a) we have moved on so far in this country that you wouldn't even know the [black] chancellor is black; or b) he is a traitor to his race what with his Eton this and fancy voice?
a) we have moved on so far in this country that you wouldn't even know the [black] chancellor is black; or b) he is a traitor to his race what with his Eton this and fancy voice?
Kwarteng and Truss have virtually assured a labour government in 2024 and at the same time put the perceived mortgage rate rises at their door, when in truth the bond market worldwide is being routed through the authorities aggressive rise in interest rates as inflation is being fought against everywhere . It is likely about 1% has been added because of the kamikaze behaviour of Kwarteng but even if Starmer had been in no 10 he would be looking at a housing crisis that is hard to see how it is mitigated
I am old enough to remember negative equity and it looks as if this could return over the next few yeaes, but sadly we have become used to very low interest rates which look like being returned to more normal ones and yes many will be affected but we are not immune to worldwide events
Labour have had a good conference but the one thing missing is that they have failed to understand that the economy in 2024 is going to be in a very poor place, and ironically they may well have to raise taxes and reduce public sector spending by an amount that to a Labour party will be very difficult
I do not defend Kwarteng or Truss but at the very least she needs to sack Kwarteng if she wants to have any chance of surviving , and she has a ready made successor she knows only too well, one Rishi Sunak
The obvious pivot - which Starmer and his team have hinted at already - is how we rebuild after the Great Truss Financial Crisis. We invest, and gain a return on that investment. Some of that investing will need to come from government and he's already announced the first StateCo to do energy. Much will need to come from the private sector, and as they are always looking for something sane to put money in there will be plenty of opportunities.
This final phase of Torynomics will kill dead the stupidty of "who will pay for that" and "what will you cut to find the money". Investment had been turned by the Tories into a dirty word. Their spivvy hedgie friends don't want investment, they just want to turn a quick profit now and not care about tomorrow.
That has to end. So many of the things this country needs - infrastructure, hospitals and schools fit for purpose, sustainable self-reliant energy generation - deliver both a long-term positive ROI but a short-term boost when money goes to pay people to build stuff who then pay taxes and spend. Which gives other people jobs.
We used to call it capitalism. Starmer will lead us back there.
In normal times yes but 2024 will not be normal
As far as GB Energy is concerned it is modelled on EDF in France who have just had a 15 billion buy out by Macron and Lucy Powell this morning simply was wholly unconvincing in her explanation about its funding
Its pretty simple: 1. UK needs a big expansion in generating capacity 2. Instead of paying a foreign company to install, own and manage this, the UK will create its own company to do so 3. Instead of buying all of the components from abroad, the UK will promote UK manufacturing to supply turbines and solar panels.
The money will be spend regardless. Because there is no scenario where "sorry, we can't afford to create the generating capacity we need, we'll just have to have brownouts instead"
a) we have moved on so far in this country that you wouldn't even know the [black] chancellor is black; or b) he is a traitor to his race what with his Eton this and fancy voice?
Very definitely (b).
Thanks - have we heard the full transcript. I need no convincing that Huq is a nasty piece of work but I can see how you get to a) also. Just wondered on the whole thing/context.
a) we have moved on so far in this country that you wouldn't even know the [black] chancellor is black; or b) he is a traitor to his race what with his Eton this and fancy voice?
"Superficially, he is a black man. He went to Eton, I think, he went to a very expensive prep school, all the way through, the top schools in the country,” she said in a leaked recording of her speech. “If you hear him on the Today programme, you wouldn’t know he’s black”
Ms Huq is also reported to have said: "Superficially, they've had four brown chancellors and that.But when you have a little brown guy who. And also the leadership contest I think that I'd say alludes to that, when there was, say, Suella, Kemi all these people in it... "
From twitter. But neither quote tells us what the But the reality... pay off was
Just caught the end of SKS on Today this morning on my way back from the doctors. Quite impressive, I thought. His instant calling out of the racist comment by Rupa Huq was a nice change too. He's had a good week and he is right to emphasise how far Labour has come after the Corbyn disaster.
Of course fish and barrels come to mind in attacking the present government but his predecessor would have contrived a miss or even been talking about a different barrel somewhere else in the world.
Has he worked out what a woman is yet?
Thats right. People who have lost their homes in the Great Truss Financial Crisis will still vote Tory - for the mince MP who has sneered at them - because Starmer once said something about a woman and took the knee.
Do you know how ridiculous you sound? Woke does not threaten people's lives. Truss does.
If your mortgage goes up - discretionary spending or next year's holiday disappears.
Because of this week's issues people will be associating their mortgages going up not with disasters in Ukraine but with the Tory party so that lack of holiday is going to reflect in who people vote for next time round.
and it's the sort of reason why people won't sit out the next election - they will actually go and vote to punish the party that created the mess and their lack of holiday.
I have little doubt you are correct
Sky just said that the Swedish Sizemologists have said more than a 100 kilos of dynamite were used on one of the North Sea pipelines
a) we have moved on so far in this country that you wouldn't even know the [black] chancellor is black; or b) he is a traitor to his race what with his Eton this and fancy voice?
Or (c) - there is a mentalist strain on the left who weaponise stereotypes about "their people". In this case black people are victims, so this successful Tory man cannot be black.
Its not racism, its far wider than that. It is workers vs bosses - working people are working class. They can't aspire to better themselves because then they become the hated bosses and cease to be working class.
Blair understood this. Which is why he endlessly talked up and invested in social mobility. And they still hate him for it.
a) we have moved on so far in this country that you wouldn't even know the [black] chancellor is black; or b) he is a traitor to his race what with his Eton this and fancy voice?
It was b, Starmer rightly withdrew the whip instantly. The country at large is at "a" though.
Just caught the end of SKS on Today this morning on my way back from the doctors. Quite impressive, I thought. His instant calling out of the racist comment by Rupa Huq was a nice change too. He's had a good week and he is right to emphasise how far Labour has come after the Corbyn disaster.
Of course fish and barrels come to mind in attacking the present government but his predecessor would have contrived a miss or even been talking about a different barrel somewhere else in the world.
Has he worked out what a woman is yet?
Thats right. People who have lost their homes in the Great Truss Financial Crisis will still vote Tory - for the mince MP who has sneered at them - because Starmer once said something about a woman and took the knee.
Do you know how ridiculous you sound? Woke does not threaten people's lives. Truss does.
If your mortgage goes up - discretionary spending or next year's holiday disappears.
Because of this week's issues people will be associating their mortgages going up not with disasters in Ukraine but with the Tory party so that lack of holiday is going to reflect in who people vote for next time round.
and it's the sort of reason why people won't sit out the next election - they will actually go and vote to punish the party that created the mess and their lack of holiday.
Apparently not. Fear of ladyboys will make them vote for the party that has directly made their kids cry.
a) we have moved on so far in this country that you wouldn't even know the [black] chancellor is black; or b) he is a traitor to his race what with his Eton this and fancy voice?
"Superficially, he is a black man. He went to Eton, I think, he went to a very expensive prep school, all the way through, the top schools in the country,” she said in a leaked recording of her speech. “If you hear him on the Today programme, you wouldn’t know he’s black”
Ms Huq is also reported to have said: "Superficially, they've had four brown chancellors and that.But when you have a little brown guy who. And also the leadership contest I think that I'd say alludes to that, when there was, say, Suella, Kemi all these people in it... "
From twitter. But neither quote tells us what the But the reality... pay off was
Actually, it's worse than "he is a traitor to his race what with his Eton this and fancy voice" - it's "he is a traitor to his race because he's a Conservative", as the references to Sunak, Braverman and Badenoch show.
- “… something that CON MPs in marginal seats will only be too aware of.“
The latest polls indicate a complete Conservative wipeout in both Scotland and Wales.
That would result in a Con seat distribution of perhaps:
England 250 seats Scotland 0 seats Wales 0 seats N Ireland 0 seats
Not a good look for a supposedly “Unionist” party.
If they only get 250 seats they wouldn’t even be a majority in their home country England. They could easily not even win a plurality there.
This is an existential problem not just for the Conservatives, but for all Unionists, which is why Labour are trying to throw them as many lifelines they can without seriously pissing off their own base.
The distribution of seats matters. It looks like the Tories are well on their way to being a sect.
Even if the Tories drop to 250 that isn't low enough for a Labour majority so I'm not tempted to back that. Wales will be good for them but I'm not expecting any gains in Scotland.
I’d be amazed if Labour don’t make 1 or 2 gains in Scotland, at the very least. Although the SNP have a consistent poll lead of 21-24 points, it ought not to be beyond SLab’s gumption to manage a handful of gains. Mind you, never overestimate SLab has become an accepted wisdom in Scottish politics.
That said, moving from 1 to say 6 SLab seats doesn’t really help Starmer. He probably needs at least 15-20 Scottish seats for Lab Maj, and that requires a 12 point swing. That task looks to be beyond Anas Sarwar and the dunderheids.
His announcement of 100,000 Scottish jobs yesterday was interesting
a) we have moved on so far in this country that you wouldn't even know the [black] chancellor is black; or b) he is a traitor to his race what with his Eton this and fancy voice?
"Superficially, he is a black man. He went to Eton, I think, he went to a very expensive prep school, all the way through, the top schools in the country,” she said in a leaked recording of her speech. “If you hear him on the Today programme, you wouldn’t know he’s black”
Ms Huq is also reported to have said: "Superficially, they've had four brown chancellors and that.But when you have a little brown guy who. And also the leadership contest I think that I'd say alludes to that, when there was, say, Suella, Kemi all these people in it... "
From twitter. But neither quote tells us what the But the reality... pay off was
Yes interesting - the first extended quote, which I've seen, could be a testament to how far (in this case) black people have come in this country although "superficially" is problematic.
"Superficially" in the second quote could be taken to mean that for all the Cons' diversity they are still posh twats.
I don't suppose we will ever know and the point seems to be that she shouldn't have gone there in the first place.
Fingers crossed for mild weather, plenty of wind and decent sunshine this European winter.
The latest three-month outlook from the Met Office, issued Monday, has a much weaker signal than normal, but with a slight tendency towards less stormy weather, albeit not particularly cold. Roughly a C+ in terms of what we'd want it to be.
a) we have moved on so far in this country that you wouldn't even know the [black] chancellor is black; or b) he is a traitor to his race what with his Eton this and fancy voice?
"Superficially, he is a black man. He went to Eton, I think, he went to a very expensive prep school, all the way through, the top schools in the country,” she said in a leaked recording of her speech. “If you hear him on the Today programme, you wouldn’t know he’s black”
Ms Huq is also reported to have said: "Superficially, they've had four brown chancellors and that.But when you have a little brown guy who. And also the leadership contest I think that I'd say alludes to that, when there was, say, Suella, Kemi all these people in it... "
From twitter. But neither quote tells us what the But the reality... pay off was
Actually, it's worse than "he is a traitor to his race what with his Eton this and fancy voice" - it's "he is a traitor to his race because he's a Conservative", as the references to Sunak, Braverman and Badenoch show.
Yes that is definitely a reading. And then she could have said anything - women, the working class, Liverpudlians - and it would have the same meaning and perhaps not as controversially.
Kwarteng and Truss have virtually assured a labour government in 2024 and at the same time put the perceived mortgage rate rises at their door, when in truth the bond market worldwide is being routed through the authorities aggressive rise in interest rates as inflation is being fought against everywhere . It is likely about 1% has been added because of the kamikaze behaviour of Kwarteng but even if Starmer had been in no 10 he would be looking at a housing crisis that is hard to see how it is mitigated
I am old enough to remember negative equity and it looks as if this could return over the next few yeaes, but sadly we have become used to very low interest rates which look like being returned to more normal ones and yes many will be affected but we are not immune to worldwide events
Labour have had a good conference but the one thing missing is that they have failed to understand that the economy in 2024 is going to be in a very poor place, and ironically they may well have to raise taxes and reduce public sector spending by an amount that to a Labour party will be very difficult
I do not defend Kwarteng or Truss but at the very least she needs to sack Kwarteng if she wants to have any chance of surviving , and she has a ready made successor she knows only too well, one Rishi Sunak
The obvious pivot - which Starmer and his team have hinted at already - is how we rebuild after the Great Truss Financial Crisis. We invest, and gain a return on that investment. Some of that investing will need to come from government and he's already announced the first StateCo to do energy. Much will need to come from the private sector, and as they are always looking for something sane to put money in there will be plenty of opportunities.
This final phase of Torynomics will kill dead the stupidty of "who will pay for that" and "what will you cut to find the money". Investment had been turned by the Tories into a dirty word. Their spivvy hedgie friends don't want investment, they just want to turn a quick profit now and not care about tomorrow.
That has to end. So many of the things this country needs - infrastructure, hospitals and schools fit for purpose, sustainable self-reliant energy generation - deliver both a long-term positive ROI but a short-term boost when money goes to pay people to build stuff who then pay taxes and spend. Which gives other people jobs.
We used to call it capitalism. Starmer will lead us back there.
In normal times yes but 2024 will not be normal
As far as GB Energy is concerned it is modelled on EDF in France who have just had a 15 billion buy out by Macron and Lucy Powell this morning simply was wholly unconvincing in her explanation about its funding
Its pretty simple: 1. UK needs a big expansion in generating capacity 2. Instead of paying a foreign company to install, own and manage this, the UK will create its own company to do so 3. Instead of buying all of the components from abroad, the UK will promote UK manufacturing to supply turbines and solar panels.
The money will be spend regardless. Because there is no scenario where "sorry, we can't afford to create the generating capacity we need, we'll just have to have brownouts instead"
Also, France's issues this summer stemmed from the fact loads of their nuclear power stations were on rivers which obviously dry up somewhat in a heatwave. Sea level rises are quite predictable beyond the lifespan of any nuclear plant so it's not an issue we'd encounter as ours are all by the sea.
Kwarteng and Truss have virtually assured a labour government in 2024 and at the same time put the perceived mortgage rate rises at their door, when in truth the bond market worldwide is being routed through the authorities aggressive rise in interest rates as inflation is being fought against everywhere . It is likely about 1% has been added because of the kamikaze behaviour of Kwarteng but even if Starmer had been in no 10 he would be looking at a housing crisis that is hard to see how it is mitigated
I am old enough to remember negative equity and it looks as if this could return over the next few yeaes, but sadly we have become used to very low interest rates which look like being returned to more normal ones and yes many will be affected but we are not immune to worldwide events
Labour have had a good conference but the one thing missing is that they have failed to understand that the economy in 2024 is going to be in a very poor place, and ironically they may well have to raise taxes and reduce public sector spending by an amount that to a Labour party will be very difficult
I do not defend Kwarteng or Truss but at the very least she needs to sack Kwarteng if she wants to have any chance of surviving , and she has a ready made successor she knows only too well, one Rishi Sunak
The obvious pivot - which Starmer and his team have hinted at already - is how we rebuild after the Great Truss Financial Crisis. We invest, and gain a return on that investment. Some of that investing will need to come from government and he's already announced the first StateCo to do energy. Much will need to come from the private sector, and as they are always looking for something sane to put money in there will be plenty of opportunities.
This final phase of Torynomics will kill dead the stupidty of "who will pay for that" and "what will you cut to find the money". Investment had been turned by the Tories into a dirty word. Their spivvy hedgie friends don't want investment, they just want to turn a quick profit now and not care about tomorrow.
That has to end. So many of the things this country needs - infrastructure, hospitals and schools fit for purpose, sustainable self-reliant energy generation - deliver both a long-term positive ROI but a short-term boost when money goes to pay people to build stuff who then pay taxes and spend. Which gives other people jobs.
We used to call it capitalism. Starmer will lead us back there.
In normal times yes but 2024 will not be normal
As far as GB Energy is concerned it is modelled on EDF in France who have just had a 15 billion buy out by Macron and Lucy Powell this morning simply was wholly unconvincing in her explanation about its funding
Its pretty simple: 1. UK needs a big expansion in generating capacity 2. Instead of paying a foreign company to install, own and manage this, the UK will create its own company to do so 3. Instead of buying all of the components from abroad, the UK will promote UK manufacturing to supply turbines and solar panels.
The money will be spend regardless. Because there is no scenario where "sorry, we can't afford to create the generating capacity we need, we'll just have to have brownouts instead"
The problem is that the other companies will still be in the field and competing against GB Energy which is fine, but the problem arises when the turbines and solar panels can be purchased far cheaper outside the UK
Just caught the end of SKS on Today this morning on my way back from the doctors. Quite impressive, I thought. His instant calling out of the racist comment by Rupa Huq was a nice change too. He's had a good week and he is right to emphasise how far Labour has come after the Corbyn disaster.
Of course fish and barrels come to mind in attacking the present government but his predecessor would have contrived a miss or even been talking about a different barrel somewhere else in the world.
Has he worked out what a woman is yet?
Maybe you should tell SKS since you appear to know. I am a woman and I would struggle to come up with a suitable definition.
“They can celebrate their identity. They can't demote my kids to second class citizens or treat them as though they are a threat to their existence, just by being here. Hopefully you are not filling their minds with this kind of poison.”
+++++
I refer you to your words regarding “Western Civilisation”:
“I will gladly participate in its murder and dance on its grave”
I think the argument ends there, don’t you?
It was a conditional statement, as you know only too well. If Western Civilisation amounts to blood and soil fascism as you seem to believe, then I will gladly see its demise, because it absolutely won't be worth saving. I hope and believe that that isn't the case, but when I read statements like yours I see the first step on the journey to the gas chambers it is genuinely frightening.
Disgusting rather than frightening
You wanted Putin to conquer Ukraine via the “disbanding of NATO”
No. If they weren't able to get involved then rather than blowing smoke from the sidelines they should disband.
Incidentally, French nuclear output is back up to 28GW, up from the lowest depths they reached during the summer, but so far down on normal that it's still below the range of the dial on the gridwatch site.
a) we have moved on so far in this country that you wouldn't even know the [black] chancellor is black; or b) he is a traitor to his race what with his Eton this and fancy voice?
Or (c) - there is a mentalist strain on the left who weaponise stereotypes about "their people". In this case black people are victims, so this successful Tory man cannot be black.
Its not racism, its far wider than that. It is workers vs bosses - working people are working class. They can't aspire to better themselves because then they become the hated bosses and cease to be working class.
Blair understood this. Which is why he endlessly talked up and invested in social mobility. And they still hate him for it.
The test for labour is will she stand as labour candidate in 2024
a) we have moved on so far in this country that you wouldn't even know the [black] chancellor is black; or b) he is a traitor to his race what with his Eton this and fancy voice?
"Superficially, he is a black man. He went to Eton, I think, he went to a very expensive prep school, all the way through, the top schools in the country,” she said in a leaked recording of her speech. “If you hear him on the Today programme, you wouldn’t know he’s black”
Ms Huq is also reported to have said: "Superficially, they've had four brown chancellors and that.But when you have a little brown guy who. And also the leadership contest I think that I'd say alludes to that, when there was, say, Suella, Kemi all these people in it... "
From twitter. But neither quote tells us what the But the reality... pay off was
Yes interesting - the first extended quote, which I've seen, could be a testament to how far (in this case) black people have come in this country although "superficially" is problematic.
"Superficially" in the second quote could be taken to mean that for all the Cons' diversity they are still posh twats.
I don't suppose we will ever know and the point seems to be that she shouldn't have gone there in the first place.
It was a bizarre comment which managed to be snobbish, invertedly snobbish, luridly patronising and apparently racist all at once
She probably didn’t mean any of it that way, but what with the Left being so keen on immediate cancellation, I don’t see why she gets the benefit of doubt
Kwarteng and Truss have virtually assured a labour government in 2024 and at the same time put the perceived mortgage rate rises at their door, when in truth the bond market worldwide is being routed through the authorities aggressive rise in interest rates as inflation is being fought against everywhere . It is likely about 1% has been added because of the kamikaze behaviour of Kwarteng but even if Starmer had been in no 10 he would be looking at a housing crisis that is hard to see how it is mitigated
I am old enough to remember negative equity and it looks as if this could return over the next few yeaes, but sadly we have become used to very low interest rates which look like being returned to more normal ones and yes many will be affected but we are not immune to worldwide events
Labour have had a good conference but the one thing missing is that they have failed to understand that the economy in 2024 is going to be in a very poor place, and ironically they may well have to raise taxes and reduce public sector spending by an amount that to a Labour party will be very difficult
I do not defend Kwarteng or Truss but at the very least she needs to sack Kwarteng if she wants to have any chance of surviving , and she has a ready made successor she knows only too well, one Rishi Sunak
The obvious pivot - which Starmer and his team have hinted at already - is how we rebuild after the Great Truss Financial Crisis. We invest, and gain a return on that investment. Some of that investing will need to come from government and he's already announced the first StateCo to do energy. Much will need to come from the private sector, and as they are always looking for something sane to put money in there will be plenty of opportunities.
This final phase of Torynomics will kill dead the stupidty of "who will pay for that" and "what will you cut to find the money". Investment had been turned by the Tories into a dirty word. Their spivvy hedgie friends don't want investment, they just want to turn a quick profit now and not care about tomorrow.
That has to end. So many of the things this country needs - infrastructure, hospitals and schools fit for purpose, sustainable self-reliant energy generation - deliver both a long-term positive ROI but a short-term boost when money goes to pay people to build stuff who then pay taxes and spend. Which gives other people jobs.
We used to call it capitalism. Starmer will lead us back there.
In normal times yes but 2024 will not be normal
As far as GB Energy is concerned it is modelled on EDF in France who have just had a 15 billion buy out by Macron and Lucy Powell this morning simply was wholly unconvincing in her explanation about its funding
Its pretty simple: 1. UK needs a big expansion in generating capacity 2. Instead of paying a foreign company to install, own and manage this, the UK will create its own company to do so 3. Instead of buying all of the components from abroad, the UK will promote UK manufacturing to supply turbines and solar panels.
The money will be spend regardless. Because there is no scenario where "sorry, we can't afford to create the generating capacity we need, we'll just have to have brownouts instead"
Also, France's issues this summer stemmed from the fact loads of their nuclear power stations were on rivers which obviously dry up somewhat in a heatwave. Sea level rises are quite predictable beyond the lifespan of any nuclear plant so it's not an issue we'd encounter as ours are all by the sea.
There are some things we cannot afford not to do. Energy generating capacity is a pertinent example - we either invest or we suffer both brownouts and crazy spot price gouging. So the money is being spent regardless - do we hand this over to the French government or the Swedish government, or copy their successful examples and do it ourselves?
With our geographic location and our tech / industrial abilities we should be a global leader in renewables. Instead the market and a "government involvement is communism" mindset means we are nowhere. If we're to spend the money - and we are - why not have something to show for it other than just the infrastructure?
a) we have moved on so far in this country that you wouldn't even know the [black] chancellor is black; or b) he is a traitor to his race what with his Eton this and fancy voice?
Or (c) - there is a mentalist strain on the left who weaponise stereotypes about "their people". In this case black people are victims, so this successful Tory man cannot be black.
Its not racism, its far wider than that. It is workers vs bosses - working people are working class. They can't aspire to better themselves because then they become the hated bosses and cease to be working class.
Blair understood this. Which is why he endlessly talked up and invested in social mobility. And they still hate him for it.
The explanation for why they hate him is contained in your post. Social mobility implies the acceptance of inequality, which for them is unacceptable.
Ian just completed an eyewall replacement cycle, is now a huge beast of a storm, and has seen a very rapid pressure drop in the last hour. Could possibly be a category 5 on landfall.
How spooky, the day after that “strange” incident on the pipelines.
I would be hoping the govt are taking steps to protect some of our critical infrastructure like wind farms etc. though perhaps that would be too sensible to expect of Truss
a) we have moved on so far in this country that you wouldn't even know the [black] chancellor is black; or b) he is a traitor to his race what with his Eton this and fancy voice?
I think that it is b, but I do think there is a purposeful misunderstanding happening in the chattering classes regarding this.
Woke and CRT may have become the new right wing boogeymen, but they were originally parts of AAV and black liberation discussion, and they have been discussed for a long time within the community. To "stay woke" was a cry that, no matter your class position, you need to remember that white dominated societies will still treat you worse for being a black man in a myriad of ways. So when black people act as class traitors there is often discussion amongst black liberation groups about what that person means to the community. These discussions have happened for generations - think on how old the phrase "uncle tom" is.
Is it the place of anyone who isn't black to start throwing these terms around? No. Should politicians like Huq or Biden say these things? Also no. But I think that race and class have become so intertwined in the UK and US specifically, that these kinds of clumsy things get said.
If she had said, for instance, that Kwasi was just another private school elitist who knew nothing of the struggles of the average working person who was black (which is what I think she was essentially saying), would people be complaining as much? I don't think so.
a) we have moved on so far in this country that you wouldn't even know the [black] chancellor is black; or b) he is a traitor to his race what with his Eton this and fancy voice?
"Superficially, he is a black man. He went to Eton, I think, he went to a very expensive prep school, all the way through, the top schools in the country,” she said in a leaked recording of her speech. “If you hear him on the Today programme, you wouldn’t know he’s black”
Ms Huq is also reported to have said: "Superficially, they've had four brown chancellors and that.But when you have a little brown guy who. And also the leadership contest I think that I'd say alludes to that, when there was, say, Suella, Kemi all these people in it... "
From twitter. But neither quote tells us what the But the reality... pay off was
Yes interesting - the first extended quote, which I've seen, could be a testament to how far (in this case) black people have come in this country although "superficially" is problematic.
"Superficially" in the second quote could be taken to mean that for all the Cons' diversity they are still posh twats.
I don't suppose we will ever know and the point seems to be that she shouldn't have gone there in the first place.
It was a bizarre comment which managed to be snobbish, invertedly snobbish, luridly patronising and apparently racist all at once
She probably didn’t mean any of it that way, but what with the Left being so keen on immediate cancellation, I don’t see why she gets the benefit of doubt
UK pension funds have been hit with variation margin calls of as much as £100 million each, after sharp falls in gilts and sterling pushed mark-to-market valuations on derivatives and leveraged repo positions heavily against them.
I can't see Truss going before the next election. In the unlikely event she rid lose a confidence vote the next leader would have to be elected by coronation without a leadership vote
Kwarteng and Truss have virtually assured a labour government in 2024 and at the same time put the perceived mortgage rate rises at their door, when in truth the bond market worldwide is being routed through the authorities aggressive rise in interest rates as inflation is being fought against everywhere . It is likely about 1% has been added because of the kamikaze behaviour of Kwarteng but even if Starmer had been in no 10 he would be looking at a housing crisis that is hard to see how it is mitigated
I am old enough to remember negative equity and it looks as if this could return over the next few yeaes, but sadly we have become used to very low interest rates which look like being returned to more normal ones and yes many will be affected but we are not immune to worldwide events
Labour have had a good conference but the one thing missing is that they have failed to understand that the economy in 2024 is going to be in a very poor place, and ironically they may well have to raise taxes and reduce public sector spending by an amount that to a Labour party will be very difficult
I do not defend Kwarteng or Truss but at the very least she needs to sack Kwarteng if she wants to have any chance of surviving , and she has a ready made successor she knows only too well, one Rishi Sunak
The obvious pivot - which Starmer and his team have hinted at already - is how we rebuild after the Great Truss Financial Crisis. We invest, and gain a return on that investment. Some of that investing will need to come from government and he's already announced the first StateCo to do energy. Much will need to come from the private sector, and as they are always looking for something sane to put money in there will be plenty of opportunities.
This final phase of Torynomics will kill dead the stupidty of "who will pay for that" and "what will you cut to find the money". Investment had been turned by the Tories into a dirty word. Their spivvy hedgie friends don't want investment, they just want to turn a quick profit now and not care about tomorrow.
That has to end. So many of the things this country needs - infrastructure, hospitals and schools fit for purpose, sustainable self-reliant energy generation - deliver both a long-term positive ROI but a short-term boost when money goes to pay people to build stuff who then pay taxes and spend. Which gives other people jobs.
We used to call it capitalism. Starmer will lead us back there.
In normal times yes but 2024 will not be normal
As far as GB Energy is concerned it is modelled on EDF in France who have just had a 15 billion buy out by Macron and Lucy Powell this morning simply was wholly unconvincing in her explanation about its funding
Its pretty simple: 1. UK needs a big expansion in generating capacity 2. Instead of paying a foreign company to install, own and manage this, the UK will create its own company to do so 3. Instead of buying all of the components from abroad, the UK will promote UK manufacturing to supply turbines and solar panels.
The money will be spend regardless. Because there is no scenario where "sorry, we can't afford to create the generating capacity we need, we'll just have to have brownouts instead"
The problem is that the other companies will still be in the field and competing against GB Energy which is fine, but the problem arises when the turbines and solar panels can be purchased far cheaper outside the UK
Cheaper short term or long term? Any fool can sell something cheap once. But long term when we have no choice but to buy from them, what does the price do then?
You have just displayed the "we can't afford it" mentality that has broken this country. We *can* afford it.
Borrow money Invest the money Deliver a return on the investment Have significantly greater capacity and capabilities - more money to reinvest
I don't understand how you Tory-supporting minds have forgotten how capitalism works?
Fingers crossed for mild weather, plenty of wind and decent sunshine this European winter.
The latest three-month outlook from the Met Office, issued Monday, has a much weaker signal than normal, but with a slight tendency towards less stormy weather, albeit not particularly cold. Roughly a C+ in terms of what we'd want it to be.
Yes it's not looking great, certainly for central Europe. The critical time will be Jan-March though so hopefully the La Nina tendency to positive AO and the warmish SSTs will keep us warm and breezy in late winter.
Absolutely nothing in that bollocks article supports your assertion
I can't actually read below the paywall section to see, but I doubt the Times would be entirely making it up.
They don't really back it up. If the below accusation constitutes belief in conspiracy theories, then the Danish government got there before Meloni:
Marta Bonafoni, a centre-left member of the Lazio regional council, which covers the region around Rome, said that members from Meloni’s party now frequently decried “ethnic substitution” in the region.
“When we propose rules on council houses, they insert amendments to exclude migrants, citing the danger of ethnic substitution,” she said.
Obviously there needs to true born Romano quotas for Lazio’s sub bench.
a) we have moved on so far in this country that you wouldn't even know the [black] chancellor is black; or b) he is a traitor to his race what with his Eton this and fancy voice?
I think that it is b, but I do think there is a purposeful misunderstanding happening in the chattering classes regarding this.
Woke and CRT may have become the new right wing boogeymen, but they were originally parts of AAV and black liberation discussion, and they have been discussed for a long time within the community. To "stay woke" was a cry that, no matter your class position, you need to remember that white dominated societies will still treat you worse for being a black man in a myriad of ways. So when black people act as class traitors there is often discussion amongst black liberation groups about what that person means to the community. These discussions have happened for generations - think on how old the phrase "uncle tom" is.
Is it the place of anyone who isn't black to start throwing these terms around? No. Should politicians like Huq or Biden say these things? Also no. But I think that race and class have become so intertwined in the UK and US specifically, that these kinds of clumsy things get said.
If she had said, for instance, that Kwasi was just another private school elitist who knew nothing of the struggles of the average working person who was black (which is what I think she was essentially saying), would people be complaining as much? I don't think so.
Yes I think that's right - at another moment (and perhaps she is kicking herself for not using that example) she might have said "women" and it would have been polemical but not especially worthy of attention.
So much for my googling À bientôt with all the accents correctly.
a) we have moved on so far in this country that you wouldn't even know the [black] chancellor is black; or b) he is a traitor to his race what with his Eton this and fancy voice?
Or (c) - there is a mentalist strain on the left who weaponise stereotypes about "their people". In this case black people are victims, so this successful Tory man cannot be black.
Its not racism, its far wider than that. It is workers vs bosses - working people are working class. They can't aspire to better themselves because then they become the hated bosses and cease to be working class.
Blair understood this. Which is why he endlessly talked up and invested in social mobility. And they still hate him for it.
The explanation for why they hate him is contained in your post. Social mobility implies the acceptance of inequality, which for them is unacceptable.
Blair was more a liberal than a socialist, as is Starmer to some extent, or at most a social democrat
Kwarteng and Truss have virtually assured a labour government in 2024 and at the same time put the perceived mortgage rate rises at their door, when in truth the bond market worldwide is being routed through the authorities aggressive rise in interest rates as inflation is being fought against everywhere . It is likely about 1% has been added because of the kamikaze behaviour of Kwarteng but even if Starmer had been in no 10 he would be looking at a housing crisis that is hard to see how it is mitigated
I am old enough to remember negative equity and it looks as if this could return over the next few yeaes, but sadly we have become used to very low interest rates which look like being returned to more normal ones and yes many will be affected but we are not immune to worldwide events
Labour have had a good conference but the one thing missing is that they have failed to understand that the economy in 2024 is going to be in a very poor place, and ironically they may well have to raise taxes and reduce public sector spending by an amount that to a Labour party will be very difficult
I do not defend Kwarteng or Truss but at the very least she needs to sack Kwarteng if she wants to have any chance of surviving , and she has a ready made successor she knows only too well, one Rishi Sunak
The obvious pivot - which Starmer and his team have hinted at already - is how we rebuild after the Great Truss Financial Crisis. We invest, and gain a return on that investment. Some of that investing will need to come from government and he's already announced the first StateCo to do energy. Much will need to come from the private sector, and as they are always looking for something sane to put money in there will be plenty of opportunities.
This final phase of Torynomics will kill dead the stupidty of "who will pay for that" and "what will you cut to find the money". Investment had been turned by the Tories into a dirty word. Their spivvy hedgie friends don't want investment, they just want to turn a quick profit now and not care about tomorrow.
That has to end. So many of the things this country needs - infrastructure, hospitals and schools fit for purpose, sustainable self-reliant energy generation - deliver both a long-term positive ROI but a short-term boost when money goes to pay people to build stuff who then pay taxes and spend. Which gives other people jobs.
We used to call it capitalism. Starmer will lead us back there.
In normal times yes but 2024 will not be normal
As far as GB Energy is concerned it is modelled on EDF in France who have just had a 15 billion buy out by Macron and Lucy Powell this morning simply was wholly unconvincing in her explanation about its funding
Yet again one of our politicians is giving the wrong diagnosis. SKS this morning was saying that it was wrong that we had a situation where the Chinese had a major say in our nuclear industry, where EDF played such a large roll in our energy markets and a Swedish company had brought online the most recent windfarm. He is right about that but this is the consequence of 30 years of trade deficits and excess consumption. We do not have the capital in this country to do these sorts of things ourselves.
His solution is to create a national champion with public sector, borrowed money. What we really want is capital accumulation in the UK that allows us to fund these things without relying on the kindness of strangers. I don't see any sign that Labour have got a grip of this yet. In fairness, they are not alone.
Finally, after all those strong men of the right, a strong woman in the wank bank. It’s been a long, barren period since the Thatch.
Fascist cheers on fascist.
Their love-in will probably last as long as Hitler’s and Mussolini’s, who quickly discovered that they despised each other.
Says the “blood and soil” Scot Nat who claims the indyref was REALLY won by those of Scottish blood born on Scottish soil, Sorosly outvoted by fake Scots from elsewhere
a) we have moved on so far in this country that you wouldn't even know the [black] chancellor is black; or b) he is a traitor to his race what with his Eton this and fancy voice?
Or (c) - there is a mentalist strain on the left who weaponise stereotypes about "their people". In this case black people are victims, so this successful Tory man cannot be black.
Its not racism, its far wider than that. It is workers vs bosses - working people are working class. They can't aspire to better themselves because then they become the hated bosses and cease to be working class.
Blair understood this. Which is why he endlessly talked up and invested in social mobility. And they still hate him for it.
The test for labour is will she stand as labour candidate in 2024
Indeed. Labour need to prune the rotten branches. Sam Tarry looks to be heading out the door. There are a good dozen or perhaps a score of MPs who are a disgrace who need to go.
And the same is true on the Tory benches. Remove the insane, the insulting and the downright stupid. Lets have political representatives who aren't fundamentally loathsome.
Kwarteng and Truss have virtually assured a labour government in 2024 and at the same time put the perceived mortgage rate rises at their door, when in truth the bond market worldwide is being routed through the authorities aggressive rise in interest rates as inflation is being fought against everywhere . It is likely about 1% has been added because of the kamikaze behaviour of Kwarteng but even if Starmer had been in no 10 he would be looking at a housing crisis that is hard to see how it is mitigated
I am old enough to remember negative equity and it looks as if this could return over the next few yeaes, but sadly we have become used to very low interest rates which look like being returned to more normal ones and yes many will be affected but we are not immune to worldwide events
Labour have had a good conference but the one thing missing is that they have failed to understand that the economy in 2024 is going to be in a very poor place, and ironically they may well have to raise taxes and reduce public sector spending by an amount that to a Labour party will be very difficult
I do not defend Kwarteng or Truss but at the very least she needs to sack Kwarteng if she wants to have any chance of surviving , and she has a ready made successor she knows only too well, one Rishi Sunak
The obvious pivot - which Starmer and his team have hinted at already - is how we rebuild after the Great Truss Financial Crisis. We invest, and gain a return on that investment. Some of that investing will need to come from government and he's already announced the first StateCo to do energy. Much will need to come from the private sector, and as they are always looking for something sane to put money in there will be plenty of opportunities.
This final phase of Torynomics will kill dead the stupidty of "who will pay for that" and "what will you cut to find the money". Investment had been turned by the Tories into a dirty word. Their spivvy hedgie friends don't want investment, they just want to turn a quick profit now and not care about tomorrow.
That has to end. So many of the things this country needs - infrastructure, hospitals and schools fit for purpose, sustainable self-reliant energy generation - deliver both a long-term positive ROI but a short-term boost when money goes to pay people to build stuff who then pay taxes and spend. Which gives other people jobs.
We used to call it capitalism. Starmer will lead us back there.
In normal times yes but 2024 will not be normal
As far as GB Energy is concerned it is modelled on EDF in France who have just had a 15 billion buy out by Macron and Lucy Powell this morning simply was wholly unconvincing in her explanation about its funding
Its pretty simple: 1. UK needs a big expansion in generating capacity 2. Instead of paying a foreign company to install, own and manage this, the UK will create its own company to do so 3. Instead of buying all of the components from abroad, the UK will promote UK manufacturing to supply turbines and solar panels.
The money will be spend regardless. Because there is no scenario where "sorry, we can't afford to create the generating capacity we need, we'll just have to have brownouts instead"
The problem is that the other companies will still be in the field and competing against GB Energy which is fine, but the problem arises when the turbines and solar panels can be purchased far cheaper outside the UK
Cheaper short term or long term? Any fool can sell something cheap once. But long term when we have no choice but to buy from them, what does the price do then?
You have just displayed the "we can't afford it" mentality that has broken this country. We *can* afford it.
Borrow money Invest the money Deliver a return on the investment Have significantly greater capacity and capabilities - more money to reinvest
I don't understand how you Tory-supporting minds have forgotten how capitalism works?
Again 2024 will be a very different climate and it is entirely possible we will not be able to borrow even to invest without eye-watering interest rates
And yes also - @RochdalePioneers . The worst thing for many on the left is for a working class hero to become, through hard work and endeavour, a member of the hated boss class.
cf the Left's view of the Jews and their rise from plucky underdogs who needed saving to imperialist oppressors who should be resisted continuously.
- “… something that CON MPs in marginal seats will only be too aware of.“
The latest polls indicate a complete Conservative wipeout in both Scotland and Wales.
That would result in a Con seat distribution of perhaps:
England 250 seats Scotland 0 seats Wales 0 seats N Ireland 0 seats
Not a good look for a supposedly “Unionist” party.
If they only get 250 seats they wouldn’t even be a majority in their home country England. They could easily not even win a plurality there.
This is an existential problem not just for the Conservatives, but for all Unionists, which is why Labour are trying to throw them as many lifelines they can without seriously pissing off their own base.
The distribution of seats matters. It looks like the Tories are well on their way to being a sect.
Even if the Tories drop to 250 that isn't low enough for a Labour majority so I'm not tempted to back that. Wales will be good for them but I'm not expecting any gains in Scotland.
I’d be amazed if Labour don’t make 1 or 2 gains in Scotland, at the very least. Although the SNP have a consistent poll lead of 21-24 points, it ought not to be beyond SLab’s gumption to manage a handful of gains. Mind you, never overestimate SLab has become an accepted wisdom in Scottish politics.
That said, moving from 1 to say 6 SLab seats doesn’t really help Starmer. He probably needs at least 15-20 Scottish seats for Lab Maj, and that requires a 12 point swing. That task looks to be beyond Anas Sarwar and the dunderheids.
On the latest polls Starmer will win a majority anyway even if he gains no seats from the SNP because of big gains from the Tories in England and Wales.
Sturgeon therefore urgently needs Truss and the Tories to have something of a recovery so there is a hung parliament and the SNP get some influence. In fact Tories most seats but SNP balance of power is far better for the SNP than a Labour majority enabling Starmer to ignore them completely
I can't see Truss going before the next election. In the unlikely event she rid lose a confidence vote the next leader would have to be elected by coronation without a leadership vote
I would suggest she needs to sack Kwarteng or that coronation becomes extremely likely
I can't see Truss going before the next election. In the unlikely event she rid lose a confidence vote the next leader would have to be elected by coronation without a leadership vote
I think we have all had enough of leadership membership votes.
Kwarteng and Truss have virtually assured a labour government in 2024 and at the same time put the perceived mortgage rate rises at their door, when in truth the bond market worldwide is being routed through the authorities aggressive rise in interest rates as inflation is being fought against everywhere . It is likely about 1% has been added because of the kamikaze behaviour of Kwarteng but even if Starmer had been in no 10 he would be looking at a housing crisis that is hard to see how it is mitigated
I am old enough to remember negative equity and it looks as if this could return over the next few yeaes, but sadly we have become used to very low interest rates which look like being returned to more normal ones and yes many will be affected but we are not immune to worldwide events
Labour have had a good conference but the one thing missing is that they have failed to understand that the economy in 2024 is going to be in a very poor place, and ironically they may well have to raise taxes and reduce public sector spending by an amount that to a Labour party will be very difficult
I do not defend Kwarteng or Truss but at the very least she needs to sack Kwarteng if she wants to have any chance of surviving , and she has a ready made successor she knows only too well, one Rishi Sunak
The obvious pivot - which Starmer and his team have hinted at already - is how we rebuild after the Great Truss Financial Crisis. We invest, and gain a return on that investment. Some of that investing will need to come from government and he's already announced the first StateCo to do energy. Much will need to come from the private sector, and as they are always looking for something sane to put money in there will be plenty of opportunities.
This final phase of Torynomics will kill dead the stupidty of "who will pay for that" and "what will you cut to find the money". Investment had been turned by the Tories into a dirty word. Their spivvy hedgie friends don't want investment, they just want to turn a quick profit now and not care about tomorrow.
That has to end. So many of the things this country needs - infrastructure, hospitals and schools fit for purpose, sustainable self-reliant energy generation - deliver both a long-term positive ROI but a short-term boost when money goes to pay people to build stuff who then pay taxes and spend. Which gives other people jobs.
We used to call it capitalism. Starmer will lead us back there.
In normal times yes but 2024 will not be normal
As far as GB Energy is concerned it is modelled on EDF in France who have just had a 15 billion buy out by Macron and Lucy Powell this morning simply was wholly unconvincing in her explanation about its funding
Its pretty simple: 1. UK needs a big expansion in generating capacity 2. Instead of paying a foreign company to install, own and manage this, the UK will create its own company to do so 3. Instead of buying all of the components from abroad, the UK will promote UK manufacturing to supply turbines and solar panels.
The money will be spend regardless. Because there is no scenario where "sorry, we can't afford to create the generating capacity we need, we'll just have to have brownouts instead"
Also, France's issues this summer stemmed from the fact loads of their nuclear power stations were on rivers which obviously dry up somewhat in a heatwave. Sea level rises are quite predictable beyond the lifespan of any nuclear plant so it's not an issue we'd encounter as ours are all by the sea.
There are some things we cannot afford not to do. Energy generating capacity is a pertinent example - we either invest or we suffer both brownouts and crazy spot price gouging. So the money is being spent regardless - do we hand this over to the French government or the Swedish government, or copy their successful examples and do it ourselves?
With our geographic location and our tech / industrial abilities we should be a global leader in renewables. Instead the market and a "government involvement is communism" mindset means we are nowhere. If we're to spend the money - and we are - why not have something to show for it other than just the infrastructure?
It is more or less what I was advocating on here a couple of days ago, except I thought of renationalisation of existing companies rather than setting one up from scratch.
Personally, I like SKS's idea. The UK needs control of its critical infrastructure rather than bleeding money to foreign owners
It is fascinating. These eurosceptic-libertarian ultras have been so reliant on feeling betrayed to avoid accountability for their crackpot ideas. In Truss they accidentally got what they wanted - she let them down by not letting them down - and they have nowhere to hide. https://twitter.com/rafaelbehr/status/1575027967167602688
Would be a good moment to start floating the idea of rejoining.
Not for Starmer. Why rock the boat when you're riding a wave
I can't see Truss going before the next election. In the unlikely event she rid lose a confidence vote the next leader would have to be elected by coronation without a leadership vote
I would suggest she needs to sack Kwarteng or that coronation becomes extremely likely
If Kwarteng goes she likely goes soon after, like Johnson and Sunak their fortunes are intertwined
a) we have moved on so far in this country that you wouldn't even know the [black] chancellor is black; or b) he is a traitor to his race what with his Eton this and fancy voice?
"Superficially, he is a black man. He went to Eton, I think, he went to a very expensive prep school, all the way through, the top schools in the country,” she said in a leaked recording of her speech. “If you hear him on the Today programme, you wouldn’t know he’s black”
Ms Huq is also reported to have said: "Superficially, they've had four brown chancellors and that.But when you have a little brown guy who. And also the leadership contest I think that I'd say alludes to that, when there was, say, Suella, Kemi all these people in it... "
From twitter. But neither quote tells us what the But the reality... pay off was
Yes interesting - the first extended quote, which I've seen, could be a testament to how far (in this case) black people have come in this country although "superficially" is problematic.
"Superficially" in the second quote could be taken to mean that for all the Cons' diversity they are still posh twats.
I don't suppose we will ever know and the point seems to be that she shouldn't have gone there in the first place.
I think at the end of the day her position is not the racist "he doesn't sound like he's black because he has a posh accent" but that he (and the other chancellors she mentions) are in favour of policies that do not benefit the majority of black and other non-white British people and instead perpetuate economic policies we know disproportionately negatively impact black and other non-white British people.
Again, she said it in a very bad way, but I think that was the point of her criticism.
And yes also - @RochdalePioneers . The worst thing for many on the left is for a working class hero to become, through hard work and endeavour, a member of the hated boss class.
cf the Left's view of the Jews and their rise from plucky underdogs who needed saving to imperialist oppressors who should be resisted continuously.
Hence also the left distrust for some well off Hindus
a) we have moved on so far in this country that you wouldn't even know the [black] chancellor is black; or b) he is a traitor to his race what with his Eton this and fancy voice?
Or (c) - there is a mentalist strain on the left who weaponise stereotypes about "their people". In this case black people are victims, so this successful Tory man cannot be black.
Its not racism, its far wider than that. It is workers vs bosses - working people are working class. They can't aspire to better themselves because then they become the hated bosses and cease to be working class.
Blair understood this. Which is why he endlessly talked up and invested in social mobility. And they still hate him for it.
The test for labour is will she stand as labour candidate in 2024
Indeed. Labour need to prune the rotten branches. Sam Tarry looks to be heading out the door. There are a good dozen or perhaps a score of MPs who are a disgrace who need to go.
And the same is true on the Tory benches. Remove the insane, the insulting and the downright stupid. Lets have political representatives who aren't fundamentally loathsome.
I might say that it looks like a considerable number of those conservatives the electorate will deal with in 2024
Finally, after all those strong men of the right, a strong woman in the wank bank. It’s been a long, barren period since the Thatch.
Fascist cheers on fascist.
Their love-in will probably last as long as Hitler’s and Mussolini’s, who quickly discovered that they despised each other.
Says the “blood and soil” Scot Nat who claims the indyref was REALLY won by those of Scottish blood born on Scottish soil, Sorosly outvoted by fake Scots from elsewhere
Just caught the end of SKS on Today this morning on my way back from the doctors. Quite impressive, I thought. His instant calling out of the racist comment by Rupa Huq was a nice change too. He's had a good week and he is right to emphasise how far Labour has come after the Corbyn disaster.
Of course fish and barrels come to mind in attacking the present government but his predecessor would have contrived a miss or even been talking about a different barrel somewhere else in the world.
Has he worked out what a woman is yet?
Noone gives a hoot about this crap any more. The only people pushing it are the economy-wrecking Tories.
And there's another important cost here.
The reason Truss got into No 10 is that she got onto the final ballot.
And the thing that stopped Mordaunt making it was the War On Woke; she was considered insufficiently sound.
Dicking around with foolish non-battles means that fools are more likely to gain power. And we really can't afford that right now.
Kwarteng and Truss have virtually assured a labour government in 2024 and at the same time put the perceived mortgage rate rises at their door, when in truth the bond market worldwide is being routed through the authorities aggressive rise in interest rates as inflation is being fought against everywhere . It is likely about 1% has been added because of the kamikaze behaviour of Kwarteng but even if Starmer had been in no 10 he would be looking at a housing crisis that is hard to see how it is mitigated
I am old enough to remember negative equity and it looks as if this could return over the next few yeaes, but sadly we have become used to very low interest rates which look like being returned to more normal ones and yes many will be affected but we are not immune to worldwide events
Labour have had a good conference but the one thing missing is that they have failed to understand that the economy in 2024 is going to be in a very poor place, and ironically they may well have to raise taxes and reduce public sector spending by an amount that to a Labour party will be very difficult
I do not defend Kwarteng or Truss but at the very least she needs to sack Kwarteng if she wants to have any chance of surviving , and she has a ready made successor she knows only too well, one Rishi Sunak
The obvious pivot - which Starmer and his team have hinted at already - is how we rebuild after the Great Truss Financial Crisis. We invest, and gain a return on that investment. Some of that investing will need to come from government and he's already announced the first StateCo to do energy. Much will need to come from the private sector, and as they are always looking for something sane to put money in there will be plenty of opportunities.
This final phase of Torynomics will kill dead the stupidty of "who will pay for that" and "what will you cut to find the money". Investment had been turned by the Tories into a dirty word. Their spivvy hedgie friends don't want investment, they just want to turn a quick profit now and not care about tomorrow.
That has to end. So many of the things this country needs - infrastructure, hospitals and schools fit for purpose, sustainable self-reliant energy generation - deliver both a long-term positive ROI but a short-term boost when money goes to pay people to build stuff who then pay taxes and spend. Which gives other people jobs.
We used to call it capitalism. Starmer will lead us back there.
In normal times yes but 2024 will not be normal
As far as GB Energy is concerned it is modelled on EDF in France who have just had a 15 billion buy out by Macron and Lucy Powell this morning simply was wholly unconvincing in her explanation about its funding
Its pretty simple: 1. UK needs a big expansion in generating capacity 2. Instead of paying a foreign company to install, own and manage this, the UK will create its own company to do so 3. Instead of buying all of the components from abroad, the UK will promote UK manufacturing to supply turbines and solar panels.
The money will be spend regardless. Because there is no scenario where "sorry, we can't afford to create the generating capacity we need, we'll just have to have brownouts instead"
Also, France's issues this summer stemmed from the fact loads of their nuclear power stations were on rivers which obviously dry up somewhat in a heatwave. Sea level rises are quite predictable beyond the lifespan of any nuclear plant so it's not an issue we'd encounter as ours are all by the sea.
There are some things we cannot afford not to do. Energy generating capacity is a pertinent example - we either invest or we suffer both brownouts and crazy spot price gouging. So the money is being spent regardless - do we hand this over to the French government or the Swedish government, or copy their successful examples and do it ourselves?
With our geographic location and our tech / industrial abilities we should be a global leader in renewables. Instead the market and a "government involvement is communism" mindset means we are nowhere. If we're to spend the money - and we are - why not have something to show for it other than just the infrastructure?
It is more or less what I was advocating on here a couple of days ago, except I thought of renationalisation of existing companies rather than setting one up from scratch.
Personally, I like SKS's idea. The UK needs control of its critical infrastructure rather than bleeding money to foreign owners
Why renationalise any of them? We have regulated markets. Simply regulate them so that the new StateCo is in prime position and let the private sector decide whether it wants to play in a competitive market instead of the protected cartels we have now.
Big_G and DavidL have raised concerns and they are understandable to a point. But the only way we will ever regain our ability to manufacture, install and manage wind turbines is if we do so. And there is something seriously pathetic about an argument that Britain is unable to do the basics that somewhere like Sweden can and its too hard / risky for us to repair that position so that we can.
So much for global Britain. Some on the right would have us an eternal supplicant.
It is fascinating. These eurosceptic-libertarian ultras have been so reliant on feeling betrayed to avoid accountability for their crackpot ideas. In Truss they accidentally got what they wanted - she let them down by not letting them down - and they have nowhere to hide. https://twitter.com/rafaelbehr/status/1575027967167602688
Would be a good moment to start floating the idea of rejoining.
Not for Starmer. Why rock the boat when you're riding a wave
- “… something that CON MPs in marginal seats will only be too aware of.“
The latest polls indicate a complete Conservative wipeout in both Scotland and Wales.
That would result in a Con seat distribution of perhaps:
England 250 seats Scotland 0 seats Wales 0 seats N Ireland 0 seats
Not a good look for a supposedly “Unionist” party.
If they only get 250 seats they wouldn’t even be a majority in their home country England. They could easily not even win a plurality there.
This is an existential problem not just for the Conservatives, but for all Unionists, which is why Labour are trying to throw them as many lifelines they can without seriously pissing off their own base.
The distribution of seats matters. It looks like the Tories are well on their way to being a sect.
Even if the Tories drop to 250 that isn't low enough for a Labour majority so I'm not tempted to back that. Wales will be good for them but I'm not expecting any gains in Scotland.
I’d be amazed if Labour don’t make 1 or 2 gains in Scotland, at the very least. Although the SNP have a consistent poll lead of 21-24 points, it ought not to be beyond SLab’s gumption to manage a handful of gains. Mind you, never overestimate SLab has become an accepted wisdom in Scottish politics.
That said, moving from 1 to say 6 SLab seats doesn’t really help Starmer. He probably needs at least 15-20 Scottish seats for Lab Maj, and that requires a 12 point swing. That task looks to be beyond Anas Sarwar and the dunderheids.
On the latest polls Starmer will win a majority anyway even if he gains no seats from the SNP because of big gains from the Tories in England and Wales.
Sturgeon therefore urgently needs Truss and the Tories to have something of a recovery so there is a hung parliament and the SNP get some influence. In fact Tories most seats but SNP balance of power is far better for the SNP than a Labour majority enabling Starmer to ignore them completely
But Starmer has said no ifs, no buts, no deals with the SNP. Wasn’t it even going to be put in the Labour constitution, or was that just a fever dream of PB Unionists?
Lagarde just confirmed ECB will lift rates at next 'several meetings'
This is a serious issue for all markets
So what good would sacking Kwarteng do?
A 10% upwards correction in the markets for starters. With the exception of certain Tony-donating hedgies, the entire global financial community has looked at the Truss Kwarteng plan and detailed why it is various degrees of crazy.
I know you and a few other loons think Kwarteng is right and the global financial community is wrong. And even if that was true it doesn't matter - you either carry the market with you or you fail.
The most amusing fact for me is that it took me a while to realise that the subtitles weren't genuine. They were almost believable!
Interesting piece on 5Live with Irina from Kyiv after Starmers speech. Her husband is being discharged from the UKR army as he has 3 children, and with the new troops arriving trained he simply isn't needed anymore and can go back to feeding his family. Quite a contrast to the Russian need for any warm body.
Looking at the state of the new Russian recruits, I find it hard to believe that they have adequate winter kit. I cannot see their logistics getting it there either. They are in for great suffering.
And yes also - @RochdalePioneers . The worst thing for many on the left is for a working class hero to become, through hard work and endeavour, a member of the hated boss class.
cf the Left's view of the Jews and their rise from plucky underdogs who needed saving to imperialist oppressors who should be resisted continuously.
I mean, the left hate class traitors. That's a given, because if you're on the left the understanding of politics is that of a struggle of the working class against the oppression of the capitalist class. And that isn't how the left view Jewish people - it may be a criticism of Israel, or some Jewish people, but many left wing people are Jewish, and indeed a lot of left wing thought is deeply based in the work of Jewish people.
It's amazing how quickly the right wing decided how defending Jewish people was so important to them only after Labour had a Jewish leader who was smeared for being unable to properly eat a bacon sandwich, for having a radical Jewish father who supposedly hated this country, and continuously talked about a liberal metropolitan elite who were citizens of nowhere...
Kwarteng and Truss have virtually assured a labour government in 2024 and at the same time put the perceived mortgage rate rises at their door, when in truth the bond market worldwide is being routed through the authorities aggressive rise in interest rates as inflation is being fought against everywhere . It is likely about 1% has been added because of the kamikaze behaviour of Kwarteng but even if Starmer had been in no 10 he would be looking at a housing crisis that is hard to see how it is mitigated
I am old enough to remember negative equity and it looks as if this could return over the next few yeaes, but sadly we have become used to very low interest rates which look like being returned to more normal ones and yes many will be affected but we are not immune to worldwide events
Labour have had a good conference but the one thing missing is that they have failed to understand that the economy in 2024 is going to be in a very poor place, and ironically they may well have to raise taxes and reduce public sector spending by an amount that to a Labour party will be very difficult
I do not defend Kwarteng or Truss but at the very least she needs to sack Kwarteng if she wants to have any chance of surviving , and she has a ready made successor she knows only too well, one Rishi Sunak
The obvious pivot - which Starmer and his team have hinted at already - is how we rebuild after the Great Truss Financial Crisis. We invest, and gain a return on that investment. Some of that investing will need to come from government and he's already announced the first StateCo to do energy. Much will need to come from the private sector, and as they are always looking for something sane to put money in there will be plenty of opportunities.
This final phase of Torynomics will kill dead the stupidty of "who will pay for that" and "what will you cut to find the money". Investment had been turned by the Tories into a dirty word. Their spivvy hedgie friends don't want investment, they just want to turn a quick profit now and not care about tomorrow.
That has to end. So many of the things this country needs - infrastructure, hospitals and schools fit for purpose, sustainable self-reliant energy generation - deliver both a long-term positive ROI but a short-term boost when money goes to pay people to build stuff who then pay taxes and spend. Which gives other people jobs.
We used to call it capitalism. Starmer will lead us back there.
In normal times yes but 2024 will not be normal
As far as GB Energy is concerned it is modelled on EDF in France who have just had a 15 billion buy out by Macron and Lucy Powell this morning simply was wholly unconvincing in her explanation about its funding
Its pretty simple: 1. UK needs a big expansion in generating capacity 2. Instead of paying a foreign company to install, own and manage this, the UK will create its own company to do so 3. Instead of buying all of the components from abroad, the UK will promote UK manufacturing to supply turbines and solar panels.
The money will be spend regardless. Because there is no scenario where "sorry, we can't afford to create the generating capacity we need, we'll just have to have brownouts instead"
Also, France's issues this summer stemmed from the fact loads of their nuclear power stations were on rivers which obviously dry up somewhat in a heatwave. Sea level rises are quite predictable beyond the lifespan of any nuclear plant so it's not an issue we'd encounter as ours are all by the sea.
There are some things we cannot afford not to do. Energy generating capacity is a pertinent example - we either invest or we suffer both brownouts and crazy spot price gouging. So the money is being spent regardless - do we hand this over to the French government or the Swedish government, or copy their successful examples and do it ourselves?
With our geographic location and our tech / industrial abilities we should be a global leader in renewables. Instead the market and a "government involvement is communism" mindset means we are nowhere. If we're to spend the money - and we are - why not have something to show for it other than just the infrastructure?
It is more or less what I was advocating on here a couple of days ago, except I thought of renationalisation of existing companies rather than setting one up from scratch.
Personally, I like SKS's idea. The UK needs control of its critical infrastructure rather than bleeding money to foreign owners
Why renationalise any of them? We have regulated markets. Simply regulate them so that the new StateCo is in prime position and let the private sector decide whether it wants to play in a competitive market instead of the protected cartels we have now.
Big_G and DavidL have raised concerns and they are understandable to a point. But the only way we will ever regain our ability to manufacture, install and manage wind turbines is if we do so. And there is something seriously pathetic about an argument that Britain is unable to do the basics that somewhere like Sweden can and its too hard / risky for us to repair that position so that we can.
So much for global Britain. Some on the right would have us an eternal supplicant.
"regulate them so that the new StateCo is in a prime position" and "competitive market" seem incompatible.
Short term borrowing yields seem to have stabilised today, hopefully over the next few days markets realise this is an overreaction and slowly buy back in. I don't see how sterling or longer dated gilts will recover without government action to bring the budget into balance and address the long running issue of the current account deficit.
a) we have moved on so far in this country that you wouldn't even know the [black] chancellor is black; or b) he is a traitor to his race what with his Eton this and fancy voice?
Or (c) - there is a mentalist strain on the left who weaponise stereotypes about "their people". In this case black people are victims, so this successful Tory man cannot be black.
Its not racism, its far wider than that. It is workers vs bosses - working people are working class. They can't aspire to better themselves because then they become the hated bosses and cease to be working class.
Blair understood this. Which is why he endlessly talked up and invested in social mobility. And they still hate him for it.
The test for labour is will she stand as labour candidate in 2024
Indeed. Labour need to prune the rotten branches. Sam Tarry looks to be heading out the door. There are a good dozen or perhaps a score of MPs who are a disgrace who need to go.
And the same is true on the Tory benches. Remove the insane, the insulting and the downright stupid. Lets have political representatives who aren't fundamentally loathsome.
I might say that it looks like a considerable number of those conservatives the electorate will deal with in 2024
Perhaps if the Tories removed the likes of Gulles the party would have a better chance in those seats. That knobber in Ashfield patronising his own constituents - they will beat him down so hard that its funny.
a) we have moved on so far in this country that you wouldn't even know the [black] chancellor is black; or b) he is a traitor to his race what with his Eton this and fancy voice?
Verdict, to be determined. Action - suspension of the whip.
Lagarde just confirmed ECB will lift rates at next 'several meetings'
This is a serious issue for all markets
So what good would sacking Kwarteng do?
A 10% upwards correction in the markets for starters. With the exception of certain Tony-donating hedgies, the entire global financial community has looked at the Truss Kwarteng plan and detailed why it is various degrees of crazy.
I know you and a few other loons think Kwarteng is right and the global financial community is wrong. And even if that was true it doesn't matter - you either carry the market with you or you fail.
The global financial community is right - interest rates are going to go up significantly. Kwarteng is right - Britain needs some tough economic medicine.
Kwarteng and Truss have virtually assured a labour government in 2024 and at the same time put the perceived mortgage rate rises at their door, when in truth the bond market worldwide is being routed through the authorities aggressive rise in interest rates as inflation is being fought against everywhere . It is likely about 1% has been added because of the kamikaze behaviour of Kwarteng but even if Starmer had been in no 10 he would be looking at a housing crisis that is hard to see how it is mitigated
I am old enough to remember negative equity and it looks as if this could return over the next few yeaes, but sadly we have become used to very low interest rates which look like being returned to more normal ones and yes many will be affected but we are not immune to worldwide events
Labour have had a good conference but the one thing missing is that they have failed to understand that the economy in 2024 is going to be in a very poor place, and ironically they may well have to raise taxes and reduce public sector spending by an amount that to a Labour party will be very difficult
I do not defend Kwarteng or Truss but at the very least she needs to sack Kwarteng if she wants to have any chance of surviving , and she has a ready made successor she knows only too well, one Rishi Sunak
The obvious pivot - which Starmer and his team have hinted at already - is how we rebuild after the Great Truss Financial Crisis. We invest, and gain a return on that investment. Some of that investing will need to come from government and he's already announced the first StateCo to do energy. Much will need to come from the private sector, and as they are always looking for something sane to put money in there will be plenty of opportunities.
This final phase of Torynomics will kill dead the stupidty of "who will pay for that" and "what will you cut to find the money". Investment had been turned by the Tories into a dirty word. Their spivvy hedgie friends don't want investment, they just want to turn a quick profit now and not care about tomorrow.
That has to end. So many of the things this country needs - infrastructure, hospitals and schools fit for purpose, sustainable self-reliant energy generation - deliver both a long-term positive ROI but a short-term boost when money goes to pay people to build stuff who then pay taxes and spend. Which gives other people jobs.
We used to call it capitalism. Starmer will lead us back there.
In normal times yes but 2024 will not be normal
As far as GB Energy is concerned it is modelled on EDF in France who have just had a 15 billion buy out by Macron and Lucy Powell this morning simply was wholly unconvincing in her explanation about its funding
Its pretty simple: 1. UK needs a big expansion in generating capacity 2. Instead of paying a foreign company to install, own and manage this, the UK will create its own company to do so 3. Instead of buying all of the components from abroad, the UK will promote UK manufacturing to supply turbines and solar panels.
The money will be spend regardless. Because there is no scenario where "sorry, we can't afford to create the generating capacity we need, we'll just have to have brownouts instead"
Also, France's issues this summer stemmed from the fact loads of their nuclear power stations were on rivers which obviously dry up somewhat in a heatwave. Sea level rises are quite predictable beyond the lifespan of any nuclear plant so it's not an issue we'd encounter as ours are all by the sea.
There are some things we cannot afford not to do. Energy generating capacity is a pertinent example - we either invest or we suffer both brownouts and crazy spot price gouging. So the money is being spent regardless - do we hand this over to the French government or the Swedish government, or copy their successful examples and do it ourselves?
With our geographic location and our tech / industrial abilities we should be a global leader in renewables. Instead the market and a "government involvement is communism" mindset means we are nowhere. If we're to spend the money - and we are - why not have something to show for it other than just the infrastructure?
It is more or less what I was advocating on here a couple of days ago, except I thought of renationalisation of existing companies rather than setting one up from scratch.
Personally, I like SKS's idea. The UK needs control of its critical infrastructure rather than bleeding money to foreign owners
Why renationalise any of them? We have regulated markets. Simply regulate them so that the new StateCo is in prime position and let the private sector decide whether it wants to play in a competitive market instead of the protected cartels we have now.
Big_G and DavidL have raised concerns and they are understandable to a point. But the only way we will ever regain our ability to manufacture, install and manage wind turbines is if we do so. And there is something seriously pathetic about an argument that Britain is unable to do the basics that somewhere like Sweden can and its too hard / risky for us to repair that position so that we can.
So much for global Britain. Some on the right would have us an eternal supplicant.
"regulate them so that the new StateCo is in a prime position" and "competitive market" seem incompatible.
The market has one primary function - deliver to the state the strategic function it was created for. The profits of the companies and shareholder value can only be realised after the primary function is achieved.
That is how these markets work across Europe. Except in the UK where a small number of private companies operate a cartel, fail to invest in the strategic expensive elements and shrug their shoulders when shit gets flushed en-masse onto our beaches in the summer tourism season.
And yes also - @RochdalePioneers . The worst thing for many on the left is for a working class hero to become, through hard work and endeavour, a member of the hated boss class.
cf the Left's view of the Jews and their rise from plucky underdogs who needed saving to imperialist oppressors who should be resisted continuously.
I mean, the left hate class traitors. That's a given, because if you're on the left the understanding of politics is that of a struggle of the working class against the oppression of the capitalist class. And that isn't how the left view Jewish people - it may be a criticism of Israel, or some Jewish people, but many left wing people are Jewish, and indeed a lot of left wing thought is deeply based in the work of Jewish people.
It's amazing how quickly the right wing decided how defending Jewish people was so important to them only after Labour had a Jewish leader who was smeared for being unable to properly eat a bacon sandwich, for having a radical Jewish father who supposedly hated this country, and continuously talked about a liberal metropolitan elite who were citizens of nowhere...
If your claim is that Miliband's bacon sandwich ridicule was anti-semitic, you've lost the argument.
a) we have moved on so far in this country that you wouldn't even know the [black] chancellor is black; or b) he is a traitor to his race what with his Eton this and fancy voice?
Verdict, to be determined. Action - suspension of the whip.
It was a stupid and racist thing to say, but immediate action and apology, so a clear distance from Corbynism.
And yes also - @RochdalePioneers . The worst thing for many on the left is for a working class hero to become, through hard work and endeavour, a member of the hated boss class.
cf the Left's view of the Jews and their rise from plucky underdogs who needed saving to imperialist oppressors who should be resisted continuously.
I mean, the left hate class traitors. That's a given, because if you're on the left the understanding of politics is that of a struggle of the working class against the oppression of the capitalist class. And that isn't how the left view Jewish people - it may be a criticism of Israel, or some Jewish people, but many left wing people are Jewish, and indeed a lot of left wing thought is deeply based in the work of Jewish people.
It's amazing how quickly the right wing decided how defending Jewish people was so important to them only after Labour had a Jewish leader who was smeared for being unable to properly eat a bacon sandwich, for having a radical Jewish father who supposedly hated this country, and continuously talked about a liberal metropolitan elite who were citizens of nowhere...
If your claim is that Miliband's bacon sandwich ridicule was anti-semitic, you've lost the argument.
Fingers crossed for mild weather, plenty of wind and decent sunshine this European winter.
Uncross your fingers. We need rain far more than we need sun, or next summer we'll be in full reluctant Turkish conscript territory.
Moreover, if we have sun it will probably be cold and still. Wet and windy is your friend because it will be warmer.
Only in Britain. The gas price will be driven by conditions on the whole continent. We need a positive NAO. That gives us what you list, plus mild sunshine in Mediterranean Europe.
Kwarteng and Truss have virtually assured a labour government in 2024 and at the same time put the perceived mortgage rate rises at their door, when in truth the bond market worldwide is being routed through the authorities aggressive rise in interest rates as inflation is being fought against everywhere . It is likely about 1% has been added because of the kamikaze behaviour of Kwarteng but even if Starmer had been in no 10 he would be looking at a housing crisis that is hard to see how it is mitigated
I am old enough to remember negative equity and it looks as if this could return over the next few yeaes, but sadly we have become used to very low interest rates which look like being returned to more normal ones and yes many will be affected but we are not immune to worldwide events
Labour have had a good conference but the one thing missing is that they have failed to understand that the economy in 2024 is going to be in a very poor place, and ironically they may well have to raise taxes and reduce public sector spending by an amount that to a Labour party will be very difficult
I do not defend Kwarteng or Truss but at the very least she needs to sack Kwarteng if she wants to have any chance of surviving , and she has a ready made successor she knows only too well, one Rishi Sunak
The obvious pivot - which Starmer and his team have hinted at already - is how we rebuild after the Great Truss Financial Crisis. We invest, and gain a return on that investment. Some of that investing will need to come from government and he's already announced the first StateCo to do energy. Much will need to come from the private sector, and as they are always looking for something sane to put money in there will be plenty of opportunities.
This final phase of Torynomics will kill dead the stupidty of "who will pay for that" and "what will you cut to find the money". Investment had been turned by the Tories into a dirty word. Their spivvy hedgie friends don't want investment, they just want to turn a quick profit now and not care about tomorrow.
That has to end. So many of the things this country needs - infrastructure, hospitals and schools fit for purpose, sustainable self-reliant energy generation - deliver both a long-term positive ROI but a short-term boost when money goes to pay people to build stuff who then pay taxes and spend. Which gives other people jobs.
We used to call it capitalism. Starmer will lead us back there.
In normal times yes but 2024 will not be normal
As far as GB Energy is concerned it is modelled on EDF in France who have just had a 15 billion buy out by Macron and Lucy Powell this morning simply was wholly unconvincing in her explanation about its funding
Its pretty simple: 1. UK needs a big expansion in generating capacity 2. Instead of paying a foreign company to install, own and manage this, the UK will create its own company to do so 3. Instead of buying all of the components from abroad, the UK will promote UK manufacturing to supply turbines and solar panels.
The money will be spend regardless. Because there is no scenario where "sorry, we can't afford to create the generating capacity we need, we'll just have to have brownouts instead"
Also, France's issues this summer stemmed from the fact loads of their nuclear power stations were on rivers which obviously dry up somewhat in a heatwave. Sea level rises are quite predictable beyond the lifespan of any nuclear plant so it's not an issue we'd encounter as ours are all by the sea.
There are some things we cannot afford not to do. Energy generating capacity is a pertinent example - we either invest or we suffer both brownouts and crazy spot price gouging. So the money is being spent regardless - do we hand this over to the French government or the Swedish government, or copy their successful examples and do it ourselves?
With our geographic location and our tech / industrial abilities we should be a global leader in renewables. Instead the market and a "government involvement is communism" mindset means we are nowhere. If we're to spend the money - and we are - why not have something to show for it other than just the infrastructure?
It is more or less what I was advocating on here a couple of days ago, except I thought of renationalisation of existing companies rather than setting one up from scratch.
Personally, I like SKS's idea. The UK needs control of its critical infrastructure rather than bleeding money to foreign owners
Why renationalise any of them? We have regulated markets. Simply regulate them so that the new StateCo is in prime position and let the private sector decide whether it wants to play in a competitive market instead of the protected cartels we have now.
Big_G and DavidL have raised concerns and they are understandable to a point. But the only way we will ever regain our ability to manufacture, install and manage wind turbines is if we do so. And there is something seriously pathetic about an argument that Britain is unable to do the basics that somewhere like Sweden can and its too hard / risky for us to repair that position so that we can.
So much for global Britain. Some on the right would have us an eternal supplicant.
"regulate them so that the new StateCo is in a prime position" and "competitive market" seem incompatible.
The market has one primary function - deliver to the state the strategic function it was created for. The profits of the companies and shareholder value can only be realised after the primary function is achieved.
That is how these markets work across Europe. Except in the UK where a small number of private companies operate a cartel, fail to invest in the strategic expensive elements and shrug their shoulders when shit gets flushed en-masse onto our beaches in the summer tourism season.
The problem is one that @DavidL and I agree on. Running a current account deficit means selling off British assets to foreigners, including our utilities. The underlying problem is not addressed.
Kwarteng and Truss have virtually assured a labour government in 2024 and at the same time put the perceived mortgage rate rises at their door, when in truth the bond market worldwide is being routed through the authorities aggressive rise in interest rates as inflation is being fought against everywhere . It is likely about 1% has been added because of the kamikaze behaviour of Kwarteng but even if Starmer had been in no 10 he would be looking at a housing crisis that is hard to see how it is mitigated
I am old enough to remember negative equity and it looks as if this could return over the next few yeaes, but sadly we have become used to very low interest rates which look like being returned to more normal ones and yes many will be affected but we are not immune to worldwide events
Labour have had a good conference but the one thing missing is that they have failed to understand that the economy in 2024 is going to be in a very poor place, and ironically they may well have to raise taxes and reduce public sector spending by an amount that to a Labour party will be very difficult
I do not defend Kwarteng or Truss but at the very least she needs to sack Kwarteng if she wants to have any chance of surviving , and she has a ready made successor she knows only too well, one Rishi Sunak
The obvious pivot - which Starmer and his team have hinted at already - is how we rebuild after the Great Truss Financial Crisis. We invest, and gain a return on that investment. Some of that investing will need to come from government and he's already announced the first StateCo to do energy. Much will need to come from the private sector, and as they are always looking for something sane to put money in there will be plenty of opportunities.
This final phase of Torynomics will kill dead the stupidty of "who will pay for that" and "what will you cut to find the money". Investment had been turned by the Tories into a dirty word. Their spivvy hedgie friends don't want investment, they just want to turn a quick profit now and not care about tomorrow.
That has to end. So many of the things this country needs - infrastructure, hospitals and schools fit for purpose, sustainable self-reliant energy generation - deliver both a long-term positive ROI but a short-term boost when money goes to pay people to build stuff who then pay taxes and spend. Which gives other people jobs.
We used to call it capitalism. Starmer will lead us back there.
In normal times yes but 2024 will not be normal
As far as GB Energy is concerned it is modelled on EDF in France who have just had a 15 billion buy out by Macron and Lucy Powell this morning simply was wholly unconvincing in her explanation about its funding
Its pretty simple: 1. UK needs a big expansion in generating capacity 2. Instead of paying a foreign company to install, own and manage this, the UK will create its own company to do so 3. Instead of buying all of the components from abroad, the UK will promote UK manufacturing to supply turbines and solar panels.
The money will be spend regardless. Because there is no scenario where "sorry, we can't afford to create the generating capacity we need, we'll just have to have brownouts instead"
Also, France's issues this summer stemmed from the fact loads of their nuclear power stations were on rivers which obviously dry up somewhat in a heatwave. Sea level rises are quite predictable beyond the lifespan of any nuclear plant so it's not an issue we'd encounter as ours are all by the sea.
There are some things we cannot afford not to do. Energy generating capacity is a pertinent example - we either invest or we suffer both brownouts and crazy spot price gouging. So the money is being spent regardless - do we hand this over to the French government or the Swedish government, or copy their successful examples and do it ourselves?
With our geographic location and our tech / industrial abilities we should be a global leader in renewables. Instead the market and a "government involvement is communism" mindset means we are nowhere. If we're to spend the money - and we are - why not have something to show for it other than just the infrastructure?
It is more or less what I was advocating on here a couple of days ago, except I thought of renationalisation of existing companies rather than setting one up from scratch.
Personally, I like SKS's idea. The UK needs control of its critical infrastructure rather than bleeding money to foreign owners
Why renationalise any of them? We have regulated markets. Simply regulate them so that the new StateCo is in prime position and let the private sector decide whether it wants to play in a competitive market instead of the protected cartels we have now.
Big_G and DavidL have raised concerns and they are understandable to a point. But the only way we will ever regain our ability to manufacture, install and manage wind turbines is if we do so. And there is something seriously pathetic about an argument that Britain is unable to do the basics that somewhere like Sweden can and its too hard / risky for us to repair that position so that we can.
So much for global Britain. Some on the right would have us an eternal supplicant.
"regulate them so that the new StateCo is in a prime position" and "competitive market" seem incompatible.
The market has one primary function - deliver to the state the strategic function it was created for. The profits of the companies and shareholder value can only be realised after the primary function is achieved.
That is how these markets work across Europe. Except in the UK where a small number of private companies operate a cartel, fail to invest in the strategic expensive elements and shrug their shoulders when shit gets flushed en-masse onto our beaches in the summer tourism season.
As may be - you clearly want to rig the market in favour of StateCo (for reasons which are easy to guess) - at which point why not be honest and nationalise the existing companies?
Lagarde just confirmed ECB will lift rates at next 'several meetings'
This is a serious issue for all markets
So what good would sacking Kwarteng do?
A 10% upwards correction in the markets for starters. With the exception of certain Tony-donating hedgies, the entire global financial community has looked at the Truss Kwarteng plan and detailed why it is various degrees of crazy.
I know you and a few other loons think Kwarteng is right and the global financial community is wrong. And even if that was true it doesn't matter - you either carry the market with you or you fail.
The global financial community is right - interest rates are going to go up significantly. Kwarteng is right - Britain needs some tough economic medicine.
The most amusing fact for me is that it took me a while to realise that the subtitles weren't genuine. They were almost believable!
Interesting piece on 5Live with Irina from Kyiv after Starmers speech. Her husband is being discharged from the UKR army as he has 3 children, and with the new troops arriving trained he simply isn't needed anymore and can go back to feeding his family. Quite a contrast to the Russian need for any warm body.
Looking at the state of the new Russian recruits, I find it hard to believe that they have adequate winter kit. I cannot see their logistics getting it there either. They are in for great suffering.
Could be over before winter to be honest. Ukr making gains around Lyman last few days.
Short term borrowing yields seem to have stabilised today, hopefully over the next few days markets realise this is an overreaction and slowly buy back in. I don't see how sterling or longer dated gilts will recover without government action to bring the budget into balance and address the long running issue of the current account deficit.
The government needs to reset fiscal policy and not in November. Kwarteng needs to bring that date forward, have the OBR fully signed up and a much more coherent set of numbers to present. Without this the markets will be swamped in uncertainty and every minor sell off risks triggering something bigger.
Kwarteng and Truss have virtually assured a labour government in 2024 and at the same time put the perceived mortgage rate rises at their door, when in truth the bond market worldwide is being routed through the authorities aggressive rise in interest rates as inflation is being fought against everywhere . It is likely about 1% has been added because of the kamikaze behaviour of Kwarteng but even if Starmer had been in no 10 he would be looking at a housing crisis that is hard to see how it is mitigated
I am old enough to remember negative equity and it looks as if this could return over the next few yeaes, but sadly we have become used to very low interest rates which look like being returned to more normal ones and yes many will be affected but we are not immune to worldwide events
Labour have had a good conference but the one thing missing is that they have failed to understand that the economy in 2024 is going to be in a very poor place, and ironically they may well have to raise taxes and reduce public sector spending by an amount that to a Labour party will be very difficult
I do not defend Kwarteng or Truss but at the very least she needs to sack Kwarteng if she wants to have any chance of surviving , and she has a ready made successor she knows only too well, one Rishi Sunak
The obvious pivot - which Starmer and his team have hinted at already - is how we rebuild after the Great Truss Financial Crisis. We invest, and gain a return on that investment. Some of that investing will need to come from government and he's already announced the first StateCo to do energy. Much will need to come from the private sector, and as they are always looking for something sane to put money in there will be plenty of opportunities.
This final phase of Torynomics will kill dead the stupidty of "who will pay for that" and "what will you cut to find the money". Investment had been turned by the Tories into a dirty word. Their spivvy hedgie friends don't want investment, they just want to turn a quick profit now and not care about tomorrow.
That has to end. So many of the things this country needs - infrastructure, hospitals and schools fit for purpose, sustainable self-reliant energy generation - deliver both a long-term positive ROI but a short-term boost when money goes to pay people to build stuff who then pay taxes and spend. Which gives other people jobs.
We used to call it capitalism. Starmer will lead us back there.
In normal times yes but 2024 will not be normal
As far as GB Energy is concerned it is modelled on EDF in France who have just had a 15 billion buy out by Macron and Lucy Powell this morning simply was wholly unconvincing in her explanation about its funding
Its pretty simple: 1. UK needs a big expansion in generating capacity 2. Instead of paying a foreign company to install, own and manage this, the UK will create its own company to do so 3. Instead of buying all of the components from abroad, the UK will promote UK manufacturing to supply turbines and solar panels.
The money will be spend regardless. Because there is no scenario where "sorry, we can't afford to create the generating capacity we need, we'll just have to have brownouts instead"
Also, France's issues this summer stemmed from the fact loads of their nuclear power stations were on rivers which obviously dry up somewhat in a heatwave. Sea level rises are quite predictable beyond the lifespan of any nuclear plant so it's not an issue we'd encounter as ours are all by the sea.
There are some things we cannot afford not to do. Energy generating capacity is a pertinent example - we either invest or we suffer both brownouts and crazy spot price gouging. So the money is being spent regardless - do we hand this over to the French government or the Swedish government, or copy their successful examples and do it ourselves?
With our geographic location and our tech / industrial abilities we should be a global leader in renewables. Instead the market and a "government involvement is communism" mindset means we are nowhere. If we're to spend the money - and we are - why not have something to show for it other than just the infrastructure?
It is more or less what I was advocating on here a couple of days ago, except I thought of renationalisation of existing companies rather than setting one up from scratch.
Personally, I like SKS's idea. The UK needs control of its critical infrastructure rather than bleeding money to foreign owners
Why renationalise any of them? We have regulated markets. Simply regulate them so that the new StateCo is in prime position and let the private sector decide whether it wants to play in a competitive market instead of the protected cartels we have now.
Big_G and DavidL have raised concerns and they are understandable to a point. But the only way we will ever regain our ability to manufacture, install and manage wind turbines is if we do so. And there is something seriously pathetic about an argument that Britain is unable to do the basics that somewhere like Sweden can and its too hard / risky for us to repair that position so that we can.
So much for global Britain. Some on the right would have us an eternal supplicant.
The devil will be in the detail, either way. A government owned energy company would certainly have the scale to negotiate very large deals with manufacturers to build factories in the UK, for example. So long as it's not run by the idiots who manage defence procurement.
And yes also - @RochdalePioneers . The worst thing for many on the left is for a working class hero to become, through hard work and endeavour, a member of the hated boss class.
cf the Left's view of the Jews and their rise from plucky underdogs who needed saving to imperialist oppressors who should be resisted continuously.
I mean, the left hate class traitors. That's a given, because if you're on the left the understanding of politics is that of a struggle of the working class against the oppression of the capitalist class. And that isn't how the left view Jewish people - it may be a criticism of Israel, or some Jewish people, but many left wing people are Jewish, and indeed a lot of left wing thought is deeply based in the work of Jewish people.
It's amazing how quickly the right wing decided how defending Jewish people was so important to them only after Labour had a Jewish leader who was smeared for being unable to properly eat a bacon sandwich, for having a radical Jewish father who supposedly hated this country, and continuously talked about a liberal metropolitan elite who were citizens of nowhere...
If your claim is that Miliband's bacon sandwich ridicule was anti-semitic, you've lost the argument.
To take just one line, "To denote Miliband as being from north London is not unlike labeling someone an east coast or Upper West Side intellectual in the United States." - is ridiculous. The geography was mentioned because it shows where modern Labour's home is. Electing subsequent leaders from constituencies in Islington and Camden rather proved the point.
Fingers crossed for mild weather, plenty of wind and decent sunshine this European winter.
Uncross your fingers. We need rain far more than we need sun, or next summer we'll be in full reluctant Turkish conscript territory.
Moreover, if we have sun it will probably be cold and still. Wet and windy is your friend because it will be warmer.
Only in Britain. The gas price will be driven by conditions on the whole continent. We need a positive NAO. That gives us what you list, plus mild sunshine in Mediterranean Europe.
They need water even more urgently than we do.* Otherwise next year there's a non-trivial risk they will run out.
*by which I mean, persistent heavy drizzle or in some areas, snow to top up the glaciers rather than the torrential downpours that caused flash floods in Italy a couple of weeks ago.
And yes also - @RochdalePioneers . The worst thing for many on the left is for a working class hero to become, through hard work and endeavour, a member of the hated boss class.
cf the Left's view of the Jews and their rise from plucky underdogs who needed saving to imperialist oppressors who should be resisted continuously.
I mean, the left hate class traitors. That's a given, because if you're on the left the understanding of politics is that of a struggle of the working class against the oppression of the capitalist class. And that isn't how the left view Jewish people - it may be a criticism of Israel, or some Jewish people, but many left wing people are Jewish, and indeed a lot of left wing thought is deeply based in the work of Jewish people.
It's amazing how quickly the right wing decided how defending Jewish people was so important to them only after Labour had a Jewish leader who was smeared for being unable to properly eat a bacon sandwich, for having a radical Jewish father who supposedly hated this country, and continuously talked about a liberal metropolitan elite who were citizens of nowhere...
If your claim is that Miliband's bacon sandwich ridicule was anti-semitic, you've lost the argument.
I'm not sure about that. The amusement of the coverage seemed to be both about how he looked and what he was eating.
And 148Gres is also the right that the Mail's, npw professed hunter of anti-semitism in the Labour Party, coverage of Ralph Miliband, as "an intellectual who hated Britain" - in fact he served in the war effort - was blatantly anti-semitic. May's "citizens of nowhere" and "liberal metropolitan elite" similarly have very specific historical meanings and resonances in Europe.
KK: Now look here, do you chaps mind not attacking the pound? BANKERS: But your economic plan is fucking mental and will end in tears KK: Actually our plan is built on sound financial reason supported by the markets obver the decades BANKERS: We are the market. We say its mental. KK: Bloody socialists talking down Britain
Comments
1. UK needs a big expansion in generating capacity
2. Instead of paying a foreign company to install, own and manage this, the UK will create its own company to do so
3. Instead of buying all of the components from abroad, the UK will promote UK manufacturing to supply turbines and solar panels.
The money will be spend regardless. Because there is no scenario where "sorry, we can't afford to create the generating capacity we need, we'll just have to have brownouts instead"
Ms Huq is also reported to have said: "Superficially, they've had four brown chancellors and that.But when you have a little brown guy who. And also the leadership contest I think that I'd say alludes to that, when there was, say, Suella, Kemi all these people in it... "
From twitter. But neither quote tells us what the But the reality... pay off was
Sky just said that the Swedish Sizemologists have said more than a 100 kilos of dynamite were used on one of the North Sea pipelines
Its not racism, its far wider than that. It is workers vs bosses - working people are working class. They can't aspire to better themselves because then they become the hated bosses and cease to be working class.
Blair understood this. Which is why he endlessly talked up and invested in social mobility. And they still hate him for it.
"Superficially" in the second quote could be taken to mean that for all the Cons' diversity they are still posh twats.
I don't suppose we will ever know and the point seems to be that she shouldn't have gone there in the first place.
Their love-in will probably last as long as Hitler’s and Mussolini’s, who quickly discovered that they despised each other.
http://gridwatch.templar.co.uk/france/
She probably didn’t mean any of it that way, but what with the Left being so keen on immediate cancellation, I don’t see why she gets the benefit of doubt
À bientôt, tout le monde.
With our geographic location and our tech / industrial abilities we should be a global leader in renewables. Instead the market and a "government involvement is communism" mindset means we are nowhere. If we're to spend the money - and we are - why not have something to show for it other than just the infrastructure?
https://twitter.com/DrRickKnabb/status/1575013474891096064?s=20&t=NzNZS8nBemgrRIThcTjWtw
Latest reconnaissance data here - there's an aircraft currently inside the eye
https://www.tropicaltidbits.com/recon/
I would be hoping the govt are taking steps to protect some of our critical infrastructure like wind farms etc. though perhaps that would be too sensible to expect of Truss
Woke and CRT may have become the new right wing boogeymen, but they were originally parts of AAV and black liberation discussion, and they have been discussed for a long time within the community. To "stay woke" was a cry that, no matter your class position, you need to remember that white dominated societies will still treat you worse for being a black man in a myriad of ways. So when black people act as class traitors there is often discussion amongst black liberation groups about what that person means to the community. These discussions have happened for generations - think on how old the phrase "uncle tom" is.
Is it the place of anyone who isn't black to start throwing these terms around? No. Should politicians like Huq or Biden say these things? Also no. But I think that race and class have become so intertwined in the UK and US specifically, that these kinds of clumsy things get said.
If she had said, for instance, that Kwasi was just another private school elitist who knew nothing of the struggles of the average working person who was black (which is what I think she was essentially saying), would people be complaining as much? I don't think so.
https://www.risk.net/derivatives/7954682/uk-pensions-hit-with-ps100m-margin-calls-as-gilts-and-sterling-slide
You have just displayed the "we can't afford it" mentality that has broken this country. We *can* afford it.
Borrow money
Invest the money
Deliver a return on the investment
Have significantly greater capacity and capabilities - more money to reinvest
I don't understand how you Tory-supporting minds have forgotten how capitalism works?
So much for my googling À bientôt with all the accents correctly.
His solution is to create a national champion with public sector, borrowed money. What we really want is capital accumulation in the UK that allows us to fund these things without relying on the kindness of strangers. I don't see any sign that Labour have got a grip of this yet. In fairness, they are not alone.
And the same is true on the Tory benches. Remove the insane, the insulting and the downright stupid. Lets have political representatives who aren't fundamentally loathsome.
cf the Left's view of the Jews and their rise from plucky underdogs who needed saving to imperialist oppressors who should be resisted continuously.
Sturgeon therefore urgently needs Truss and the Tories to have something of a recovery so there is a hung parliament and the SNP get some influence. In fact Tories most seats but SNP balance of power is far better for the SNP than a Labour majority enabling Starmer to ignore them completely
https://twitter.com/R82938886/status/1574865224108220423
The most amusing fact for me is that it took me a while to realise that the subtitles weren't genuine. They were almost believable!
Lagarde just confirmed ECB will lift rates at next 'several meetings'
This is a serious issue for all markets
Personally, I like SKS's idea. The UK needs control of its critical infrastructure rather than bleeding money to foreign owners
Again, she said it in a very bad way, but I think that was the point of her criticism.
https://www.theguardian.com/money/2022/sep/28/uk-house-prices-predicted-fall-mortgage-interest-rate
Probably a good thing for UK PLC. But for a Tory govt? Fatal. Starmer will be the next PM
The reason Truss got into No 10 is that she got onto the final ballot.
And the thing that stopped Mordaunt making it was the War On Woke; she was considered insufficiently sound.
Dicking around with foolish non-battles means that fools are more likely to gain power. And we really can't afford that right now.
Big_G and DavidL have raised concerns and they are understandable to a point. But the only way we will ever regain our ability to manufacture, install and manage wind turbines is if we do so. And there is something seriously pathetic about an argument that Britain is unable to do the basics that somewhere like Sweden can and its too hard / risky for us to repair that position so that we can.
So much for global Britain. Some on the right would have us an eternal supplicant.
I know you and a few other loons think Kwarteng is right and the global financial community is wrong. And even if that was true it doesn't matter - you either carry the market with you or you fail.
Looking at the state of the new Russian recruits, I find it hard to believe that they have adequate winter kit. I cannot see their logistics getting it there either. They are in for great suffering.
It's amazing how quickly the right wing decided how defending Jewish people was so important to them only after Labour had a Jewish leader who was smeared for being unable to properly eat a bacon sandwich, for having a radical Jewish father who supposedly hated this country, and continuously talked about a liberal metropolitan elite who were citizens of nowhere...
Action - suspension of the whip.
That is how these markets work across Europe. Except in the UK where a small number of private companies operate a cartel, fail to invest in the strategic expensive elements and shrug their shoulders when shit gets flushed en-masse onto our beaches in the summer tourism season.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/06/sun-front-page-antisemitic-save-our-bacon-ed-miliband
https://forward.com/opinion/306666/the-strangeness-of-ed-miliband/
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/is-the-criticism-of-ed-miliband-a-coded-form-of-antisemitism-9885745.html
Sheesh, if anything that shows our weakness and makes a run more certain.
Roll on 5pm. or I'll be selling the Big Issue by Monday
Desperate from Kwarteng. If he wants to shore up the £ he needs more fiscal discipline
A government owned energy company would certainly have the scale to negotiate very large deals with manufacturers to build factories in the UK, for example. So long as it's not run by the idiots who manage defence procurement.
To take just one line, "To denote Miliband as being from north London is not unlike labeling someone an east coast or Upper West Side intellectual in the United States." - is ridiculous. The geography was mentioned because it shows where modern Labour's home is. Electing subsequent leaders from constituencies in Islington and Camden rather proved the point.
*by which I mean, persistent heavy drizzle or in some areas, snow to top up the glaciers rather than the torrential downpours that caused flash floods in Italy a couple of weeks ago.
And 148Gres is also the right that the Mail's, npw professed hunter of anti-semitism in the Labour Party, coverage of Ralph Miliband, as "an intellectual who hated Britain" - in fact he served in the war effort - was blatantly anti-semitic. May's "citizens of nowhere" and "liberal metropolitan elite" similarly have very specific historical meanings and resonances in Europe.
BANKERS: But your economic plan is fucking mental and will end in tears
KK: Actually our plan is built on sound financial reason supported by the markets obver the decades
BANKERS: We are the market. We say its mental.
KK: Bloody socialists talking down Britain