I have just discovered that accredited journalists can skip THE QUEUE
A moral dilemma indeed
Stop prevaricating.
Pack a small bag, man up and get in THE QUEUE.
You probably have about 2 hours before your chance is gone forever.
You’re right. I’m going to do my duty, get my lazy arse in gear, get down to that bloody queue, then completely skip it with my Press Card, see the Queen at my leisure, then head out for lunch with a friend
That’s my duty, as a loyal member of His Majesty’s Press, Knapper’s Gazette branch
Of course you fucking will. You’d be daft not to. If I were in your position and wanted to go I’d do the same.
But you will not be allowed to don the mantle of suffering and perseverance that the 14 hour pilgrimage would bestow, a holy cleansing of your soul, a glorious, public affirmation of your diamond hard unquenchable patriotism and fealty to our glorious ex-monarch.
You’ll just look like a cynical chancer. Go for it!
You are not going to see the Queen, she is dead and hidden in a box. The queue is the event, a mass participation event marking a remarkable reign and a remarkable public servant. Those who take part in it will remember it for the rest of their lives. You either participate or you don't. If you just want to see it switch on the TV.
You don't understand. You do see The Queen. Everyone who files past sees The Queen, and gets those few precious seconds with her.
You might not see her face with your naked eyes but, believe me, you definitely penetrate through into that box and see her.
I am envious of your experience which was clearly almost spiritual. I went to the Kingsway in Dundee to see the cortege go by. It was also a mass participation event, albeit on a vastly smaller scale. A pale shadow of your experience. My clerk was one of those organising the honour guard in St Giles. She was there 11 hours a day. It was exhausting but exhilarating. I wish I had gone there but work did not alllow. I will regret that.
You did what you could, and the memory you obtained from viewing the cortege is more than most managed and will last with you a lifetime.
Don't regret it.
You LITERALLY “penetrated through into the Queen’s box” - in your own words - and call me an old-fashioned stickler but that doesn’t seem particularly cricket, either
In which they translate 'interviewed as a witness' in their article into "involved in an alleged conspiracy" in the couple of paras the public can see.
FPT - The FBI have to jump through a lot of hoops to interview someone in a foreign jurisdiction. It's not done on a whim or just in case or as a filler. So it's pretty serious for it to have reached this stage.
Whether it's because he is under suspicion or simply as a witness who can say.
Correct. The "interviewed as a witness" is from his spokesman, I think, and perhaps others. FBI may change their agenda. We'll see.
I remain deeply cynical about scoops in the Sunday Times, having observed the various ones during COVID.
In which they translate 'interviewed as a witness' in their article into "involved in an alleged conspiracy" in the couple of paras the public can see.
FPT - The FBI have to jump through a lot of hoops to interview someone in a foreign jurisdiction. It's not done on a whim or just in case or as a filler. So it's pretty serious for it to have reached this stage.
Whether it's because he is under suspicion or simply as a witness who can say.
Correct. The "interviewed as a witness" is from his spokesman, I think, and perhaps others. FBI may change their agenda. We'll see.
I remain deeply cynical about scoops in the Sunday Times, having observed the various ones during COVID.
Times says he has signed a proffer agreement. The internet seems unanimous in thinking that is something that is done by suspects and defendants, never by witnesses.
The Guardian really are making a play for the Twitter f*ckwit demographic with these headlines, in the hope that they will repeat just the headline.
Both the standfirst, and first sentence in the article, say it has been rescheduled (for 2 days later at the UN).
Headlines are designed to attract readers into stories. That is their purpose. It's a great headline.
It’s misleading and it’s just click bait.
It is perfect for how the press operates these days.
It's always operated that way.
That may or may not be the case - but is no excuse for deliberately misleading headlines. The circs have also changed with the permeability of social media.
I think the willingness to self-trash the brand is ... interesting.
When the period of national hysteria ends on Monday, what will the press find to fill all that space?
You have three times on this thread referred to national hysteria. I've not seen anything to characterise as hysterical, which term could fairly describe the reaction to Princess Diana's death. These past few days, the public's reaction has been overwhelmingly of reflection and appreciation.
Hysteria? There’s been a very small amount of quiet tears. And a lot of people standing quietly for hours, for various things.
It reminds me of the first countryside march. Totally peaceful, quiet. The joke that they tidied up Hyde Park was pretty much true.
A couple of university acquaintances were there. Black Bloc types. They were horrified, angered… and terrified. To them, “middle class” people having a quiet demo was Fascism… “I felt the menace when they looked at me” was one comment. This from a guy who thought that smashing shop windows was valuable social commentary.
It was simply that a large protest “the other way” wasn’t in their world view - riots are ok when they are from your side. Viscous little dreams of beating up your opponents are cool. The “others” assembling in large numbers - END TIMES!
For republicans if a certain bent, the current events are wrong, EVUL! IMMORAL! FASCISM!
Meanwhile everyone else has a cup of tea.
The attitude expressed by radical leftwingers towards the Tory party on horseback's pro-foxhunting marches seems to have made a big effect on you, because you keep referring to it, but it's not at all to their discredit. It doesn't show them to be hypocrites at all. All it shows is that they were a bit naive where the right wing, its ability to mobilise its social base, and its willingness to use physical force were concerned. (At least some on the radical left - me for example - are not naive about that, but we are few and far between.) "I felt the menace when they looked back at me" - whoever said that was aware and learning, which is more than can be said about a lot of people. Perhaps he or she hadn't read much about May 1968 in Paris. The political right wing were kind of nowhere for a few days. It was as if they'd disappeared. Then WHAM they called out 1 million people in a huge march in Paris, and made it absolutely clear they were willing to fight a civil war.
My feeling at the time of the pro-foxhunting marches, which you call "countryside" marches as if everyone living in the countryside supports foxhunting which is not true, was that it would not be at all surprising if on a subsequent march they brought guns.
There's a some truth in Dynamo's views on this one, as he observed it from several thousand miles away.
The Countryside march was certainly quiet and relatively peaceful, but I personally also thought it contained a large amount of element of threat, and also a sense of aggressively trying to monopolise the national identity, as much as the most intolerant leftwingers.
There were also some very large landed and country business interests funding that march, somewhat astroturfing as the organised Right is prone to, in the UK, and as with Brexit. I remember the bitter resentment of it from an old friend in the countryside when I lived there ; the countryside has in fact always been split right almost exactly right down the middle on hunting and the right of lairds to trample everyone's fields, as I saw when I lived there.
I was there.
I was there because I supported continuation and licencing of foxhunting, not its prohibition, and thought the latter nonsensical, ideological and a sign of the Blair Government throwing red meat to its left-wing backbenches because they didnt really give a shit about the countryside.
I lost that battle. But I still think I was right to march.
I have just discovered that accredited journalists can skip THE QUEUE
A moral dilemma indeed
Stop prevaricating.
Pack a small bag, man up and get in THE QUEUE.
You probably have about 2 hours before your chance is gone forever.
You’re right. I’m going to do my duty, get my lazy arse in gear, get down to that bloody queue, then completely skip it with my Press Card, see the Queen at my leisure, then head out for lunch with a friend
That’s my duty, as a loyal member of His Majesty’s Press, Knapper’s Gazette branch
Of course you fucking will. You’d be daft not to. If I were in your position and wanted to go I’d do the same.
But you will not be allowed to don the mantle of suffering and perseverance that the 14 hour pilgrimage would bestow, a holy cleansing of your soul, a glorious, public affirmation of your diamond hard unquenchable patriotism and fealty to our glorious ex-monarch.
You’ll just look like a cynical chancer. Go for it!
You are not going to see the Queen, she is dead and hidden in a box. The queue is the event, a mass participation event marking a remarkable reign and a remarkable public servant. Those who take part in it will remember it for the rest of their lives. You either participate or you don't. If you just want to see it switch on the TV.
What's more, as I understand it, this has not been organised by the government. Everything has been organised partly by the palace and partly by the police with no political or politicians involvement. Which is perhaps why everything has run smoothly.
When the period of national hysteria ends on Monday, what will the press find to fill all that space?
You have three times on this thread referred to national hysteria. I've not seen anything to characterise as hysterical, which term could fairly describe the reaction to Princess Diana's death. These past few days, the public's reaction has been overwhelmingly of reflection and appreciation.
Hysteria? There’s been a very small amount of quiet tears. And a lot of people standing quietly for hours, for various things.
It reminds me of the first countryside march. Totally peaceful, quiet. The joke that they tidied up Hyde Park was pretty much true.
A couple of university acquaintances were there. Black Bloc types. They were horrified, angered… and terrified. To them, “middle class” people having a quiet demo was Fascism… “I felt the menace when they looked at me” was one comment. This from a guy who thought that smashing shop windows was valuable social commentary.
It was simply that a large protest “the other way” wasn’t in their world view - riots are ok when they are from your side. Viscous little dreams of beating up your opponents are cool. The “others” assembling in large numbers - END TIMES!
For republicans if a certain bent, the current events are wrong, EVUL! IMMORAL! FASCISM!
Meanwhile everyone else has a cup of tea.
The attitude expressed by radical leftwingers towards the Tory party on horseback's pro-foxhunting marches seems to have made a big effect on you, because you keep referring to it, but it's not at all to their discredit. It doesn't show them to be hypocrites at all. All it shows is that they were a bit naive where the right wing, its ability to mobilise its social base, and its willingness to use physical force were concerned. (At least some on the radical left - me for example - are not naive about that, but we are few and far between.) "I felt the menace when they looked back at me" - whoever said that was aware and learning, which is more than can be said about a lot of people. Perhaps he or she hadn't read much about May 1968 in Paris. The political right wing were kind of nowhere for a few days. It was as if they'd disappeared. Then WHAM they called out 1 million people in a huge march in Paris, and made it absolutely clear they were willing to fight a civil war.
My feeling at the time of the pro-foxhunting marches, which you call "countryside" marches as if everyone living in the countryside supports foxhunting which is not true, was that it would not be at all surprising if on a subsequent march they brought guns.
Were you there?
No I didn't see any of the CA marches at first hand. I was involved in anti-CA stuff from behind my keyboard, though, and paying close attention. And unlike most leftwingers I have been in other environments where I've witnessed the ruling class act as a herd. It's not a pretty sight. (@IshmaelZ - stop trying to get personal info from me, OK? Last time it was my age group.)
Re; MexicanPete's point on Poles either going up into senior positions or returning home, that is interesting. If the average family really is now 20% poorer than our neighbouring countries, that would indeed start to bring them close to some of the slightly better East European living standards, as the FT article says.
I read the story with one raised eyebrow. JB Murdoch is a good journalist so I’m willing to believe him, yet the data doesn’t quite pass the smell test
I’ve just come from southern Spain and Portugal which have a similar GDP per capita to parts of Eastern Europe. Landing in Gatwick it is immediately obvious the UK is much richer (even taking into account the fact I landed in prosperous SE England)
The graphs apparently use GDP by PPP, which might be a confounding factor here
There's nothing wrong with using PPP data.
However, I'm not convinced the actual data actually backed up the point he was making. The charts showed that over the course of twenty years, the median British household saw their income rise in real terms, from $30,000 to $44,000 ie a rise of 47% . That is actually rather better than I would have expected.
The richest ten per cent certainly did better than that (the rise was 60%) . But, only the poorest 5% and the richest 3% saw stagnation in living standards over that period.
We shouldn't be upset that much of Eastern Europe has seen extraordinary rises in living standards over that period. Eastern Europe is getting to the point where it ought to have been, had they not had to endure 50 years of first Nazism, then communism. Slovenia, the Baltic States, Poland, Czechia, and Slovakia, simply *ought* to be very rich countries, and now they're reaching their proper place.
Yes
Tho I do believe one has to be careful with PPP, it can mislead - but so can nominal GDP in a different way
Slovenia in particular should definitely be a rich society, small, sunny, fertile, Alpine, next to Austria and Switzerland and the richest bit of Italy. Small highly educated population, low immigration, low population density, no post industrial blight
It should be as rich as its rich neighbours and now - belatedly - it is getting there
Most of us would have expected, thirty years ago, that freed from communism, Eastern Europe would flourish, and so it proved.
When the period of national hysteria ends on Monday, what will the press find to fill all that space?
You have three times on this thread referred to national hysteria. I've not seen anything to characterise as hysterical, which term could fairly describe the reaction to Princess Diana's death. These past few days, the public's reaction has been overwhelmingly of reflection and appreciation.
Hysteria? There’s been a very small amount of quiet tears. And a lot of people standing quietly for hours, for various things.
It reminds me of the first countryside march. Totally peaceful, quiet. The joke that they tidied up Hyde Park was pretty much true.
A couple of university acquaintances were there. Black Bloc types. They were horrified, angered… and terrified. To them, “middle class” people having a quiet demo was Fascism… “I felt the menace when they looked at me” was one comment. This from a guy who thought that smashing shop windows was valuable social commentary.
It was simply that a large protest “the other way” wasn’t in their world view - riots are ok when they are from your side. Viscous little dreams of beating up your opponents are cool. The “others” assembling in large numbers - END TIMES!
For republicans if a certain bent, the current events are wrong, EVUL! IMMORAL! FASCISM!
Meanwhile everyone else has a cup of tea.
The attitude expressed by radical leftwingers towards the Tory party on horseback's pro-foxhunting marches seems to have made a big effect on you, because you keep referring to it, but it's not at all to their discredit. It doesn't show them to be hypocrites at all. All it shows is that they were a bit naive where the right wing, its ability to mobilise its social base, and its willingness to use physical force were concerned. (At least some on the radical left - me for example - are not naive about that, but we are few and far between.) "I felt the menace when they looked back at me" - whoever said that was aware and learning, which is more than can be said about a lot of people. Perhaps he or she hadn't read much about May 1968 in Paris. The political right wing were kind of nowhere for a few days. It was as if they'd disappeared. Then WHAM they called out 1 million people in a huge march in Paris, and made it absolutely clear they were willing to fight a civil war.
My feeling at the time of the pro-foxhunting marches, which you call "countryside" marches as if everyone living in the countryside supports foxhunting which is not true, was that it would not be at all surprising if on a subsequent march they brought guns.
I’ve mentioned it twice.
Your last couple of sentences illustrate nicely the hysteria that the marches induced. You were “feeling” armed revolution? Really?
I’ve seen lots of marches in London. I even helped organise a couple - both were against my political beliefs. They were student marches and, working in the Student Union, I thought it my duty to ensure that the students had an organised and safe march.
Part of democracy is such peaceful marches. Being all up for window smashing, trying to set fire to buildings, throwing missiles at the police etc etc and then claiming to be scared by people politely walking down a road is quite funny.
I find the idea that we are inches from a revolution (fascist or otherwise) interesting. There is substantial evidence to the contrary.
Consider the Rotherham and other “issues” - from them came not pogroms. Not even murders. A small increase in racism - which was not, as I understand it, from anyone actually involved - opportunism from the usual scum.
My relatives from South America were astonished. If such things had occurred there, the police stations would have been burnt down and policemen lynched as a first step. The local government offices would have gone next… then the race riots…
*Shuffles feet shamefacedly*. You may not be the only PBer to do so. I did feel embarrassed but I salved my conscience by taking my elderly mother with me who could never have queued for health reasons.
I have just discovered that accredited journalists can skip THE QUEUE
A moral dilemma indeed
Stop prevaricating.
Pack a small bag, man up and get in THE QUEUE.
You probably have about 2 hours before your chance is gone forever.
You’re right. I’m going to do my duty, get my lazy arse in gear, get down to that bloody queue, then completely skip it with my Press Card, see the Queen at my leisure, then head out for lunch with a friend
That’s my duty, as a loyal member of His Majesty’s Press, Knapper’s Gazette branch
Of course you fucking will. You’d be daft not to. If I were in your position and wanted to go I’d do the same.
But you will not be allowed to don the mantle of suffering and perseverance that the 14 hour pilgrimage would bestow, a holy cleansing of your soul, a glorious, public affirmation of your diamond hard unquenchable patriotism and fealty to our glorious ex-monarch.
You’ll just look like a cynical chancer. Go for it!
You are not going to see the Queen, she is dead and hidden in a box. The queue is the event, a mass participation event marking a remarkable reign and a remarkable public servant. Those who take part in it will remember it for the rest of their lives. You either participate or you don't. If you just want to see it switch on the TV.
You don't understand. You do see The Queen. Everyone who files past sees The Queen, and gets those few precious seconds with her.
You might not see her face with your naked eyes but, believe me, you definitely penetrate through into that box and see her.
When the period of national hysteria ends on Monday, what will the press find to fill all that space?
You have three times on this thread referred to national hysteria. I've not seen anything to characterise as hysterical, which term could fairly describe the reaction to Princess Diana's death. These past few days, the public's reaction has been overwhelmingly of reflection and appreciation.
Hysteria? There’s been a very small amount of quiet tears. And a lot of people standing quietly for hours, for various things.
It reminds me of the first countryside march. Totally peaceful, quiet. The joke that they tidied up Hyde Park was pretty much true.
A couple of university acquaintances were there. Black Bloc types. They were horrified, angered… and terrified. To them, “middle class” people having a quiet demo was Fascism… “I felt the menace when they looked at me” was one comment. This from a guy who thought that smashing shop windows was valuable social commentary.
It was simply that a large protest “the other way” wasn’t in their world view - riots are ok when they are from your side. Viscous little dreams of beating up your opponents are cool. The “others” assembling in large numbers - END TIMES!
For republicans if a certain bent, the current events are wrong, EVUL! IMMORAL! FASCISM!
Meanwhile everyone else has a cup of tea.
The attitude expressed by radical leftwingers towards the Tory party on horseback's pro-foxhunting marches seems to have made a big effect on you, because you keep referring to it, but it's not at all to their discredit. It doesn't show them to be hypocrites at all. All it shows is that they were a bit naive where the right wing, its ability to mobilise its social base, and its willingness to use physical force were concerned. (At least some on the radical left - me for example - are not naive about that, but we are few and far between.) "I felt the menace when they looked back at me" - whoever said that was aware and learning, which is more than can be said about a lot of people. Perhaps he or she hadn't read much about May 1968 in Paris. The political right wing were kind of nowhere for a few days. It was as if they'd disappeared. Then WHAM they called out 1 million people in a huge march in Paris, and made it absolutely clear they were willing to fight a civil war.
My feeling at the time of the pro-foxhunting marches, which you call "countryside" marches as if everyone living in the countryside supports foxhunting which is not true, was that it would not be at all surprising if on a subsequent march they brought guns.
Were you there?
No I didn't see any of the CA marches at first hand. I was involved in anti-CA stuff from behind my keyboard, though, and paying close attention. And unlike most leftwingers I have been in other environments where I've witnessed the ruling class act as a herd. It's not a pretty sight. (@IshmaelZ - stop trying to get personal info from me, OK? Last time it was my age group.)
Hahahahahaha
This is just the warm up, it's your inside leg measurement I am really after.
Ruling class FFS, there's people I hunt with who work on the tills in Tescos. Arse.
*Shuffles feet shamefacedly*. You may not be the only PBer to do so. I did feel embarrassed but I salved my conscience by taking my elderly mother with me who could never have queued for health reasons.
I know consistency is overrated, but can I refer you to almost everything you have written in the past 5 days? You can't skip The Queue. Unless of course, someone offers you TRAVEL or SEX. But The Queue is travel - albeit extremely slow travel. As always, the journey is as important as the destination. And as for sex - who knows what new friends you'll make in The Queue?
Of course, if it starts to rain, that changes things completely.
It's quite simple: he can't be arsed.
He wasn't even sure he wanted to be here in the first place because he wasn't sure he could handle The Grief.
@Jonathan got him right when he described him as a right-wing luvvie. And so, it has proved.
I have just discovered that accredited journalists can skip THE QUEUE
A moral dilemma indeed
Stop prevaricating.
Pack a small bag, man up and get in THE QUEUE.
You probably have about 2 hours before your chance is gone forever.
You’re right. I’m going to do my duty, get my lazy arse in gear, get down to that bloody queue, then completely skip it with my Press Card, see the Queen at my leisure, then head out for lunch with a friend
That’s my duty, as a loyal member of His Majesty’s Press, Knapper’s Gazette branch
Of course you fucking will. You’d be daft not to. If I were in your position and wanted to go I’d do the same.
But you will not be allowed to don the mantle of suffering and perseverance that the 14 hour pilgrimage would bestow, a holy cleansing of your soul, a glorious, public affirmation of your diamond hard unquenchable patriotism and fealty to our glorious ex-monarch.
You’ll just look like a cynical chancer. Go for it!
You are not going to see the Queen, she is dead and hidden in a box. The queue is the event, a mass participation event marking a remarkable reign and a remarkable public servant. Those who take part in it will remember it for the rest of their lives. You either participate or you don't. If you just want to see it switch on the TV.
You don't understand. You do see The Queen. Everyone who files past sees The Queen, and gets those few precious seconds with her.
You might not see her face with your naked eyes but, believe me, you definitely penetrate through into that box and see her.
In which they translate 'interviewed as a witness' in their article into "involved in an alleged conspiracy" in the couple of paras the public can see.
FPT - The FBI have to jump through a lot of hoops to interview someone in a foreign jurisdiction. It's not done on a whim or just in case or as a filler. So it's pretty serious for it to have reached this stage.
Whether it's because he is under suspicion or simply as a witness who can say.
Correct. The "interviewed as a witness" is from his spokesman, I think, and perhaps others. FBI may change their agenda. We'll see.
I remain deeply cynical about scoops in the Sunday Times, having observed the various ones during COVID.
It is worth remembering that there are different types of witness. There are those who simply saw something or did something which is an element in the offence which has to be proved as a matter of law eg the person who filed the relevant document on a particular date or saw a man running from A to B etc. They are not people who, even on the worst reading, could ever be charged with any offence.
Then there are those who are very involved in a matter. They could be charged with an offence. Or the investigators/prosecutors may feel that it is better to get their evidence as witnesses because it helps them make the case against even more important/involved offenders.
So, for instance, one of the key witnesses in a big fraud trial I did was the fraudster's manager. There was plenty of evidence on which he could have been charged but the prosecutors decided that it made more sense to have him a as a witness.
This sort of assessment happens all the time when you are investigating conspiracies or offences where multiple people are involved.
What we don't know here is whether the FBI are interviewing him because they consider him to be the first type of witness I have described or in the second category.
*Shuffles feet shamefacedly*. You may not be the only PBer to do so. I did feel embarrassed but I salved my conscience by taking my elderly mother with me who could never have queued for health reasons.
Ah. You’ve given me an excuse. Ta
And PB looked from Schofield to Leon and Leon to Schofield and already they couldnt tell the difference between them. Chilling.
Contrary view to the sacking of Scholar in the Times.
Rathy ranty. What is interesting is that the Times agreed to publish it, given how strong it is.
What an utterly shit opener:
"While there has been an understandable outpouring of sadness at the death of Queen Elizabeth, the removal of Sir Tom Scholar as the lead permanent secretary at the Treasury should be a cause for celebration."
I would regard that as deeply unpleasant exaggeration if it came from a poster on PB. From a named contributor on the Times, it's appalling.
I have just discovered that accredited journalists can skip THE QUEUE
A moral dilemma indeed
Stop prevaricating.
Pack a small bag, man up and get in THE QUEUE.
You probably have about 2 hours before your chance is gone forever.
You’re right. I’m going to do my duty, get my lazy arse in gear, get down to that bloody queue, then completely skip it with my Press Card, see the Queen at my leisure, then head out for lunch with a friend
That’s my duty, as a loyal member of His Majesty’s Press, Knapper’s Gazette branch
You know you said you'd physically fight to keep the monarchy? If a referendum decided to abolish it, would you be willing to take part in the kind of terrorist actions in favour of the monarchy that you were calling for Zelensky's government to carry out in Russia?
You don't need to do that but could still argue for restoration of the monarchy as in Spain or here after Cromwell.
Not that there is any chance of any referendum anytime soon on it or it being lost, only the Greens back a republic
Contrary view to the sacking of Scholar in the Times.
Rathy ranty. What is interesting is that the Times agreed to publish it, given how strong it is.
What an utterly shit opener:
"While there has been an understandable outpouring of sadness at the death of Queen Elizabeth, the removal of Sir Tom Scholar as the lead permanent secretary at the Treasury should be a cause for celebration."
I would regard that as deeply unpleasant exaggeration if it came from a poster on PB. From a named contributor on the Times, it's appalling.
I think its a stretch to expect Scholar Sacking Bunting to be a feature of homes during the State Funeral
When the period of national hysteria ends on Monday, what will the press find to fill all that space?
You have three times on this thread referred to national hysteria. I've not seen anything to characterise as hysterical, which term could fairly describe the reaction to Princess Diana's death. These past few days, the public's reaction has been overwhelmingly of reflection and appreciation.
Hysteria? There’s been a very small amount of quiet tears. And a lot of people standing quietly for hours, for various things.
It reminds me of the first countryside march. Totally peaceful, quiet. The joke that they tidied up Hyde Park was pretty much true.
A couple of university acquaintances were there. Black Bloc types. They were horrified, angered… and terrified. To them, “middle class” people having a quiet demo was Fascism… “I felt the menace when they looked at me” was one comment. This from a guy who thought that smashing shop windows was valuable social commentary.
It was simply that a large protest “the other way” wasn’t in their world view - riots are ok when they are from your side. Viscous little dreams of beating up your opponents are cool. The “others” assembling in large numbers - END TIMES!
For republicans if a certain bent, the current events are wrong, EVUL! IMMORAL! FASCISM!
Meanwhile everyone else has a cup of tea.
The attitude expressed by radical leftwingers towards the Tory party on horseback's pro-foxhunting marches seems to have made a big effect on you, because you keep referring to it, but it's not at all to their discredit. It doesn't show them to be hypocrites at all. All it shows is that they were a bit naive where the right wing, its ability to mobilise its social base, and its willingness to use physical force were concerned. (At least some on the radical left - me for example - are not naive about that, but we are few and far between.) "I felt the menace when they looked back at me" - whoever said that was aware and learning, which is more than can be said about a lot of people. Perhaps he or she hadn't read much about May 1968 in Paris. The political right wing were kind of nowhere for a few days. It was as if they'd disappeared. Then WHAM they called out 1 million people in a huge march in Paris, and made it absolutely clear they were willing to fight a civil war.
My feeling at the time of the pro-foxhunting marches, which you call "countryside" marches as if everyone living in the countryside supports foxhunting which is not true, was that it would not be at all surprising if on a subsequent march they brought guns.
Were you there?
No I didn't see any of the CA marches at first hand. I was involved in anti-CA stuff from behind my keyboard, though, and paying close attention. And unlike most leftwingers I have been in other environments where I've witnessed the ruling class act as a herd. It's not a pretty sight. (@IshmaelZ - stop trying to get personal info from me, OK? Last time it was my age group.)
Hahahahahaha
This is just the warm up, it's your inside leg measurement I am really after.
Ruling class FFS, there's people I hunt with who work on the tills in Tescos. Arse.
it just goes to prove my point about people being triggered by ordinary actions by opponents.
Someone mentioned various Evul Big Groups involved in the demos. This is a feature of every large cause. The Iraq demos had a variety of interesting backers, for example. The anti-fracking demos (and organisations) especially. As did the big CND marches in the 80s.
The presence of such groups doesn’t invalidate the marchers, I think. Nothing is pure.
Re; Ishamel's question on why I perceived a sense of threat or pitchfork menace from that CA march, it's such a long time ago now it can surely only be anecdotal. That was just my sense gleaned from interviews with a few of protestors in the crowd at the time. I'm sure there were other views represented too.
The largest banner in this picture reminds of my general anecdotal impressions and flavour of it I felt at the time. "Beware the Fury of a Patient Man - West Dartmoor Hunt ."
But now I’m not sure. I don’t want to PENETRATE THROUGH INTO THE QUEEN’S BOX, especially as she’s dead
You don't have to. We all know that you are a dignified restrained sort of fellow, limiting yourself to a small sherry before dinner one Sunday in four. And not the sort of vulgar person who prances round beaches drunk shouting at foreigners and ogling girls. Let alone talking about penetration at such a time. (Tsk).
Off you go now. Do your duty, wear some widower's weeds and stop wailing at us. Report back at 18:00 and if your report is very good you may permit yourself a small drink.
Interesting header here. In particular that factors you kind of feel are going to be key in sweeping the Cons into opposition in 24 - eg tactical voting and their losing touch with their old base in seeking to keep a newer one - are possibly being borne out in local results. The worst position in my longer term politics betting portfolio is a short of Lab majority at average 6.5. Really wish I could magic that one away.
*Shuffles feet shamefacedly*. You may not be the only PBer to do so. I did feel embarrassed but I salved my conscience by taking my elderly mother with me who could never have queued for health reasons.
Ah. You’ve given me an excuse. Ta
And PB looked from Schofield to Leon and Leon to Schofield and already they couldnt tell the difference between them. Chilling.
Dunno... If you've got to be a 'Queue Wanker' (as they are now called on socials) then you'd be daft not to take the short one.
I know consistency is overrated, but can I refer you to almost everything you have written in the past 5 days? You can't skip The Queue. Unless of course, someone offers you TRAVEL or SEX. But The Queue is travel - albeit extremely slow travel. As always, the journey is as important as the destination. And as for sex - who knows what new friends you'll make in The Queue?
Of course, if it starts to rain, that changes things completely.
It's quite simple: he can't be arsed.
He wasn't even sure he wanted to be here in the first place because he wasn't sure he could handle The Grief.
@Jonathan got him right when he described him as a right-wing luvvie. And so, it has proved.
Yes but only one of has revealed that he’s been PENETRATING THE QUEEN’S BOX and it isn’t me, is it?
Quite frankly no one comes out of this smelling of roses so it’s probably best we move on
Contrary view to the sacking of Scholar in the Times.
Rathy ranty. What is interesting is that the Times agreed to publish it, given how strong it is.
What an utterly shit opener:
"While there has been an understandable outpouring of sadness at the death of Queen Elizabeth, the removal of Sir Tom Scholar as the lead permanent secretary at the Treasury should be a cause for celebration."
I would regard that as deeply unpleasant exaggeration if it came from a poster on PB. From a named contributor on the Times, it's appalling.
You are not going to see the Queen, she is dead and hidden in a box. The queue is the event, a mass participation event marking a remarkable reign and a remarkable public servant. Those who take part in it will remember it for the rest of their lives. You either participate or you don't. If you just want to see it switch on the TV.
What's more, as I understand it, this has not been organised by the government. Everything has been organised partly by the palace and partly by the police with no political or politicians involvement. Which is perhaps why everything has run smoothly.
So far anyway!
Perhaps he just wants to be a "Pussycat, Pussycat".
That "not going to see the Queen" is interesting. I was musing on whether an open casket (not British tradition) would be more appropriate.
Are there any countries that do that? (Soviet Russia? Presumably to prove that the old dictator is dead 'n' gone ;-) )
Re; Ishamel's question on why I perceived a sense of threat or pitchfork menace from that CA march, it's such a long time ago now it can surely only be anecdotal. That was just my sense gleaned from interviews with a few of protestors in the crowd at the time ; I'm sure there were other views represented too.
The largest banner in this picture reminds of the general anecdotal impressions and flavour of it I felt at the time. "Beware the Fury of a Patient Man - West Dartmoor Hunt ."
LOL, that's my local hunt. Quoting Dryden is not something I would have thought within their skill set, must ask who it was.
But it's all very well to say Ooooh I felt threatened, we really need some stats for beatings/stabbings/murders to see if the feeling was justified. There weren't any.
When the period of national hysteria ends on Monday, what will the press find to fill all that space?
You have three times on this thread referred to national hysteria. I've not seen anything to characterise as hysterical, which term could fairly describe the reaction to Princess Diana's death. These past few days, the public's reaction has been overwhelmingly of reflection and appreciation.
Hysteria? There’s been a very small amount of quiet tears. And a lot of people standing quietly for hours, for various things.
It reminds me of the first countryside march. Totally peaceful, quiet. The joke that they tidied up Hyde Park was pretty much true.
A couple of university acquaintances were there. Black Bloc types. They were horrified, angered… and terrified. To them, “middle class” people having a quiet demo was Fascism… “I felt the menace when they looked at me” was one comment. This from a guy who thought that smashing shop windows was valuable social commentary.
It was simply that a large protest “the other way” wasn’t in their world view - riots are ok when they are from your side. Viscous little dreams of beating up your opponents are cool. The “others” assembling in large numbers - END TIMES!
For republicans if a certain bent, the current events are wrong, EVUL! IMMORAL! FASCISM!
Meanwhile everyone else has a cup of tea.
The attitude expressed by radical leftwingers towards the Tory party on horseback's pro-foxhunting marches seems to have made a big effect on you, because you keep referring to it, but it's not at all to their discredit. It doesn't show them to be hypocrites at all. All it shows is that they were a bit naive where the right wing, its ability to mobilise its social base, and its willingness to use physical force were concerned. (At least some on the radical left - me for example - are not naive about that, but we are few and far between.) "I felt the menace when they looked back at me" - whoever said that was aware and learning, which is more than can be said about a lot of people. Perhaps he or she hadn't read much about May 1968 in Paris. The political right wing were kind of nowhere for a few days. It was as if they'd disappeared. Then WHAM they called out 1 million people in a huge march in Paris, and made it absolutely clear they were willing to fight a civil war.
My feeling at the time of the pro-foxhunting marches, which you call "countryside" marches as if everyone living in the countryside supports foxhunting which is not true, was that it would not be at all surprising if on a subsequent march they brought guns.
There's a some truth in Dynamo's views on this one, as he observed it from several thousand miles away.
The Countryside march was certainly quiet and relatively peaceful, but I personally also thought it contained a large amount of element of threat, and also a sense of aggressively trying to monopolise the national identity, as much as the most intolerant leftwingers.
There were also some very large landed and country business interests funding that march, somewhat astroturfing as the organised Right is prone to, in the UK, and as with Brexit. I remember the bitter resentment of it from an old friend in the countryside when I lived there ; the countryside has in fact always been split right almost exactly right down the middle on hunting and the right of lairds to trample everyone's fields, as I saw when I lived there.
I was there.
I was there because I supported continuation and licencing of foxhunting, not its prohibition, and thought the latter nonsensical, ideological and a sign of the Blair Government throwing red meat to its left-wing backbenches because they didnt really give a shit about the countryside.
I lost that battle. But I still think I was right to march.
Actually I agree with you on the gesture politics aspect. Although I'm not - at all - a fan of hunting, it could also easily be seen as one of two pieces of gesture politics from the Blair government to the left, as an alibi for not being that radical, in its first term. The other was the idiotic ban on assisted places at public schools, which just served to make them more socially exclusive than before.
Re; Ishamel's question on why I perceived a sense of threat or pitchfork menace from that CA march, it's such a long time ago now it can surely only be anecdotal. That was just my sense gleaned from interviews with a few of protestors in the crowd at the time. I'm sure there were other views represented too.
The largest banner in this picture reminds of my general anecdotal impressions and flavour of it I felt at the time. "Beware the Fury of a Patient Man - West Dartmoor Hunt ."
*Shuffles feet shamefacedly*. You may not be the only PBer to do so. I did feel embarrassed but I salved my conscience by taking my elderly mother with me who could never have queued for health reasons.
Ah. You’ve given me an excuse. Ta
And PB looked from Schofield to Leon and Leon to Schofield and already they couldnt tell the difference between them. Chilling.
Dunno... If you've got to be a 'Queue Wanker' (as they are now called on socials) then you'd be daft not to take the short one.
Contrary view to the sacking of Scholar in the Times.
Rathy ranty. What is interesting is that the Times agreed to publish it, given how strong it is.
When he resigned in the Lords over the Covid bounceback loan schemes, it was reported as him criticising Sunak. Now apparently Scholar is to blame.
However, he was the Treasury Minister responsible in part for implementation of the scheme and was also criticised for his own conflicts of interest in relation to some of those companies gaining contracts.
Perhaps there is something a bit more personal underlying his criticisms.
Liz Truss is unsuited to this moment and the times to come, the nation wants a pragmatic unifier, where her dna is intrinsically ideological and divisively partisan.
Not her fault, but she became out-of-date two days into the job. If you don’t believe me, just imagine if Ben Wallace we’re leader now.
Easy to say she's unsuited but with nothing to back it up.
Must be the most ironic pot and kettle post ever. You constantly post snide negative posts about everything and have never said anything constructive. As you have been challenged by several before why don't you get off your arse and actually write a thread rather than snipping all the time.
My stalker is back ...why don't you just take a hike. in any event all the snide comments are coming from the Anti Truss brigade.
Why don't you, just for once, post something positive or constructive. You really do come over as someone who is very bitter.
Take a look in the mirror chummy. You don't like what I post , then ignore it. I shall cetainly ignore you from on. Have a good day.
Look in the mirror? Just look at my posts. The first ones I wrote today were complimentary of the lying in state and the public attending it and the tv coverage. Other than ones for comedic effect I write constructive posts, arguing a point. I have liked several posts today. Some for people I don't agree with, but because they have produced well constructive arguments.
You just post bile after bile without any content.
If you don't like what you see here then argue against it, write a header or do something constructive. Anything. Even post a joke, but do something worthwhile.
Otherwise just sod off with your negativity.
I will post what I like. You are not the sole arbiter. If you don't like what I post ignore it.
Good advice. I already do.
Sensible fellow. There are many disparate views on on PB. I now ignore all the bile that is posted about Truss which seems to.pass on here as accepted. She has been dismissed as PM when she has barely been in office for 10 days or so. She may turn out as awful but the jury is still out, but not on PB it would seem.
I know consistency is overrated, but can I refer you to almost everything you have written in the past 5 days? You can't skip The Queue. Unless of course, someone offers you TRAVEL or SEX. But The Queue is travel - albeit extremely slow travel. As always, the journey is as important as the destination. And as for sex - who knows what new friends you'll make in The Queue?
Of course, if it starts to rain, that changes things completely.
It's quite simple: he can't be arsed.
He wasn't even sure he wanted to be here in the first place because he wasn't sure he could handle The Grief.
@Jonathan got him right when he described him as a right-wing luvvie. And so, it has proved.
Yes but only one of has revealed that he’s been PENETRATING THE QUEEN’S BOX and it isn’t me, is it?
Quite frankly no one comes out of this smelling of roses so it’s probably best we move on
The only one seeing some warped double entrende in that is you.
Contrary view to the sacking of Scholar in the Times.
Rathy ranty. What is interesting is that the Times agreed to publish it, given how strong it is.
When he resigned in the Lords over the Covid bounceback loan schemes, it was reported as him criticising Sunak. Now apparently Scholar is to blame.
However, he was the Treasury Minister responsible in part for implementation of the scheme and was also criticised for his own conflicts of interest in relation to some of those companies gaining contracts.
Perhaps there is something a bit more personal underlying his criticisms.
Given that opening para, we can be fairly sure there is something personal at work here
Contrary view to the sacking of Scholar in the Times.
Rathy ranty. What is interesting is that the Times agreed to publish it, given how strong it is.
It is nevertheless a contrary view and it is unsurprising that it was published. Some on here want to close down opposing views but they are healthy.
Treasury orthodoxy is not sacrosanct.
The structural beliefs/policy of organisations are a fascinating thing to study.
After it’s mention here, I dug around, and there seems to be such a policy/belief around tidal ponds. That they are Bad and Must Be Opposed.
The thing that tipped me was finding an estimate in which it was claimed that the entire structure of a suggested development would be in concrete - tens of millions of tons of it. This would make it massively expensive and have a serious CO2 emission issues.
The actual proposal didn’t use much concrete - large piles of rock and clay. Think a funny shaped bit of land, rather than a concrete gravity dam. The estimate was a literal lie.
Very often, such things come back to an individual with a group around him/her. When the matter in question flows past their office, they pounce…
Liz Truss is unsuited to this moment and the times to come, the nation wants a pragmatic unifier, where her dna is intrinsically ideological and divisively partisan.
Not her fault, but she became out-of-date two days into the job. If you don’t believe me, just imagine if Ben Wallace we’re leader now.
Easy to say she's unsuited but with nothing to back it up.
Must be the most ironic pot and kettle post ever. You constantly post snide negative posts about everything and have never said anything constructive. As you have been challenged by several before why don't you get off your arse and actually write a thread rather than snipping all the time.
My stalker is back ...why don't you just take a hike. in any event all the snide comments are coming from the Anti Truss brigade.
Why don't you, just for once, post something positive or constructive. You really do come over as someone who is very bitter.
Take a look in the mirror chummy. You don't like what I post , then ignore it. I shall cetainly ignore you from on. Have a good day.
Look in the mirror? Just look at my posts. The first ones I wrote today were complimentary of the lying in state and the public attending it and the tv coverage. Other than ones for comedic effect I write constructive posts, arguing a point. I have liked several posts today. Some for people I don't agree with, but because they have produced well constructive arguments.
You just post bile after bile without any content.
If you don't like what you see here then argue against it, write a header or do something constructive. Anything. Even post a joke, but do something worthwhile.
Otherwise just sod off with your negativity.
I will post what I like. You are not the sole arbiter. If you don't like what I post ignore it.
Nope I won't ignore someone who posts endless bile. Suck it up or just become a nicer person.
Re; MexicanPete's point on Poles either going up into senior positions or returning home, that is interesting. If the average family really is now 20% poorer than our neighbouring countries, that would indeed start to bring them close to some of the slightly better East European living standards, as the FT article says.
I read the story with one raised eyebrow. JB Murdoch is a good journalist so I’m willing to believe him, yet the data doesn’t quite pass the smell test
I’ve just come from southern Spain and Portugal which have a similar GDP per capita to parts of Eastern Europe. Landing in Gatwick it is immediately obvious the UK is much richer (even taking into account the fact I landed in prosperous SE England)
The graphs apparently use GDP by PPP, which might be a confounding factor here
There's nothing wrong with using PPP data.
However, I'm not convinced the actual data actually backed up the point he was making. The charts showed that over the course of twenty years, the median British household saw their income rise in real terms, from $30,000 to $44,000 ie a rise of 47% . That is actually rather better than I would have expected.
The richest ten per cent certainly did better than that (the rise was 60%) . But, only the poorest 5% and the richest 3% saw stagnation in living standards over that period.
We shouldn't be upset that much of Eastern Europe has seen extraordinary rises in living standards over that period. Eastern Europe is getting to the point where it ought to have been, had they not had to endure 50 years of first Nazism, then communism. Slovenia, the Baltic States, Poland, Czechia, and Slovakia, simply *ought* to be very rich countries, and now they're reaching their proper place.
Yes
Tho I do believe one has to be careful with PPP, it can mislead - but so can nominal GDP in a different way
Slovenia in particular should definitely be a rich society, small, sunny, fertile, Alpine, next to Austria and Switzerland and the richest bit of Italy. Small highly educated population, low immigration, low population density, no post industrial blight
It should be as rich as its rich neighbours and now - belatedly - it is getting there
Most of us would have expected, thirty years ago, that freed from communism, Eastern Europe would flourish, and so it proved.
A staunch Conservative Party member and local politician, and an international business owner with interests in Eastern Europe told me, before the referendum, that he and his team had crunched the numbers and there was no way Leave were going to win. Which I found reassuring.
Besides, he added, we’ve just spent decades pumping money into Eastern Europe and it’s going to boom. There’s no way the Conservative Party would allow any limits or barriers on our access to that.
Liz Truss is unsuited to this moment and the times to come, the nation wants a pragmatic unifier, where her dna is intrinsically ideological and divisively partisan.
Not her fault, but she became out-of-date two days into the job. If you don’t believe me, just imagine if Ben Wallace we’re leader now.
Easy to say she's unsuited but with nothing to back it up.
Must be the most ironic pot and kettle post ever. You constantly post snide negative posts about everything and have never said anything constructive. As you have been challenged by several before why don't you get off your arse and actually write a thread rather than snipping all the time.
My stalker is back ...why don't you just take a hike. in any event all the snide comments are coming from the Anti Truss brigade.
Why don't you, just for once, post something positive or constructive. You really do come over as someone who is very bitter.
Take a look in the mirror chummy. You don't like what I post , then ignore it. I shall cetainly ignore you from on. Have a good day.
Look in the mirror? Just look at my posts. The first ones I wrote today were complimentary of the lying in state and the public attending it and the tv coverage. Other than ones for comedic effect I write constructive posts, arguing a point. I have liked several posts today. Some for people I don't agree with, but because they have produced well constructive arguments.
You just post bile after bile without any content.
If you don't like what you see here then argue against it, write a header or do something constructive. Anything. Even post a joke, but do something worthwhile.
Otherwise just sod off with your negativity.
I will post what I like. You are not the sole arbiter. If you don't like what I post ignore it.
Good advice. I already do.
Sensible fellow. There are many disparate views on on PB. I now ignore all the bile that is posted about Truss which seems to.pass on here as accepted. She has been dismissed as PM when she has barely been in office for 10 days or so. She may turn out as awful but the jury is still out, but not on PB it would seem.
Lol. You don't get that was aimed at you. Twit.
Oh I did . I am now tired of you. Go stalk someone else.
Re; MexicanPete's point on Poles either going up into senior positions or returning home, that is interesting. If the average family really is now 20% poorer than our neighbouring countries, that would indeed start to bring them close to some of the slightly better East European living standards, as the FT article says.
I read the story with one raised eyebrow. JB Murdoch is a good journalist so I’m willing to believe him, yet the data doesn’t quite pass the smell test
I’ve just come from southern Spain and Portugal which have a similar GDP per capita to parts of Eastern Europe. Landing in Gatwick it is immediately obvious the UK is much richer (even taking into account the fact I landed in prosperous SE England)
The graphs apparently use GDP by PPP, which might be a confounding factor here
There's nothing wrong with using PPP data.
However, I'm not convinced the actual data actually backed up the point he was making. The charts showed that over the course of twenty years, the median British household saw their income rise in real terms, from $30,000 to $44,000 ie a rise of 47% . That is actually rather better than I would have expected.
The richest ten per cent certainly did better than that (the rise was 60%) . But, only the poorest 5% and the richest 3% saw stagnation in living standards over that period.
We shouldn't be upset that much of Eastern Europe has seen extraordinary rises in living standards over that period. Eastern Europe is getting to the point where it ought to have been, had they not had to endure 50 years of first Nazism, then communism. Slovenia, the Baltic States, Poland, Czechia, and Slovakia, simply *ought* to be very rich countries, and now they're reaching their proper place.
Yes
Tho I do believe one has to be careful with PPP, it can mislead - but so can nominal GDP in a different way
Slovenia in particular should definitely be a rich society, small, sunny, fertile, Alpine, next to Austria and Switzerland and the richest bit of Italy. Small highly educated population, low immigration, low population density, no post industrial blight
It should be as rich as its rich neighbours and now - belatedly - it is getting there
The graphs use PPP by GDP, applied to disposable income. So there are some largish distortions there, one of which is health funding compulsorily paid out of after tax income in some countries, which can be quite significant.
IMO the twitter thread was better than the original article, which as noted compared UK, US, Norway and Slovenia as 'peers', which is quite far-fetched.
I found branding top 10% countries as a "poor society", when even Western European minimum wages put people receiving them at the very top of the global scale.
Contrary view to the sacking of Scholar in the Times.
Rathy ranty. What is interesting is that the Times agreed to publish it, given how strong it is.
It is nevertheless a contrary view and it is unsurprising that it was published. Some on here want to close down opposing views but they are healthy.
Treasury orthodoxy is not sacrosanct.
Granting favours to friends and donors of the Tories has been Tory orthodoxy for years.
It would be nice to see this challenged.
It was about Scholar and the treasury's orthodoxy of the last 40 to 50 yrs.not corruption . You dont think Labour politicians do the same when in office. Cash for honours anyone.... there isn't a politician from any party that is completely straight. They all have their finger in the pie somewhere.
Contrary view to the sacking of Scholar in the Times.
Rathy ranty. What is interesting is that the Times agreed to publish it, given how strong it is.
What an utterly shit opener:
"While there has been an understandable outpouring of sadness at the death of Queen Elizabeth, the removal of Sir Tom Scholar as the lead permanent secretary at the Treasury should be a cause for celebration."
I would regard that as deeply unpleasant exaggeration if it came from a poster on PB. From a named contributor on the Times, it's appalling.
That’s actually quite grotesque
It is. Crass juxta. From the same stable as all those ...
"Here at Dante's Pizza Inferno we feel the grief of all our customers at the passing of Her Majesty and as a way of helping them, helping YOU, to process it we have created a stunning 12 inch crusty bake commemorative pizza in the shape of a corgi (and with extra anchovies). It's called The Liz and it really is The Biz! Only £25. Order now while stocks last."
On topic, I’ve started watching Netflix’s “Formula 1: Drive to Survive”
The Amazon Prime/MotoGP one is good too if you like watching skinny, dead behind the eyes, young Italians and Spaniards smashing themselves to bits on the reg. It covers the 2021 season which was replete with drama including a death, a complete mental breakdown and an incredible moment of release when Fabio Q. became the champ.
Contrary view to the sacking of Scholar in the Times.
Rathy ranty. What is interesting is that the Times agreed to publish it, given how strong it is.
It is nevertheless a contrary view and it is unsurprising that it was published. Some on here want to close down opposing views but they are healthy.
Treasury orthodoxy is not sacrosanct.
The problem with the Times article is that it's not just an attack on Treasury orthodoxy, which would be fine. It's also a very personal, rather unpleasant attack on a named Civil Servant (Tom Scholar) by an unelected Tory peer (Theodore Agnew). The Civil Servant has no right of reply. It's pretty tawdry.
Amazing. I don't blame you as I'm sure many others would take advantage of it if they could. It does rather sum up the abusive relationship that the establishment feels it needs to engage in with the media. The self importance of 'media people' must be indulged or heaven forbid they might say nasty things. It's all rather sinister and done under the cover of reporting.
I wonder whether it was actually a good idea to have the live coverage of the Hall or if it would have been better kept private - daylight on the magic? However since journalists can quite easily watch what's on TV or speak the people attending it's hard to see why they need special treatment.
OT the new Highway Code rules, or rather the government's failure to properly publicise them, might have made roads more dangerous, according to the clips shown on this driving instruction channel. https://youtu.be/ahDPuCInKJU?t=188
It is not just drivers and riders who need to know how to behave at junctions, pedestrians do too, and they won't be reading the Highway Code. Anne-Marie Trevelyan has replaced Grant Shapps as Transport Secretary and should splash some advertising cash in Soho, and/or remark the roads as one of the commenters says was done in Spain.
On topic, I’ve started watching Netflix’s “Formula 1: Drive to Survive”
The Amazon Prime/MotoGP one is good too if you like watching skinny, dead behind the eyes, young Italians and Spaniards smashing themselves to bits on the reg. It covers the 2021 season which was replete with drama including a death, a complete mental breakdown and an incredible moment of release when Fabio Q. became the champ.
Well I might have watched it. But now you’ve gone and ruined it by giving away the ending. Golf clap
What’s great about Drive to Survive - for me - is that I have so little interest in F1 I have no idea who anyone is, or who’s going to win, or when or why
So it is really like watching a fresh TV drama. It is all twists and turns. The show runners have done a scintillating job of extracting maximum narrative. I’m sure it’s bending the truth to make it more entertaining, but who cares, F1 is ridiculous anyway
Re; MexicanPete's point on Poles either going up into senior positions or returning home, that is interesting. If the average family really is now 20% poorer than our neighbouring countries, that would indeed start to bring them close to some of the slightly better East European living standards, as the FT article says.
I read the story with one raised eyebrow. JB Murdoch is a good journalist so I’m willing to believe him, yet the data doesn’t quite pass the smell test
I’ve just come from southern Spain and Portugal which have a similar GDP per capita to parts of Eastern Europe. Landing in Gatwick it is immediately obvious the UK is much richer (even taking into account the fact I landed in prosperous SE England)
The graphs apparently use GDP by PPP, which might be a confounding factor here
There's nothing wrong with using PPP data.
However, I'm not convinced the actual data actually backed up the point he was making. The charts showed that over the course of twenty years, the median British household saw their income rise in real terms, from $30,000 to $44,000 ie a rise of 47% . That is actually rather better than I would have expected.
The richest ten per cent certainly did better than that (the rise was 60%) . But, only the poorest 5% and the richest 3% saw stagnation in living standards over that period.
We shouldn't be upset that much of Eastern Europe has seen extraordinary rises in living standards over that period. Eastern Europe is getting to the point where it ought to have been, had they not had to endure 50 years of first Nazism, then communism. Slovenia, the Baltic States, Poland, Czechia, and Slovakia, simply *ought* to be very rich countries, and now they're reaching their proper place.
Yes
Tho I do believe one has to be careful with PPP, it can mislead - but so can nominal GDP in a different way
Slovenia in particular should definitely be a rich society, small, sunny, fertile, Alpine, next to Austria and Switzerland and the richest bit of Italy. Small highly educated population, low immigration, low population density, no post industrial blight
It should be as rich as its rich neighbours and now - belatedly - it is getting there
Most of us would have expected, thirty years ago, that freed from communism, Eastern Europe would flourish, and so it proved.
A staunch Conservative Party member and local politician, and an international business owner with interests in Eastern Europe told me, before the referendum, that he and his team had crunched the numbers and there was no way Leave were going to win. Which I found reassuring.
Besides, he added, we’ve just spent decades pumping money into Eastern Europe and it’s going to boom. There’s no way the Conservative Party would allow any limits or barriers on our access to that.
Hmm.
On reflection, I think the Conservative party was spooked by the result of the referendum. A small sector then grabbed control with the result that we now have.
The party is now frantically trying to come to terms with what it's done.
We used to joke that Johnson was someone who saw which way a crowd was running, jumped in front of it and shouted follow me! I'm coming to the opinion that his successor is very much the same!
Dont skip the queue - go to the back but then walk alongside it for its full distance up to the start of the VIP line taking selfies along the way - give yourself plausible deniability.
On topic, I’ve started watching Netflix’s “Formula 1: Drive to Survive”
The Amazon Prime/MotoGP one is good too if you like watching skinny, dead behind the eyes, young Italians and Spaniards smashing themselves to bits on the reg. It covers the 2021 season which was replete with drama including a death, a complete mental breakdown and an incredible moment of release when Fabio Q. became the champ.
Dont skip the queue - go to the back but then walk alongside it for its full distance up to the start of the VIP line taking selfies along the way - give yourself plausible deniability.
On the CA March, I wouldn't agree that the absence of people being attacked means there couldn't have been any latent sense of threat. There weren't any attacks on people at the very first Trump rallies either.
Actually the header and the hunting issue are hugely relevant to each other. We all used to vote tory quite thoughtlessly and irrespective of any possible policy issues cos they wos Sound On Hunting. Now that is gone and not coming back it opens up the field considerably.
Re; MexicanPete's point on Poles either going up into senior positions or returning home, that is interesting. If the average family really is now 20% poorer than our neighbouring countries, that would indeed start to bring them close to some of the slightly better East European living standards, as the FT article says.
I read the story with one raised eyebrow. JB Murdoch is a good journalist so I’m willing to believe him, yet the data doesn’t quite pass the smell test
I’ve just come from southern Spain and Portugal which have a similar GDP per capita to parts of Eastern Europe. Landing in Gatwick it is immediately obvious the UK is much richer (even taking into account the fact I landed in prosperous SE England)
The graphs apparently use GDP by PPP, which might be a confounding factor here
There's nothing wrong with using PPP data.
However, I'm not convinced the actual data actually backed up the point he was making. The charts showed that over the course of twenty years, the median British household saw their income rise in real terms, from $30,000 to $44,000 ie a rise of 47% . That is actually rather better than I would have expected.
The richest ten per cent certainly did better than that (the rise was 60%) . But, only the poorest 5% and the richest 3% saw stagnation in living standards over that period.
We shouldn't be upset that much of Eastern Europe has seen extraordinary rises in living standards over that period. Eastern Europe is getting to the point where it ought to have been, had they not had to endure 50 years of first Nazism, then communism. Slovenia, the Baltic States, Poland, Czechia, and Slovakia, simply *ought* to be very rich countries, and now they're reaching their proper place.
Yes
Tho I do believe one has to be careful with PPP, it can mislead - but so can nominal GDP in a different way
Slovenia in particular should definitely be a rich society, small, sunny, fertile, Alpine, next to Austria and Switzerland and the richest bit of Italy. Small highly educated population, low immigration, low population density, no post industrial blight
It should be as rich as its rich neighbours and now - belatedly - it is getting there
For the purposes of the article, comparing living standards across countries, PPP is absolutely the way to go. That is what PPP is designed for, in fact. The stagnation of middle incomes in the US has been a striking feature of the economy in recent decades - arguably its most important feature and a big driver of all the political crap over there I am sure. The fact that we are seeing similar (but less extreme) trends here is worrying and I would guess explains a lot of our own political crap. An economic system that enriches a small elite while everyone else's incomes stagnate is defective and needs fixing. More of the same (as Truss is proposing) is only going to make the problem worse, for sure.
Contrary view to the sacking of Scholar in the Times.
Rathy ranty. What is interesting is that the Times agreed to publish it, given how strong it is.
It is nevertheless a contrary view and it is unsurprising that it was published. Some on here want to close down opposing views but they are healthy.
Treasury orthodoxy is not sacrosanct.
The problem with the Times article is that it's not just an attack on Treasury orthodoxy, which would be fine. It's also a very personal, rather unpleasant attack on a named Civil Servant (Tom Scholar) by an unelected Tory peer (Theodore Agnew). The Civil Servant has no right of reply. It's pretty tawdry.
On the CA March, I wouldn't agree that the absence of people being attacked means there couldn't have been any latent sense of threat. There weren't any attacks at the very first Trump rallies either.
The frequent, videoed, proudly endorsed violence on other demos was, of course, either “a few bad apples” or “justified anger at The System” depending on your viewpoint.
On the CA March, I wouldn't agree that the absence of people being attacked means there couldn't have been any latent sense of threat. There weren't any attacks at the very first Trump rallies either.
The frequent, videoed, proudly endorsed violence on other demos was, of course, either “a few bad apples” or “justified anger at The System” depending on your viewpoint.
Not at the Iraq one, the pro-cannabis ones of the '90s, or most of the anti-austerity ones of the early 2010's.
On the CA March, I wouldn't agree that the absence of people being attacked means there couldn't have been any latent sense of threat. There weren't any attacks on people at the very first Trump rallies either.
Sorry, but that is just inadmissible. I could equally say that as a fervent republican I could sense the latent menace in The Queue. Some of Hitler's earlier rallies were pretty peaceful adter all.
If the reported decision to ditch the Online Safety Bill is correct, I will praise her for that too.
As I have stated before going for sustainable growth is a good idea. Going for a short-term boomlet is not.
The jury - including me - is still out on which she is going for, the costs and how she intends doing so.
Even handedness only lasts as long as your last post./thread ⁷ The jury is definitely out as I posted above. I do not subscribe to, not let go unchallenged all the dismissive comments posted about her.
On the CA March, I wouldn't agree that the absence of people being attacked means there couldn't have been any latent sense of threat. There weren't any attacks on people at the very first Trump rallies either.
Sorry, but that is just inadmissible. I could equally say that as a fervent republican I could sense the latent menace in The Queue. Some of Hitler's earlier rallies were pretty peaceful adter all.
Well, "Beware the fury of a patient man" is certainly more threatening than "make tea not war" of the anti-Iraq war rally. Those were the two largest demos of the late '90s and 2000s, afaik.
On the CA March, I wouldn't agree that the absence of people being attacked means there couldn't have been any latent sense of threat. There weren't any attacks on people at the very first Trump rallies either.
Sorry, but that is just inadmissible. I could equally say that as a fervent republican I could sense the latent menace in The Queue. Some of Hitler's earlier rallies were pretty peaceful adter all.
Well, "Beware the fury of a patient man" is certainly more threatening than "make tea not war" of the anti-Iraq war rally. Those were the two largest demos of the late '90s and 2000s, afaik.
On the CA March, I wouldn't agree that the absence of people being attacked means there couldn't have been any latent sense of threat. There weren't any attacks on people at the very first Trump rallies either.
Sorry, but that is just inadmissible. I could equally say that as a fervent republican I could sense the latent menace in The Queue. Some of Hitler's earlier rallies were pretty peaceful adter all.
Well, "Beware the fury of a patient man" is certainly more threatening than "make tea not war" of the anti-Iraq war rally. Those were the two largest demos of the late '90s and 2000s, afaik.
Leaving the house in the morning must be a real challenge for you. Were you also terrified by Duncan Smith's riffing on the same theme at the party conference?
On the CA March, I wouldn't agree that the absence of people being attacked means there couldn't have been any latent sense of threat. There weren't any attacks on people at the very first Trump rallies either.
Sorry, but that is just inadmissible. I could equally say that as a fervent republican I could sense the latent menace in The Queue. Some of Hitler's earlier rallies were pretty peaceful adter all.
Well, "Beware the fury of a patient man" is certainly more threatening than "make tea not war" of the anti-Iraq war rally. Those were the two largest demos of the late '90s and 2000s, afaik.
On the CA March, I wouldn't agree that the absence of people being attacked means there couldn't have been any latent sense of threat. There weren't any attacks on people at the very first Trump rallies either.
Sorry, but that is just inadmissible. I could equally say that as a fervent republican I could sense the latent menace in The Queue. Some of Hitler's earlier rallies were pretty peaceful adter all.
Well, "Beware the fury of a patient man" is certainly more threatening than "make tea not war" of the anti-Iraq war rally. Those were the two largest demos of the late '90s and 2000s, afaik.
Leaving the house in the morning must be a real challenge for you. Were you also terrified by Duncan Smith's riffing on the same theme at the party conference?
People are allowed to be angry about things.
It's not really about having terror, more about what I noticed many of the banners represent. As mentioned, my sense of the early Trump rallies was quite similar. "The silent majority / rural majority have had enough, and you better not get in the way".
You're confusing fear with analysis and disapproval there, Ishmael.
Lindsay Hoyle says "we should not allow anything to overshadow the most important event the world will ever see, and that's the funeral of her Majesty". 👀 #bbclaurak
Contrary view to the sacking of Scholar in the Times.
Rathy ranty. What is interesting is that the Times agreed to publish it, given how strong it is.
When he resigned in the Lords over the Covid bounceback loan schemes, it was reported as him criticising Sunak. Now apparently Scholar is to blame.
However, he was the Treasury Minister responsible in part for implementation of the scheme and was also criticised for his own conflicts of interest in relation to some of those companies gaining contracts.
Perhaps there is something a bit more personal underlying his criticisms.
Given that opening para, we can be fairly sure there is something personal at work here
It’s pure bile. Unedifying
Stand by for more of it.
Load Agnew's fundamental belief is that the state is wasteful. That there are meaningful painless cuts that could be made.
And the reality is that... There aren't really. Not zero, sure, but not meaningful ones.
Reality has chewed up his fond belief, but rather than acknowledge this, he'd rather shoot the messenger by calling it "Treasury Orthodoxy".
Lindsay Hoyle says "we should not allow anything to overshadow the most important event the world will ever see, and that's the funeral of her Majesty". 👀 #bbclaurak
My local Tesco Express had a poster on the door, but I wonder if they felt the constant opening and closing was disrespectful to Her Majesty's image, as it was moved to the window instead.
Liz Truss is unsuited to this moment and the times to come, the nation wants a pragmatic unifier, where her dna is intrinsically ideological and divisively partisan.
Not her fault, but she became out-of-date two days into the job. If you don’t believe me, just imagine if Ben Wallace we’re leader now.
Easy to say she's unsuited but with nothing to back it up.
The nation needs someone to bring people together, a reassuring figure not someone like Truss that relishes division and controversy. If Ben Wallace had been elected, he and the government would be in a far stronger position today.
A lot of my kids' friends are going to be dressing up to watch tomorrow's funeral and having a cream tea while it takes place. I am not sure what I make of it. But I think it's a really interesting Gen Z response. What's clear is that current events are not passing them by.
Dressing up?
As what?
Dressing up as in putting on their finest clothes as befits an important occasion.
That's very interesting.
Gen Z'ers dressing up in finery for a royal funeral and having a cream tea aren't exactly incipient signs of republicanism.
My sample is only three, but none my kids have given even the slightest indication they have any active interest in scrapping the monarchy. What I don't know is how bothered they would be if it was scrapped. I am pretty sure they are less attached to it than older generations, but they would need a lot of persuading that it would be helpful to get rid of it.
I think that's fascinating, especially how viewing an event online has become less of a barrier to participation, but also in the perceptions of Gen Z - associating HMQ with cream teas, for example. Plus the blurring of community across online / offline settings.
Good analogies include getting dressed up in your football kit to watch a game on TV when you can't be at the ground, or in a pub with friends, and the trend to Google livestreams with a chatbox.
And perhaps the different experience we have all had during the lockdown - online dates cooking meals at the same time via a videolink and so on.
My generation usually "watch" football or events via screen. That has changed.
The Sunday Times reports that the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy may get yet another change of name - to Ministry of Growth, after Rees-Mogg perhaps. What a stupid waste of money departmental name changes are. https://twitter.com/MichaelLCrick/status/1571458617492262912
The Sunday Times reports that the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy may get yet another change of name - to Ministry of Growth, after Rees-Mogg perhaps. What a stupid waste of money departmental name changes are. https://twitter.com/MichaelLCrick/status/1571458617492262912
That is a stupid name, as it is far less clear about what is it is responsible for, although it is at least not as stupid as DLUHC.
I have a suspicion, though, that the real purpose of the name, if it is as they report, is that Rees-Mogg prefers to head a Ministry rather than a Department. At the moment only the MoD still has that.
(In fairness I prefer Ministry to Department as well)
Yes, but they should also expect that depending on how they express that anger they may be viewed by other people as threatening. That's part of what anger is.
On the CA March, I wouldn't agree that the absence of people being attacked means there couldn't have been any latent sense of threat. There weren't any attacks on people at the very first Trump rallies either.
Sorry, but that is just inadmissible. I could equally say that as a fervent republican I could sense the latent menace in The Queue. Some of Hitler's earlier rallies were pretty peaceful adter all.
My memories of the countryside alliance marches are now rather conflated with the James Goldsmith stuff. I can't remember if he tagged onto the CA stuff, or I've just got it all muddled now. But he certainly gave off a little threatening whiff of 'hurrah for the blackshirts'.
Comments
I remain deeply cynical about scoops in the Sunday Times, having observed the various ones during COVID.
I think the willingness to self-trash the brand is ... interesting.
I was there because I supported continuation and licencing of foxhunting, not its prohibition, and thought the latter nonsensical, ideological and a sign of the Blair Government throwing red meat to its left-wing backbenches because they didnt really give a shit about the countryside.
I lost that battle. But I still think I was right to march.
Which is perhaps why everything has run smoothly.
So far anyway!
Contrary view to the sacking of Scholar in the Times.
Your last couple of sentences illustrate nicely the hysteria that the marches induced. You were “feeling” armed revolution? Really?
I’ve seen lots of marches in London. I even helped organise a couple - both were against my political beliefs. They were student marches and, working in the Student Union, I thought it my duty to ensure that the students had an organised and safe march.
Part of democracy is such peaceful marches. Being all up for window smashing, trying to set fire to buildings, throwing missiles at the police etc etc and then claiming to be scared by people politely walking down a road is quite funny.
I find the idea that we are inches from a revolution (fascist or otherwise) interesting. There is substantial evidence to the contrary.
Consider the Rotherham and other “issues” - from them came not pogroms. Not even murders. A small increase in racism - which was not, as I understand it, from anyone actually involved - opportunism from the usual scum.
My relatives from South America were astonished. If such things had occurred there, the police stations would have been burnt down and policemen lynched as a first step. The local government offices would have gone next… then the race riots…
*Shuffles feet shamefacedly*. You may not be the only PBer to do so. I did feel embarrassed but I salved my conscience by taking my elderly mother with me who could never have queued for health reasons.
This is just the warm up, it's your inside leg measurement I am really after.
Ruling class FFS, there's people I hunt with who work on the tills in Tescos. Arse.
He wasn't even sure he wanted to be here in the first place because he wasn't sure he could handle The Grief.
@Jonathan got him right when he described him as a right-wing luvvie. And so, it has proved.
Then there are those who are very involved in a matter. They could be charged with an offence. Or the investigators/prosecutors may feel that it is better to get their evidence as witnesses because it helps them make the case against even more important/involved offenders.
So, for instance, one of the key witnesses in a big fraud trial I did was the fraudster's manager. There was plenty of evidence on which he could have been charged but the prosecutors decided that it made more sense to have him a as a witness.
This sort of assessment happens all the time when you are investigating conspiracies or offences where multiple people are involved.
What we don't know here is whether the FBI are interviewing him because they consider him to be the first type of witness I have described or in the second category.
Chilling.
"While there has been an understandable outpouring of sadness at the death of Queen Elizabeth, the removal of Sir Tom Scholar as the lead permanent secretary at the Treasury should be a cause for celebration."
I would regard that as deeply unpleasant exaggeration if it came from a poster on PB. From a named contributor on the Times, it's appalling.
Not that there is any chance of any referendum anytime soon on it or it being lost, only the Greens back a republic
Someone mentioned various Evul Big Groups involved in the demos. This is a feature of every large cause. The Iraq demos had a variety of interesting backers, for example. The anti-fracking demos (and organisations) especially. As did the big CND marches in the 80s.
The presence of such groups doesn’t invalidate the marchers, I think. Nothing is pure.
The largest banner in this picture reminds of my general anecdotal impressions and flavour of it I felt at the time. "Beware the Fury of a Patient Man - West Dartmoor Hunt ."
https://twitter.com/caupdates/status/911158153315799040
Off you go now. Do your duty, wear some widower's weeds and stop wailing at us. Report back at 18:00 and if your report is very good you may permit yourself a small drink.
Quite frankly no one comes out of this smelling of roses so it’s probably best we move on
Treasury orthodoxy is not sacrosanct.
That "not going to see the Queen" is interesting. I was musing on whether an open casket (not British tradition) would be more appropriate.
Are there any countries that do that? (Soviet Russia? Presumably to prove that the old dictator is dead 'n' gone ;-) )
But it's all very well to say Ooooh I felt threatened, we really need some stats for beatings/stabbings/murders to see if the feeling was justified. There weren't any.
I was desperate and bored at Seville airport
It’s excellent, possibly even brilliant. I can see why it’s been a global hit, and also why it has made F1 much more popular, esp in the USA
I don’t give a toss about motorsports, and yet now I am at least intrigued…
Impressive
However, he was the Treasury Minister responsible in part for implementation of the scheme and was also criticised for his own conflicts of interest in relation to some of those companies gaining contracts.
Perhaps there is something a bit more personal underlying his criticisms.
It would be nice to see this challenged.
It’s pure bile. Unedifying
After it’s mention here, I dug around, and there seems to be such a policy/belief around tidal ponds. That they are Bad and Must Be Opposed.
The thing that tipped me was finding an estimate in which it was claimed that the entire structure of a suggested development would be in concrete - tens of millions of tons of it. This would make it massively expensive and have a serious CO2 emission issues.
The actual proposal didn’t use much concrete - large piles of rock and clay. Think a funny shaped bit of land, rather than a concrete gravity dam. The estimate was a literal lie.
Very often, such things come back to an individual with a group around him/her. When the matter in question flows past their office, they pounce…
Besides, he added, we’ve just spent decades pumping money into Eastern Europe and it’s going to boom. There’s no way the Conservative Party would allow any limits or barriers on our access to that.
Hmm.
Brilliant combination.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJxDwDzAwEs
iirc lying in state ends at 6am; if so, this is very pessimistic advice; I suppose it depends where you set off from.
IMO the twitter thread was better than the original article, which as noted compared UK, US, Norway and Slovenia as 'peers', which is quite far-fetched.
I found branding top 10% countries as a "poor society", when even Western European minimum wages put people receiving them at the very top of the global scale.
@NickPalmer XMP's comments were good.
JMB does have a history of building conclusions bigger than his data supports, like many others. Here Full Fact debunked him for questionable overuse of early COVID data:
https://fullfact.org/health/limits-what-we-can-say-about-early-lockdowns/
What I take from the piece is the inadequacy of basic benefits here, and a need to work to adjust the taper more.
orthodoxy of the last 40 to 50 yrs.not corruption . You dont think Labour politicians do the same
when in office. Cash for honours anyone.... there isn't a politician from any party that is completely straight. They all have their finger in the pie somewhere.
"Here at Dante's Pizza Inferno we feel the grief of all our customers at the passing of Her Majesty and as a way of helping them, helping YOU, to process it we have created a stunning 12 inch crusty bake commemorative pizza in the shape of a corgi (and with extra anchovies). It's called The Liz and it really is The Biz! Only £25. Order now while stocks last."
I wonder whether it was actually a good idea to have the live coverage of the Hall or if it would have been better kept private - daylight on the magic? However since journalists can quite easily watch what's on TV or speak the people attending it's hard to see why they need special treatment.
https://youtu.be/ahDPuCInKJU?t=188
It is not just drivers and riders who need to know how to behave at junctions, pedestrians do too, and they won't be reading the Highway Code. Anne-Marie Trevelyan has replaced Grant Shapps as Transport Secretary and should splash some advertising cash in Soho, and/or remark the roads as one of the commenters says was done in Spain.
What’s great about Drive to Survive - for me - is that I have so little interest in F1 I have no idea who anyone is, or who’s going to win, or when or why
So it is really like watching a fresh TV drama. It is all twists and turns. The show runners have done a scintillating job of extracting maximum narrative. I’m sure it’s bending the truth to make it more entertaining, but who cares, F1 is ridiculous anyway
Great series
The party is now frantically trying to come to terms with what it's done.
We used to joke that Johnson was someone who saw which way a crowd was running, jumped in front of it and shouted follow me!
I'm coming to the opinion that his successor is very much the same!
See here - https://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2021/09/20/one-current-leader-and-one-future-one/
If the reported decision to ditch the Online Safety Bill is correct, I will praise her for that too.
As I have stated before going for sustainable growth is a good idea. Going for a short-term boomlet is not.
The jury - including me - is still out on which she is going for, the costs and how she intends doing so.
I was actually thinking of doing that!
Rumbled. Damn
The stagnation of middle incomes in the US has been a striking feature of the economy in recent decades - arguably its most important feature and a big driver of all the political crap over there I am sure. The fact that we are seeing similar (but less extreme) trends here is worrying and I would guess explains a lot of our own political crap. An economic system that enriches a small elite while everyone else's incomes stagnate is defective and needs fixing. More of the same (as Truss is proposing) is only going to make the problem worse, for sure.
People are allowed to be angry about things.
You're confusing fear with analysis and disapproval there, Ishmael.
A clue may have been in the costume, but a handful of cheery sunny day songs, without so much of a bum note, completely threw us. 😁
https://twitter.com/sturdyAlex/status/1571419837364326401
Load Agnew's fundamental belief is that the state is wasteful. That there are meaningful painless cuts that could be made.
And the reality is that... There aren't really. Not zero, sure, but not meaningful ones.
Reality has chewed up his fond belief, but rather than acknowledge this, he'd rather shoot the messenger by calling it "Treasury Orthodoxy".
to appeal to rural areas, though they will still remain the Tories best areasGood analogies include getting dressed up in your football kit to watch a game on TV when you can't be at the ground, or in a pub with friends, and the trend to Google livestreams with a chatbox.
And perhaps the different experience we have all had during the lockdown - online dates cooking meals at the same time via a videolink and so on.
My generation usually "watch" football or events via screen. That has changed.
https://twitter.com/MichaelLCrick/status/1571458617492262912
Edit - very hasty edit of spelling!! Lolz
I have a suspicion, though, that the real purpose of the name, if it is as they report, is that Rees-Mogg prefers to head a Ministry rather than a Department. At the moment only the MoD still has that.
(In fairness I prefer Ministry to Department as well)