be getting the benefit.

    Not if they live at home.....
  • Interesting to not have the same people calling Liz's plan kicking the can down the road when they did about Keir's!
  • eekeek Posts: 22,078
    Andy_JS said:

    eek said:

    Leon said:

    2000 Dinghy People crossed at the weekend

    I quite like Priti Patel - or at least I weirdly fancy her - but she had one job, and she failed. Exeunt

    So how would you solve the problem in a way that doesn't break international and maritime law???
    Illegal immigration is breaking the law.
    We've covered that before - we need a serious crackdown on those who employ illegal workers....
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 19,932
    Leon said:

    Jonathan said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Jonathan said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Jonathan said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Jonathan said:

    BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    So another loan scheme, this time mortgaging our children.

    Is cynical to believe that 2 years is in scope because Labour offered 1 year. Are they really that petty? Surely not.
    It may look petty to you, from here. People who are no keener on freezing to death in 23-24 than they are in 22-23 will regard it as pretty substantial. The fact it makes SKS look a short sighted dick is a bonus.
    Bless. Someone’s having a bad day. Sympathies.
    Yes. I would be tetchy too if I realised I supported a party leader who has just been effortlessly outplayed by liz bloody truss on her first day in the office. Don't you think it looks a bit half-arsed to propose to solve a 22-24 problem with a plan which dies of ehaustion half way through 23?
    So the Tories intend to attack Labour for spending and borrowing too little at the next general election. Interesting.
    *Very* tetchy. I am not a tory and I haven't a clue, but why wouldn't they? People want the problem solved, not left unsolved because the solution would be too expensive, would be my guess. And a LOTO who doesn't realise that he can afford, within limits, to overpromise because he is not going to be called on to deliver...oh my.
    If only life was as simple as writing a blank cheque for every problem. Tories used to care about sound money, as Sunak pointed out this is no longer true. Kicking the can down the road and mortgaging the kids doesn’t actually solve the problem.
    Do you have a better solution? I can’t see one

    More government borrowing of some sort was always the only answer, if we want to stop the economy collapsing
    Follow the money and tax the excess profits generated by the war. In the end North Sea gas is a national asset that just got a whole lot more valuable.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 30,637

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    For a sense of how mad it is to look more than 10 years into the future, this is some stat

    China’s population is expected to halve - HALVE - by 2100, and the sharp decline starts now

    And at least ten other countries - big ones like Korea and Italy - are in the same boat

    https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1566806384838152193?s=21&t=MRZkjO8ld5QUWt5i1WHZeQ

    Korea is not very big, and solving their population problem would likely be a matter of allowing more immigration.
    The wild card would be reunification with the bankrupt North.
    S Korea seems a terrible place to have/be a child. And not the place to be a low skilled migrant.
    @Nigelb makes a good point tho. North Korea needs the money of the south, South Korea needs the Koreans in the north. And both are a bit desperate. So reunification will probably happen

    A reunited Korea will be quite a power. With nukes. Possibly even stronger than Japan
  • eekeek Posts: 22,078

    Well if Liz freezes bills that’s a good start. Credit where it is due

    Depends how it's paid for - as at some point the bill will need to be paid....
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    Well if Liz freezes bills that’s a good start. Credit where it is due

    It isn't actually, not if freeze means no increase at all. They need to go up enough to affect consumption.
  • Leon said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    For a sense of how mad it is to look more than 10 years into the future, this is some stat

    China’s population is expected to halve - HALVE - by 2100, and the sharp decline starts now

    And at least ten other countries - big ones like Korea and Italy - are in the same boat

    https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1566806384838152193?s=21&t=MRZkjO8ld5QUWt5i1WHZeQ

    Korea is not very big, and solving their population problem would likely be a matter of allowing more immigration.
    The wild card would be reunification with the bankrupt North.
    S Korea seems a terrible place to have/be a child. And not the place to be a low skilled migrant.
    @Nigelb makes a good point tho. North Korea needs the money of the south, South Korea needs the Koreans in the north. And both are a bit desperate. So reunification will probably happen

    A reunited Korea will be quite a power. With nukes. Possibly even stronger than Japan
    When I was in South Korea the feeling was that neither China nor Japan would allow reunification for that very reason. Though getting the North up to speed would make the reunification of West and East Germany look like a cakewalk.

This discussion has been closed.