Paul Mason @paulmasonnews · 26m Starmer tells Labour delegates trickledown economics is a "pisstake" - says (with justification) the party feels confident and ready for an election ...
One thing that bemuses me in this country is how, for a service economy allegedly, we are really quite poor at service. I have dealt with 3 financial institutions in the past 3 days and have, literally, spent nearly 7 hours just trying to get through and matters actioned. You can get lots of responses on Twitter and endless apologies etc but there is a complete failure to understand that you actually need people who are available and able to understand and deal with a problem. Same for telephone companies and insurance companies I've dealt with this year.
I am a bit spoiled because growing up where I did in Naples we got the sort of old-fashioned service now largely seen in historical dramas. It it was not that long ago, though.
Far too many service providers have just dumped their responsibilities onto their customers so that we are effectively working for free for them. It is infuriating for customers and horrible for those working for them because they then have to deal with annoyed customers with little power to change things for the better. And yet sitting in a motorway cafe right now writing this, the lady serving behind the counter has been the epitome of friendliness and efficiency. So it can be done.
Online service is great most of the time but we forget the need for effective personal contact for when things go wrong or help is needed at our peril. And that is why people (ok me) can get so infuriated: it's not just the waste of time but the determination of institutions to put us at a distance and dismiss us rather than reach out and help. It is inhuman and impersonal. It is the exact opposite of what customer service and problem-solving should be.
Poor service due to cheap service, which equals higher profits, which equals bigger management bonuses. The ills of Britain summarised.
I suppose the questions are (a) how many people are willing to pay more for the extra customer service and (b) if the pool of customers the "high-service" firm ends up with is profitable or if it gives them a lot of bespoke problems.
Paul Mason @paulmasonnews · 26m Starmer tells Labour delegates trickledown economics is a "pisstake" - says (with justification) the party feels confident and ready for an election ...
Remainers can’t complain - it’s what they voted for with their remain vote.
Totally unrelated to this, but Leicestershire have also come out against the Strauss review today.
One more county opposing it and it can't go forward. And Derbyshire are also expected to reject it.
Interesting that so far Durham haven't said anything.
So what happens then, a fudge compromise? Somerset who were humiliated in the 50 over cup, claiming they don’t want to lose players to 100 at same time again, Strauss proposed losing players from championship fixtures to hundred instead. Rather like the BBC license fee sometimes change can’t be avoided, the contracts county give players only to have limited times they can pick them - Yorkshires best player King Harry won’t be able to play against minor county west next week for example, kind of debases the fixture and makes me hold back on all the verbal I should be giving you in case we miss him too much.
Most probably, no change. The status quo (aka, and here I do actually agree with the ECB, a stupid mess, but I'm not forgetting it's a mess of their making) remains unless a positive vote is taken to alter the situation. That's why, for example, we went back to two divisions instead of extending last year's triple conference season (which I actually thought worked very well) because a vote to continue it was lost.
But if they are not voted through, it probably makes Strauss' position untenable given the way he has publicly identified himself with them. That, however, is unlikely to force meaningful change at the ECB which is what is really needed.
Edit - incidentally Strauss didn't propose championship cricket during the Hundred. He proposed instead local Derby matches e.g. Yorks and Lancs, Notts and Leics, Glos and Som, at outgrounds to 'promote interest.'
Quite what he assumes that would achieve I have no idea, although I admit I might well turn out to see Glos v Glamorgan at Cheltenham.
In terms of best v best, the conference format isn’t a bad idea for 4 day county championship, as every county starts day 1 in it to win it, and in the second phase if they play for next season ranking points and prize money, that’s good reason to play proper keen matches too - so it doesn’t Peter out into meaningless fixtures at any point, or have talent drain between divisions or rich clubs (which is what I think they sneakily actually want). Without conference and with 2 divisions, you stay up with 1 win and lots a drawers, you only got promoted with lots of wins, at least conference system keeps every match a fair intent from both sides on decent services.
One thing that bemuses me in this country is how, for a service economy allegedly, we are really quite poor at service. I have dealt with 3 financial institutions in the past 3 days and have, literally, spent nearly 7 hours just trying to get through and matters actioned. You can get lots of responses on Twitter and endless apologies etc but there is a complete failure to understand that you actually need people who are available and able to understand and deal with a problem. Same for telephone companies and insurance companies I've dealt with this year.
I am a bit spoiled because growing up where I did in Naples we got the sort of old-fashioned service now largely seen in historical dramas. It it was not that long ago, though.
Far too many service providers have just dumped their responsibilities onto their customers so that we are effectively working for free for them. It is infuriating for customers and horrible for those working for them because they then have to deal with annoyed customers with little power to change things for the better. And yet sitting in a motorway cafe right now writing this, the lady serving behind the counter has been the epitome of friendliness and efficiency. So it can be done.
Online service is great most of the time but we forget the need for effective personal contact for when things go wrong or help is needed at our peril. And that is why people (ok me) can get so infuriated: it's not just the waste of time but the determination of institutions to put us at a distance and dismiss us rather than reach out and help. It is inhuman and impersonal. It is the exact opposite of what customer service and problem-solving should be.
Poor service due to cheap service, which equals higher profits, which equals bigger management bonuses. The ills of Britain summarised.
I suppose the questions are (a) how many people are willing to pay more for the extra customer service and (b) if the pool of customers the "high-service" firm ends up with is profitable or if it gives them a lot of bespoke problems.
The success of Ryanair suggests that people prioritise cost over service.
Remainers can’t complain - it’s what they voted for with their remain vote.
Truss herself was a Remainer let us not forget.
However not sure tax cuts mainly benefiting the rich and more immigrants will keep the redwall voting Conservative again next time
Correct me where wrong, red wall is
Long term trend regardless of current politics - mining towns and villages as ideal Escape To The… tv show destination.
Some voted Labour all their life, identify publicly as Tory now, likely because of Brexit and Boris.
Some voters in from the cold, found by Brexit referendum, turned out 2019 to get Brexit done and keep Boris PM
Labour voters no showed because of Corbyn and momentum’s insane borrow too much money and risk wrecking economy manifesto.
So that’s a lot of different groupings and motivations, quite hard to second guess what they will all do, and impossible to think Labour gets the vote of all of them, particularly new Tory voters because of Brexit. The truth here is Liz inherits bonus votes in red wall regards of her policies the next couple of years.
No, the Tories will still likely hold a few of them but most redwall seats are lower than average income and sceptical of immigration, not who Truss' initial measures are focused on
Yes, but no, becuase as I pointed out, it’s not just one type of voter with 1 motivation. Take the lower than average income voter who lurrrrrvs Brexit, switched from labour to Tory in hatred of confirmation vote remainer Starmer, that vote ain’t returning Labour any time soon regardless what Truss does.
Also when you casually toss in “truss not keeping red wall” you forget incumbency bonus - so many new red wall MPs are brilliant bluff northern types beloved by all their constituents now regardless what Truss does.
That voter does not necessarily have to go to Starmer, they could go to Farage and RefUK
The way you promote RefUK it is time you were honest and admitted to preferring them to Truss following the demise of the disgraced Johnson
Paul Mason @paulmasonnews · 26m Starmer tells Labour delegates trickledown economics is a "pisstake" - says (with justification) the party feels confident and ready for an election ...
Paul Mason @paulmasonnews · 26m Starmer tells Labour delegates trickledown economics is a "pisstake" - says (with justification) the party feels confident and ready for an election ...
Remainers can’t complain - it’s what they voted for with their remain vote.
Truss herself was a Remainer let us not forget.
However not sure tax cuts mainly benefiting the rich and more immigrants will keep the redwall voting Conservative again next time
Correct me where wrong, red wall is
Long term trend regardless of current politics - mining towns and villages as ideal Escape To The… tv show destination.
Some voted Labour all their life, identify publicly as Tory now, likely because of Brexit and Boris.
Some voters in from the cold, found by Brexit referendum, turned out 2019 to get Brexit done and keep Boris PM
Labour voters no showed because of Corbyn and momentum’s insane borrow too much money and risk wrecking economy manifesto.
So that’s a lot of different groupings and motivations, quite hard to second guess what they will all do, and impossible to think Labour gets the vote of all of them, particularly new Tory voters because of Brexit. The truth here is Liz inherits bonus votes in red wall regards of her policies the next couple of years.
No, the Tories will still likely hold a few of them but most redwall seats are lower than average income and sceptical of immigration, not who Truss' initial measures are focused on
Yes, but no, becuase as I pointed out, it’s not just one type of voter with 1 motivation. Take the lower than average income voter who lurrrrrvs Brexit, switched from labour to Tory in hatred of confirmation vote remainer Starmer, that vote ain’t returning Labour any time soon regardless what Truss does.
Also when you casually toss in “truss not keeping red wall” you forget incumbency bonus - so many new red wall MPs are brilliant bluff northern types beloved by all their constituents now regardless what Truss does.
That voter does not necessarily have to go to Starmer, they could go to Farage and RefUK
The way you promote RefUK it is time you were honest and admitted to preferring them to Truss following the demise of the disgraced Johnson
Given I was out campaigning for a local Tory by election candidate this morning and have never voted for Farage even at the European elections not happening.
However some former Brexit Party voters in the redwall seats might go back to RefUK
Paul Mason @paulmasonnews · 26m Starmer tells Labour delegates trickledown economics is a "pisstake" - says (with justification) the party feels confident and ready for an election ...
Paul Mason @paulmasonnews · 26m Starmer tells Labour delegates trickledown economics is a "pisstake" - says (with justification) the party feels confident and ready for an election ...
One thing that bemuses me in this country is how, for a service economy allegedly, we are really quite poor at service. I have dealt with 3 financial institutions in the past 3 days and have, literally, spent nearly 7 hours just trying to get through and matters actioned. You can get lots of responses on Twitter and endless apologies etc but there is a complete failure to understand that you actually need people who are available and able to understand and deal with a problem. Same for telephone companies and insurance companies I've dealt with this year.
I am a bit spoiled because growing up where I did in Naples we got the sort of old-fashioned service now largely seen in historical dramas. It it was not that long ago, though.
Far too many service providers have just dumped their responsibilities onto their customers so that we are effectively working for free for them. It is infuriating for customers and horrible for those working for them because they then have to deal with annoyed customers with little power to change things for the better. And yet sitting in a motorway cafe right now writing this, the lady serving behind the counter has been the epitome of friendliness and efficiency. So it can be done.
Online service is great most of the time but we forget the need for effective personal contact for when things go wrong or help is needed at our peril. And that is why people (ok me) can get so infuriated: it's not just the waste of time but the determination of institutions to put us at a distance and dismiss us rather than reach out and help. It is inhuman and impersonal. It is the exact opposite of what customer service and problem-solving should be.
Poor service due to cheap service, which equals higher profits, which equals bigger management bonuses. The ills of Britain summarised.
I suppose the questions are (a) how many people are willing to pay more for the extra customer service and (b) if the pool of customers the "high-service" firm ends up with is profitable or if it gives them a lot of bespoke problems.
The success of Ryanair suggests that people prioritise cost over service.
In other sectors people do regularly pay more, say London black cabs. I'm not sure what determines it, except I have a suspicion that the Revoluts of this world are 100% fine with screening out people who have complex needs.
Paul Mason @paulmasonnews · 26m Starmer tells Labour delegates trickledown economics is a "pisstake" - says (with justification) the party feels confident and ready for an election ...
One thing that bemuses me in this country is how, for a service economy allegedly, we are really quite poor at service. I have dealt with 3 financial institutions in the past 3 days and have, literally, spent nearly 7 hours just trying to get through and matters actioned. You can get lots of responses on Twitter and endless apologies etc but there is a complete failure to understand that you actually need people who are available and able to understand and deal with a problem. Same for telephone companies and insurance companies I've dealt with this year.
I am a bit spoiled because growing up where I did in Naples we got the sort of old-fashioned service now largely seen in historical dramas. It it was not that long ago, though.
Far too many service providers have just dumped their responsibilities onto their customers so that we are effectively working for free for them. It is infuriating for customers and horrible for those working for them because they then have to deal with annoyed customers with little power to change things for the better. And yet sitting in a motorway cafe right now writing this, the lady serving behind the counter has been the epitome of friendliness and efficiency. So it can be done.
Online service is great most of the time but we forget the need for effective personal contact for when things go wrong or help is needed at our peril. And that is why people (ok me) can get so infuriated: it's not just the waste of time but the determination of institutions to put us at a distance and dismiss us rather than reach out and help. It is inhuman and impersonal. It is the exact opposite of what customer service and problem-solving should be.
Poor service due to cheap service, which equals higher profits, which equals bigger management bonuses. The ills of Britain summarised.
I suppose the questions are (a) how many people are willing to pay more for the extra customer service and (b) if the pool of customers the "high-service" firm ends up with is profitable or if it gives them a lot of bespoke problems.
The success of Ryanair suggests that people prioritise cost over service.
It would be good to have the choice of cost over service. When shopping, there is the choice of Waitrose or Booths versus Asda or Morrisons. In financial services, it seems to be only Asda service at Waitrose prices.
Paul Mason @paulmasonnews · 26m Starmer tells Labour delegates trickledown economics is a "pisstake" - says (with justification) the party feels confident and ready for an election ...
Remainers can’t complain - it’s what they voted for with their remain vote.
Truss herself was a Remainer let us not forget.
However not sure tax cuts mainly benefiting the rich and more immigrants will keep the redwall voting Conservative again next time
Correct me where wrong, red wall is
Long term trend regardless of current politics - mining towns and villages as ideal Escape To The… tv show destination.
Some voted Labour all their life, identify publicly as Tory now, likely because of Brexit and Boris.
Some voters in from the cold, found by Brexit referendum, turned out 2019 to get Brexit done and keep Boris PM
Labour voters no showed because of Corbyn and momentum’s insane borrow too much money and risk wrecking economy manifesto.
So that’s a lot of different groupings and motivations, quite hard to second guess what they will all do, and impossible to think Labour gets the vote of all of them, particularly new Tory voters because of Brexit. The truth here is Liz inherits bonus votes in red wall regards of her policies the next couple of years.
No, the Tories will still likely hold a few of them but most redwall seats are lower than average income and sceptical of immigration, not who Truss' initial measures are focused on
Yes, but no, becuase as I pointed out, it’s not just one type of voter with 1 motivation. Take the lower than average income voter who lurrrrrvs Brexit, switched from labour to Tory in hatred of confirmation vote remainer Starmer, that vote ain’t returning Labour any time soon regardless what Truss does.
Also when you casually toss in “truss not keeping red wall” you forget incumbency bonus - so many new red wall MPs are brilliant bluff northern types beloved by all their constituents now regardless what Truss does.
Remainers can’t complain - it’s what they voted for with their remain vote.
Truss herself was a Remainer let us not forget.
However not sure tax cuts mainly benefiting the rich and more immigrants will keep the redwall voting Conservative again next time
Correct me where wrong, red wall is
Long term trend regardless of current politics - mining towns and villages as ideal Escape To The… tv show destination.
Some voted Labour all their life, identify publicly as Tory now, likely because of Brexit and Boris.
Some voters in from the cold, found by Brexit referendum, turned out 2019 to get Brexit done and keep Boris PM
Labour voters no showed because of Corbyn and momentum’s insane borrow too much money and risk wrecking economy manifesto.
So that’s a lot of different groupings and motivations, quite hard to second guess what they will all do, and impossible to think Labour gets the vote of all of them, particularly new Tory voters because of Brexit. The truth here is Liz inherits bonus votes in red wall regards of her policies the next couple of years.
No, the Tories will still likely hold a few of them but most redwall seats are lower than average income and sceptical of immigration, not who Truss' initial measures are focused on
Yes, but no, becuase as I pointed out, it’s not just one type of voter with 1 motivation. Take the lower than average income voter who lurrrrrvs Brexit, switched from labour to Tory in hatred of confirmation vote remainer Starmer, that vote ain’t returning Labour any time soon regardless what Truss does.
Also when you casually toss in “truss not keeping red wall” you forget incumbency bonus - so many new red wall MPs are brilliant bluff northern types beloved by all their constituents now regardless what Truss does.
That voter does not necessarily have to go to Starmer, they could go to Farage and RefUK
The way you promote RefUK it is time you were honest and admitted to preferring them to Truss following the demise of the disgraced Johnson
Given I was out campaigning for a local Tory by election candidate this morning and have never voted for Farage even at the European elections not happening.
However some former Brexit Party voters in the redwall seats might go back to RefUK
You may have but the nuance in your posts indicates your dislike of Truss
Paul Mason @paulmasonnews · 26m Starmer tells Labour delegates trickledown economics is a "pisstake" - says (with justification) the party feels confident and ready for an election ...
Paul Mason @paulmasonnews · 26m Starmer tells Labour delegates trickledown economics is a "pisstake" - says (with justification) the party feels confident and ready for an election ...
Paul Mason @paulmasonnews · 26m Starmer tells Labour delegates trickledown economics is a "pisstake" - says (with justification) the party feels confident and ready for an election ...
Paul Mason @paulmasonnews · 26m Starmer tells Labour delegates trickledown economics is a "pisstake" - says (with justification) the party feels confident and ready for an election ...
I think 2023 GE. Dangerous to leave it the full 5 years.
Possibly, but if you are 20 points behind there must be a temptation to wait to see if something, anything, turns up.
Both John Major (1997) and Gordon Brown (2010) paid a very heavy price for that Micawberish approach.
Perhaps. Major was undone by 18 years of Tory rule, plus crashing out of the ERM. Brown had nothing to offer when PM. Plus if Truss waits until the longest date she’ll get nearly 2 and a half years.
Paul Mason @paulmasonnews · 26m Starmer tells Labour delegates trickledown economics is a "pisstake" - says (with justification) the party feels confident and ready for an election ...
Paul Mason @paulmasonnews · 26m Starmer tells Labour delegates trickledown economics is a "pisstake" - says (with justification) the party feels confident and ready for an election ...
Paul Mason @paulmasonnews · 26m Starmer tells Labour delegates trickledown economics is a "pisstake" - says (with justification) the party feels confident and ready for an election ...
Paul Mason @paulmasonnews · 26m Starmer tells Labour delegates trickledown economics is a "pisstake" - says (with justification) the party feels confident and ready for an election ...
Paul Mason @paulmasonnews · 26m Starmer tells Labour delegates trickledown economics is a "pisstake" - says (with justification) the party feels confident and ready for an election ...
I think 2023 GE. Dangerous to leave it the full 5 years.
Possibly, but if you are 20 points behind there must be a temptation to wait to see if something, anything, turns up.
Both John Major (1997) and Gordon Brown (2010) paid a very heavy price for that Micawberish approach.
Though the idea Major would have won in 1994, 1995 or 1996 or Brown in 2008 or 2009 is highly unlikely. Instead they got a few extra years as PM
They wouldn't have won but I suspect neither would have put their parties out of power for a political generation either. 13 years after Major, 12 years and counting after Brown.
One thing that bemuses me in this country is how, for a service economy allegedly, we are really quite poor at service. I have dealt with 3 financial institutions in the past 3 days and have, literally, spent nearly 7 hours just trying to get through and matters actioned. You can get lots of responses on Twitter and endless apologies etc but there is a complete failure to understand that you actually need people who are available and able to understand and deal with a problem. Same for telephone companies and insurance companies I've dealt with this year.
I am a bit spoiled because growing up where I did in Naples we got the sort of old-fashioned service now largely seen in historical dramas. It it was not that long ago, though.
Far too many service providers have just dumped their responsibilities onto their customers so that we are effectively working for free for them. It is infuriating for customers and horrible for those working for them because they then have to deal with annoyed customers with little power to change things for the better. And yet sitting in a motorway cafe right now writing this, the lady serving behind the counter has been the epitome of friendliness and efficiency. So it can be done.
Online service is great most of the time but we forget the need for effective personal contact for when things go wrong or help is needed at our peril. And that is why people (ok me) can get so infuriated: it's not just the waste of time but the determination of institutions to put us at a distance and dismiss us rather than reach out and help. It is inhuman and impersonal. It is the exact opposite of what customer service and problem-solving should be.
Part of the problem is companies pay peanuts for support. This means they get monkeys and have to have them follow a script without the ability to deviate rather than pay more and get people who can be trusted to think and try and solve problems.
The other part is these people are measured on how many calls they answer an hour rather than on the number of satisfied customers after the call
Add up poorly paid demotivated staff and an incentive to answer x calls regardless of whether customers are served and you have the road to perdition we live in
Paul Mason @paulmasonnews · 26m Starmer tells Labour delegates trickledown economics is a "pisstake" - says (with justification) the party feels confident and ready for an election ...
I think 2023 GE. Dangerous to leave it the full 5 years.
Possibly, but if you are 20 points behind there must be a temptation to wait to see if something, anything, turns up.
Both John Major (1997) and Gordon Brown (2010) paid a very heavy price for that Micawberish approach.
Though the idea Major would have won in 1994, 1995 or 1996 or Brown in 2008 or 2009 is highly unlikely. Instead they got a few extra years as PM
They wouldn't have won but I suspect neither would have put their parties out of power for a political generation either. 13 years after Major, 12 years and counting after Brown.
How many party leaders would forego an extra year or two of power, even if it meant their party being out of power for longer in the future?
Paul Mason @paulmasonnews · 26m Starmer tells Labour delegates trickledown economics is a "pisstake" - says (with justification) the party feels confident and ready for an election ...
Paul Mason @paulmasonnews · 26m Starmer tells Labour delegates trickledown economics is a "pisstake" - says (with justification) the party feels confident and ready for an election ...
I think 2023 GE. Dangerous to leave it the full 5 years.
Possibly, but if you are 20 points behind there must be a temptation to wait to see if something, anything, turns up.
Both John Major (1997) and Gordon Brown (2010) paid a very heavy price for that Micawberish approach.
Though the idea Major would have won in 1994, 1995 or 1996 or Brown in 2008 or 2009 is highly unlikely. Instead they got a few extra years as PM
They wouldn't have won but I suspect neither would have put their parties out of power for a political generation either. 13 years after Major, 12 years and counting after Brown.
Blair would still have trounced Major in 1994 when New Labour was already almost 20% ahead, Cameron would still have won most seats even in 2008
I was told by informed observers several months ago that the coronation of Xi as emperor this winter was not a sure thing. Who knows what struggle is going on.
One thing that bemuses me in this country is how, for a service economy allegedly, we are really quite poor at service. I have dealt with 3 financial institutions in the past 3 days and have, literally, spent nearly 7 hours just trying to get through and matters actioned. You can get lots of responses on Twitter and endless apologies etc but there is a complete failure to understand that you actually need people who are available and able to understand and deal with a problem. Same for telephone companies and insurance companies I've dealt with this year.
I am a bit spoiled because growing up where I did in Naples we got the sort of old-fashioned service now largely seen in historical dramas. It it was not that long ago, though.
Far too many service providers have just dumped their responsibilities onto their customers so that we are effectively working for free for them. It is infuriating for customers and horrible for those working for them because they then have to deal with annoyed customers with little power to change things for the better. And yet sitting in a motorway cafe right now writing this, the lady serving behind the counter has been the epitome of friendliness and efficiency. So it can be done.
Online service is great most of the time but we forget the need for effective personal contact for when things go wrong or help is needed at our peril. And that is why people (ok me) can get so infuriated: it's not just the waste of time but the determination of institutions to put us at a distance and dismiss us rather than reach out and help. It is inhuman and impersonal. It is the exact opposite of what customer service and problem-solving should be.
Poor service due to cheap service, which equals higher profits, which equals bigger management bonuses. The ills of Britain summarised.
I suppose the questions are (a) how many people are willing to pay more for the extra customer service and (b) if the pool of customers the "high-service" firm ends up with is profitable or if it gives them a lot of bespoke problems.
The success of Ryanair suggests that people prioritise cost over service.
It would be good to have the choice of cost over service. When shopping, there is the choice of Waitrose or Booths versus Asda or Morrisons. In financial services, it seems to be only Asda service at Waitrose prices.
I don't think the Waitrose staff are more attentive, rather the intrinsic products are different from Asda. In finance the product is regulated to within an inch of its life - very little variation in the mass market - but you can always go to Coutts.
Remainers can’t complain - it’s what they voted for with their remain vote.
Totally unrelated to this, but Leicestershire have also come out against the Strauss review today.
One more county opposing it and it can't go forward. And Derbyshire are also expected to reject it.
Interesting that so far Durham haven't said anything.
So what happens then, a fudge compromise? Somerset who were humiliated in the 50 over cup, claiming they don’t want to lose players to 100 at same time again, Strauss proposed losing players from championship fixtures to hundred instead. Rather like the BBC license fee sometimes change can’t be avoided, the contracts county give players only to have limited times they can pick them - Yorkshires best player King Harry won’t be able to play against minor county west next week for example, kind of debases the fixture and makes me hold back on all the verbal I should be giving you in case we miss him too much.
Most probably, no change. The status quo (aka, and here I do actually agree with the ECB, a stupid mess, but I'm not forgetting it's a mess of their making) remains unless a positive vote is taken to alter the situation. That's why, for example, we went back to two divisions instead of extending last year's triple conference season (which I actually thought worked very well) because a vote to continue it was lost.
But if they are not voted through, it probably makes Strauss' position untenable given the way he has publicly identified himself with them. That, however, is unlikely to force meaningful change at the ECB which is what is really needed.
Edit - incidentally Strauss didn't propose championship cricket during the Hundred. He proposed instead local Derby matches e.g. Yorks and Lancs, Notts and Leics, Glos and Som, at outgrounds to 'promote interest.'
Quite what he assumes that would achieve I have no idea, although I admit I might well turn out to see Glos v Glamorgan at Cheltenham.
Or even Glam vs Glos at Colwyn Bay? I rather like out grounds: bench seats, warm beer, clockwork scoreboards and a clear view of the horizon - Cricket as the Good Lord intended. If Warwickshire would condescend to play at Leamington I'd bother to watch them, but a county day at Edgbaston has all the charm of a health and safety inspection at a meat-packing factory.
You can easily imagine him stripping to that song at a hen nite
I can see him bare chested inviting Socialists to 'get it up ya' whilst Liz pole dances for coked up bankers and Braverman screams c*** repeatedly at a fish tank. Cleverley rocks gently in the corner sobbing 'we went too far'
I was told by informed observers several months ago that the coronation of Xi as emperor this winter was not a sure thing. Who knows what struggle is going on.
Remainers can’t complain - it’s what they voted for with their remain vote.
Totally unrelated to this, but Leicestershire have also come out against the Strauss review today.
One more county opposing it and it can't go forward. And Derbyshire are also expected to reject it.
Interesting that so far Durham haven't said anything.
So what happens then, a fudge compromise? Somerset who were humiliated in the 50 over cup, claiming they don’t want to lose players to 100 at same time again, Strauss proposed losing players from championship fixtures to hundred instead. Rather like the BBC license fee sometimes change can’t be avoided, the contracts county give players only to have limited times they can pick them - Yorkshires best player King Harry won’t be able to play against minor county west next week for example, kind of debases the fixture and makes me hold back on all the verbal I should be giving you in case we miss him too much.
Most probably, no change. The status quo (aka, and here I do actually agree with the ECB, a stupid mess, but I'm not forgetting it's a mess of their making) remains unless a positive vote is taken to alter the situation. That's why, for example, we went back to two divisions instead of extending last year's triple conference season (which I actually thought worked very well) because a vote to continue it was lost.
But if they are not voted through, it probably makes Strauss' position untenable given the way he has publicly identified himself with them. That, however, is unlikely to force meaningful change at the ECB which is what is really needed.
Edit - incidentally Strauss didn't propose championship cricket during the Hundred. He proposed instead local Derby matches e.g. Yorks and Lancs, Notts and Leics, Glos and Som, at outgrounds to 'promote interest.'
Quite what he assumes that would achieve I have no idea, although I admit I might well turn out to see Glos v Glamorgan at Cheltenham.
Or even Glam vs Glos at Colwyn Bay? I rather like out grounds: bench seats, warm beer, clockwork scoreboards and a clear view of the horizon - Cricket as the Good Lord intended. If Warwickshire would condescend to play at Leamington I'd bother to watch them, but a county day at Edgbaston has all the charm of a health and safety inspection at a meat-packing factory.
Hampshire should play Sussex at Hambledon. PB readers would sell out the ground.
Get on a 7 day trial. There's a lot of content on it, including some gems. The Britbox exclusives Hotel Portofino, Magpie Murders and probably Murder in Provence I think you'd quite enjoy.
You can easily imagine him stripping to that song at a hen nite
I can see him bare chested inviting Socialists to 'get it up ya' whilst Liz pole dances for coked up bankers and Braverman screams c*** repeatedly at a fish tank. Cleverley rocks gently in the corner sobbing 'we went too far'
Somehow, Braverman's telling police to cut down on the anti-racism has gone under the radar after the shock and awe of the maxi-budget.
You can easily imagine him stripping to that song at a hen nite
I can see him bare chested inviting Socialists to 'get it up ya' whilst Liz pole dances for coked up bankers and Braverman screams c*** repeatedly at a fish tank. Cleverley rocks gently in the corner sobbing 'we went too far'
Bojo would be the one sobbing at not being invited.
You can easily imagine him stripping to that song at a hen nite
I can see him bare chested inviting Socialists to 'get it up ya' whilst Liz pole dances for coked up bankers and Braverman screams c*** repeatedly at a fish tank. Cleverley rocks gently in the corner sobbing 'we went too far'
Somehow, Braverman's telling police to cut down on the anti-racism has gone under the radar after the shock and awe of the maxi-budget.
True, true, shes clearly also on the grid for week 'one'
Remainers can’t complain - it’s what they voted for with their remain vote.
Totally unrelated to this, but Leicestershire have also come out against the Strauss review today.
One more county opposing it and it can't go forward. And Derbyshire are also expected to reject it.
Interesting that so far Durham haven't said anything.
So what happens then, a fudge compromise? Somerset who were humiliated in the 50 over cup, claiming they don’t want to lose players to 100 at same time again, Strauss proposed losing players from championship fixtures to hundred instead. Rather like the BBC license fee sometimes change can’t be avoided, the contracts county give players only to have limited times they can pick them - Yorkshires best player King Harry won’t be able to play against minor county west next week for example, kind of debases the fixture and makes me hold back on all the verbal I should be giving you in case we miss him too much.
Most probably, no change. The status quo (aka, and here I do actually agree with the ECB, a stupid mess, but I'm not forgetting it's a mess of their making) remains unless a positive vote is taken to alter the situation. That's why, for example, we went back to two divisions instead of extending last year's triple conference season (which I actually thought worked very well) because a vote to continue it was lost.
But if they are not voted through, it probably makes Strauss' position untenable given the way he has publicly identified himself with them. That, however, is unlikely to force meaningful change at the ECB which is what is really needed.
Edit - incidentally Strauss didn't propose championship cricket during the Hundred. He proposed instead local Derby matches e.g. Yorks and Lancs, Notts and Leics, Glos and Som, at outgrounds to 'promote interest.'
Quite what he assumes that would achieve I have no idea, although I admit I might well turn out to see Glos v Glamorgan at Cheltenham.
Or even Glam vs Glos at Colwyn Bay? I rather like out grounds: bench seats, warm beer, clockwork scoreboards and a clear view of the horizon - Cricket as the Good Lord intended. If Warwickshire would condescend to play at Leamington I'd bother to watch them, but a county day at Edgbaston has all the charm of a health and safety inspection at a meat-packing factory.
Used to love out grounds. Saw Somerset at Weston Supermare and Hants at Bournemouth a few times. Definite increased levels of charm…
I was told by informed observers several months ago that the coronation of Xi as emperor this winter was not a sure thing. Who knows what struggle is going on.
You can easily imagine him stripping to that song at a hen nite
I can see him bare chested inviting Socialists to 'get it up ya' whilst Liz pole dances for coked up bankers and Braverman screams c*** repeatedly at a fish tank. Cleverley rocks gently in the corner sobbing 'we went too far'
Bojo would be the one sobbing at not being invited.
Boris would be forced to watch like A Clockwork Orange but never participate. All these worlds you shall never possess.
One thing that bemuses me in this country is how, for a service economy allegedly, we are really quite poor at service. I have dealt with 3 financial institutions in the past 3 days and have, literally, spent nearly 7 hours just trying to get through and matters actioned. You can get lots of responses on Twitter and endless apologies etc but there is a complete failure to understand that you actually need people who are available and able to understand and deal with a problem. Same for telephone companies and insurance companies I've dealt with this year.
I am a bit spoiled because growing up where I did in Naples we got the sort of old-fashioned service now largely seen in historical dramas. It it was not that long ago, though.
Far too many service providers have just dumped their responsibilities onto their customers so that we are effectively working for free for them. It is infuriating for customers and horrible for those working for them because they then have to deal with annoyed customers with little power to change things for the better. And yet sitting in a motorway cafe right now writing this, the lady serving behind the counter has been the epitome of friendliness and efficiency. So it can be done.
Online service is great most of the time but we forget the need for effective personal contact for when things go wrong or help is needed at our peril. And that is why people (ok me) can get so infuriated: it's not just the waste of time but the determination of institutions to put us at a distance and dismiss us rather than reach out and help. It is inhuman and impersonal. It is the exact opposite of what customer service and problem-solving should be.
Poor service due to cheap service, which equals higher profits, which equals bigger management bonuses. The ills of Britain summarised.
The grabbing hands grab all they can Everything Counts in large amounts
Tory commentators wetting themselves as the party marches even further from the centre ground where elections are won.
Keep it up kids.
e.g.
Andrew Pierce @toryboypierce · 6h Cant remember last time a Tory #KwasiBudget got such strong praise and equally strong criticism from the Left. Its first proper Tory #Budget2023 in decades
Tory commentators wetting themselves as the party marches even further from the centre ground where elections are won.
Keep it up kids.
e.g.
Andrew Pierce @toryboypierce · 6h Cant remember last time a Tory #KwasiBudget got such strong praise and equally strong criticism from the Left. Its first proper Tory #Budget2023 in decades
By the "left" does Pierce mean everyone except The Mail, the Express, the Telegraph, himself, and BigG?
Finally some meat on the bones as I told you all exclusively.
Wow a plan that will do the square root of bugger all....we already have enough renewables to cover what we need pretty much when the conditions are right. 400% more wind and solar does bugger all when there is no wind or sun
You didn't read "more foreign workers" on the side of a bus did you?
What was the point of Brexit?
The point is we can recruit from across the world and immigration has fallen down the list of concerns
This is ridiculous. The list of "shortage" professions is already taking the piss. It needs to be pruned, not expanded. The whole point of Brexit is to cut down on low income workers.
Paul Mason @paulmasonnews · 26m Starmer tells Labour delegates trickledown economics is a "pisstake" - says (with justification) the party feels confident and ready for an election ...
I think 2023 GE. Dangerous to leave it the full 5 years.
Possibly, but if you are 20 points behind there must be a temptation to wait to see if something, anything, turns up.
Both John Major (1997) and Gordon Brown (2010) paid a very heavy price for that Micawberish approach.
Are you suggesting they should have held elections early? Didn't the Tories bottom out in the mid 90s? And although Brown got a low share of the vote he didn't do terribly seat wise. All he could have done was an immediate election for a fresh mandate in 2007. Otherwise the question would be why are you holding an election now?
But as investors pass judgment on Mr. Kwarteng’s Friday announcement, they might consider the stakes. Britain has become the most important economic experiment in the developed world because Ms. Truss is the only leader willing to abandon a stale Keynesian policy consensus that has produced stagflation everywhere. Read the plans for yourselves rather than heeding the jeremiads of economists who haven’t been able to offer any better ideas for how to revive an economy.
One thing that bemuses me in this country is how, for a service economy allegedly, we are really quite poor at service. I have dealt with 3 financial institutions in the past 3 days and have, literally, spent nearly 7 hours just trying to get through and matters actioned. You can get lots of responses on Twitter and endless apologies etc but there is a complete failure to understand that you actually need people who are available and able to understand and deal with a problem. Same for telephone companies and insurance companies I've dealt with this year.
I am a bit spoiled because growing up where I did in Naples we got the sort of old-fashioned service now largely seen in historical dramas. It it was not that long ago, though.
Far too many service providers have just dumped their responsibilities onto their customers so that we are effectively working for free for them. It is infuriating for customers and horrible for those working for them because they then have to deal with annoyed customers with little power to change things for the better. And yet sitting in a motorway cafe right now writing this, the lady serving behind the counter has been the epitome of friendliness and efficiency. So it can be done.
Online service is great most of the time but we forget the need for effective personal contact for when things go wrong or help is needed at our peril. And that is why people (ok me) can get so infuriated: it's not just the waste of time but the determination of institutions to put us at a distance and dismiss us rather than reach out and help. It is inhuman and impersonal. It is the exact opposite of what customer service and problem-solving should be.
Poor service due to cheap service, which equals higher profits, which equals bigger management bonuses. The ills of Britain summarised.
I suppose the questions are (a) how many people are willing to pay more for the extra customer service and (b) if the pool of customers the "high-service" firm ends up with is profitable or if it gives them a lot of bespoke problems.
The success of Ryanair suggests that people prioritise cost over service.
It would be good to have the choice of cost over service. When shopping, there is the choice of Waitrose or Booths versus Asda or Morrisons. In financial services, it seems to be only Asda service at Waitrose prices.
I don't think the Waitrose staff are more attentive, rather the intrinsic products are different from Asda. In finance the product is regulated to within an inch of its life - very little variation in the mass market - but you can always go to Coutts.
Coutts recently had to warn their customers to turn off apple auto-update since they can’t keep their app up to date:
You didn't read "more foreign workers" on the side of a bus did you?
What was the point of Brexit?
The point was to separate ourselves politically from the EU.
Just imagine how much oxygen would be taken up by EU issues if were were still part of it and everything Ursula von der Leyen said became a domestic issue for us. Instead all the main parties are focused on ideas about how to solve the problems faced by Britain today.
You didn't read "more foreign workers" on the side of a bus did you?
What was the point of Brexit?
The point is we can recruit from across the world and immigration has fallen down the list of concerns
An open door policy is fine by me. I am not sure that was true of every Leave voter- although I could of course be wrong.
I did vote remain by the way but this is needed and Truss is right to increase immigration where we have labour shortages
As long as its because we can't get enough workers not merely "we cant get enough workers paying minimum wage for the job" . I suspect in a lot of cases its the latter
But as investors pass judgment on Mr. Kwarteng’s Friday announcement, they might consider the stakes. Britain has become the most important economic experiment in the developed world because Ms. Truss is the only leader willing to abandon a stale Keynesian policy consensus that has produced stagflation everywhere. Read the plans for yourselves rather than heeding the jeremiads of economists who haven’t been able to offer any better ideas for how to revive an economy.
You didn't read "more foreign workers" on the side of a bus did you?
What was the point of Brexit?
The point was the separate ourselves politically from the EU.
Just imagine how much oxygen would be taken up by EU issues if were were still part of it and everything Ursula von der Leyen said became a domestic issue for us. Instead all the main parties are focused on ideas about how to solve the problems faced by Britain today.
No it was advertised as stop immigration as you well know. Carry on, those Red Wall seats are running away
One thing that bemuses me in this country is how, for a service economy allegedly, we are really quite poor at service. I have dealt with 3 financial institutions in the past 3 days and have, literally, spent nearly 7 hours just trying to get through and matters actioned. You can get lots of responses on Twitter and endless apologies etc but there is a complete failure to understand that you actually need people who are available and able to understand and deal with a problem. Same for telephone companies and insurance companies I've dealt with this year.
I am a bit spoiled because growing up where I did in Naples we got the sort of old-fashioned service now largely seen in historical dramas. It it was not that long ago, though.
Far too many service providers have just dumped their responsibilities onto their customers so that we are effectively working for free for them. It is infuriating for customers and horrible for those working for them because they then have to deal with annoyed customers with little power to change things for the better. And yet sitting in a motorway cafe right now writing this, the lady serving behind the counter has been the epitome of friendliness and efficiency. So it can be done.
Online service is great most of the time but we forget the need for effective personal contact for when things go wrong or help is needed at our peril. And that is why people (ok me) can get so infuriated: it's not just the waste of time but the determination of institutions to put us at a distance and dismiss us rather than reach out and help. It is inhuman and impersonal. It is the exact opposite of what customer service and problem-solving should be.
Poor service due to cheap service, which equals higher profits, which equals bigger management bonuses. The ills of Britain summarised.
I suppose the questions are (a) how many people are willing to pay more for the extra customer service and (b) if the pool of customers the "high-service" firm ends up with is profitable or if it gives them a lot of bespoke problems.
The success of Ryanair suggests that people prioritise cost over service.
It would be good to have the choice of cost over service. When shopping, there is the choice of Waitrose or Booths versus Asda or Morrisons. In financial services, it seems to be only Asda service at Waitrose prices.
Didn’t @Charles, formerly of this parish, work for a rather better type of bank?
Trickle down economics is a bit of a misnomer. Obviously wealthy people don't really 'leak' their lucre on the rest of us by some automatic magic, but nevertheless, they do pay a lot of farriers, gardeners, childminders, tailors, builders, etc. We could have more Government policies to support the process of getting wealthy people to spend more money in this country. 'wealth-seeding' it might be called. Like cloud-seeding.
My policy of reintroducing hereditary baronetcies, and offering them as a bounty on derelict estates, to remain with the owners and their descendents for as long as they owned, maintained, and lived in the estates, is I think, a good wealth-seeding policy.
Not really, there is no 'cut tax and keep spending the same' option and theres no apetite for increased spending either
Not sure how this is a disaster for Truss when Starmer and her are both on just 27% which indicates all to play for
Indeed. If she firms up on best PM then it gets interesting. The concern they will have is 5 is a pretty big lead for opinium, 3 is nearer the average this year, but we are talking small movements
Having read the guardian article chb linked I am left shaking my head at the fact starmer has ingeniously come up with away to ensure higher electric bills for all
But as investors pass judgment on Mr. Kwarteng’s Friday announcement, they might consider the stakes. Britain has become the most important economic experiment in the developed world because Ms. Truss is the only leader willing to abandon a stale Keynesian policy consensus that has produced stagflation everywhere. Read the plans for yourselves rather than heeding the jeremiads of economists who haven’t been able to offer any better ideas for how to revive an economy.
You didn't read "more foreign workers" on the side of a bus did you?
What was the point of Brexit?
The point is we can recruit from across the world and immigration has fallen down the list of concerns
This is ridiculous. The list of "shortage" professions is already taking the piss. It needs to be pruned, not expanded. The whole point of Brexit is to cut down on low income workers.
....I thought it was to cut down on brown foreigners coming in?...ask Joe Public in the street.
But as investors pass judgment on Mr. Kwarteng’s Friday announcement, they might consider the stakes. Britain has become the most important economic experiment in the developed world because Ms. Truss is the only leader willing to abandon a stale Keynesian policy consensus that has produced stagflation everywhere. Read the plans for yourselves rather than heeding the jeremiads of economists who haven’t been able to offer any better ideas for how to revive an economy.
But as investors pass judgment on Mr. Kwarteng’s Friday announcement, they might consider the stakes. Britain has become the most important economic experiment in the developed world because Ms. Truss is the only leader willing to abandon a stale Keynesian policy consensus that has produced stagflation everywhere. Read the plans for yourselves rather than heeding the jeremiads of economists who haven’t been able to offer any better ideas for how to revive an economy.
If cutting taxes on the rich is always and everywhere a bad idea, then it creates a ratchet effect where they can only ever go up. Krugman didn't think the top rate of income tax in Britain was too low under Blair.
But as investors pass judgment on Mr. Kwarteng’s Friday announcement, they might consider the stakes. Britain has become the most important economic experiment in the developed world because Ms. Truss is the only leader willing to abandon a stale Keynesian policy consensus that has produced stagflation everywhere. Read the plans for yourselves rather than heeding the jeremiads of economists who haven’t been able to offer any better ideas for how to revive an economy.
Remainers can’t complain - it’s what they voted for with their remain vote.
Truss herself was a Remainer let us not forget.
However not sure tax cuts mainly benefiting the rich and more immigrants will keep the redwall voting Conservative again next time
Correct me where wrong, red wall is
Long term trend regardless of current politics - mining towns and villages as ideal Escape To The… tv show destination.
Some voted Labour all their life, identify publicly as Tory now, likely because of Brexit and Boris.
Some voters in from the cold, found by Brexit referendum, turned out 2019 to get Brexit done and keep Boris PM
Labour voters no showed because of Corbyn and momentum’s insane borrow too much money and risk wrecking economy manifesto.
So that’s a lot of different groupings and motivations, quite hard to second guess what they will all do, and impossible to think Labour gets the vote of all of them, particularly new Tory voters because of Brexit. The truth here is Liz inherits bonus votes in red wall regards of her policies the next couple of years.
No, the Tories will still likely hold a few of them but most redwall seats are lower than average income and sceptical of immigration, not who Truss' initial measures are focused on
Yes, but no, becuase as I pointed out, it’s not just one type of voter with 1 motivation. Take the lower than average income voter who lurrrrrvs Brexit, switched from labour to Tory in hatred of confirmation vote remainer Starmer, that vote ain’t returning Labour any time soon regardless what Truss does.
Also when you casually toss in “truss not keeping red wall” you forget incumbency bonus - so many new red wall MPs are brilliant bluff northern types beloved by all their constituents now regardless what Truss does.
Names, please.
Dehenna, Sheridan, Davison
That's one. Is she particularly beloved? I dunno. But that surely ain't "so many" by any definition?There are always new MP's who prove locally popular. Is there any evidence the new ones are more popular than the average new MP? I don't see it. Quite a few seem to be imbeciles. But again. That isn't unusual.
You didn't read "more foreign workers" on the side of a bus did you?
What was the point of Brexit?
The point is we can recruit from across the world and immigration has fallen down the list of concerns
An open door policy is fine by me. I am not sure that was true of every Leave voter- although I could of course be wrong.
I did vote remain by the way but this is needed and Truss is right to increase immigration where we have labour shortages
The reality is of course without Brexit we wouldn't be short of imported workers, and as I recall one of the key drivers for VoteLeave, including Farage's poster campaign was too many European immigrants. The poster of course didn't suggest we would need to replace these workers with workers from farther afield.
So we can import a raft of "skilled" workers from overseas, but I can no longer retire to France, as I previously could, without being hindered by red tape.
Not really, there is no 'cut tax and keep spending the same' option and theres no apetite for increased spending either
Not sure how this is a disaster for Truss when Starmer and her are both on just 27% which indicates all to play for
Indeed. If she firms up on best PM then it gets interesting. The concern they will have is 5 is a pretty big lead for opinium, 3 is nearer the average this year, but we are talking small movements
It seems that it has not made much difference but if Truss really does do all the things she is planning then who knows
Certainly it is all to play for and I expect GE 24 in October
But as investors pass judgment on Mr. Kwarteng’s Friday announcement, they might consider the stakes. Britain has become the most important economic experiment in the developed world because Ms. Truss is the only leader willing to abandon a stale Keynesian policy consensus that has produced stagflation everywhere. Read the plans for yourselves rather than heeding the jeremiads of economists who haven’t been able to offer any better ideas for how to revive an economy.
But as investors pass judgment on Mr. Kwarteng’s Friday announcement, they might consider the stakes. Britain has become the most important economic experiment in the developed world because Ms. Truss is the only leader willing to abandon a stale Keynesian policy consensus that has produced stagflation everywhere. Read the plans for yourselves rather than heeding the jeremiads of economists who haven’t been able to offer any better ideas for how to revive an economy.
Yebbut Kwarteng's fiscal event is not mainly tax cuts for the rich, per PK.
It's not: but I would personally have removed the 45% tax band when the economy was booming, not when it was struggling.
Off topic: the next time you’re whinging at Vanilla, could you ask them to fix the annoying behaviour where clicking reply permanently puts the post into the reply box, even if you delete it - reload the page and there it is again! Clicking reply on another post appends rather than replaces it. Infuriating, as illustrated by the double quotation above.
(Oh, and the sideways/upside down photo regression too :-)
But as investors pass judgment on Mr. Kwarteng’s Friday announcement, they might consider the stakes. Britain has become the most important economic experiment in the developed world because Ms. Truss is the only leader willing to abandon a stale Keynesian policy consensus that has produced stagflation everywhere. Read the plans for yourselves rather than heeding the jeremiads of economists who haven’t been able to offer any better ideas for how to revive an economy.
I don't have much confidence that the Truss/Kwazi approach would have worked out even in the most favourable circs, those being a newly elected government with five years to run and a mandate to do what it's doing.
In the actual reality of a new PM arriving half way through a term and exercising an economic handbrake turn with no mandate whatsoever, and the press already speculating whether she'll be around in a year's time, I cannot see any of these high rolling spenders or investors having much confidence that this regime has sufficient longevity to influence their residency or investment decisions before 2024/5?
Comments
Paul Mason
@paulmasonnews
·
26m
Starmer tells Labour delegates trickledown economics is a "pisstake" - says (with justification) the party feels confident and ready for an election ...
https://twitter.com/paulmasonnews/status/1573765020382535680
However some former Brexit Party voters in the redwall seats might go back to RefUK
Unless there are any new polls we haven't seen.
Sheridan,
Davison
Got to love the old Music Hall political numbers
Just an old lie that Boris knocked about a bit
My old man said he’s a Kwarteng fan
https://twitter.com/TmorrowsPapers/status/1573766999976574976?t=wLirJlHogUm5dn9RDJuKfg&s=19
Plus if Truss waits until the longest date she’ll get nearly 2 and a half years.
The other part is these people are measured on how many calls they answer an hour rather than on the number of satisfied customers after the call
Add up poorly paid demotivated staff and an incentive to answer x calls regardless of whether customers are served and you have the road to perdition we live in
Would amount to a £5,000 pa tax break for someone earning more than £125,140.
The allowance was abolished for the top earners by George Osborne in 2010. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/09/24/liz-truss-plans-cut-taxes-new-year/
I was told by informed observers several months ago that the coronation of Xi as emperor this winter was not a sure thing. Who knows what struggle is going on.
Cleverley rocks gently in the corner sobbing 'we went too far'
Finally some meat on the bones as I told you all exclusively.
What was the point of Brexit?
All these worlds you shall never possess.
Truss is following the recipe of how to lose those seats to the letter
https://twitter.com/thejonnyreilly/status/1573750412624203784
Everything Counts in large amounts
Keep it up kids.
e.g.
Andrew Pierce
@toryboypierce
·
6h
Cant remember last time a Tory #KwasiBudget got such strong praise and equally strong criticism from the Left. Its first proper Tory #Budget2023 in decades
Disaster for Truss
Utter lunacy!
https://www.coutts.com/coutts-digital/Bank-In-the-App.html
Being a small bank is hard in the modern era! Here are Coutts dreadful online reviews:
https://uk.trustpilot.com/review/coutts.com
Just imagine how much oxygen would be taken up by EU issues if were were still part of it and everything Ursula von der Leyen said became a domestic issue for us. Instead all the main parties are focused on ideas about how to solve the problems faced by Britain today.
https://archive.ph/0AezJ
My policy of reintroducing hereditary baronetcies, and offering them as a bounty on derelict estates, to remain with the owners and their descendents for as long as they owned, maintained, and lived in the estates, is I think, a good wealth-seeding policy.
20 point lead nailed on
Focus group nuggets
Is there any evidence the new ones are more popular than the average new MP?
I don't see it.
Quite a few seem to be imbeciles.
But again. That isn't unusual.
So we can import a raft of "skilled" workers from overseas, but I can no longer retire to France, as I previously could, without being hindered by red tape.
Certainly it is all to play for and I expect GE 24 in October
(Oh, and the sideways/upside down photo regression too :-)
In the actual reality of a new PM arriving half way through a term and exercising an economic handbrake turn with no mandate whatsoever, and the press already speculating whether she'll be around in a year's time, I cannot see any of these high rolling spenders or investors having much confidence that this regime has sufficient longevity to influence their residency or investment decisions before 2024/5?