Reflecting on yesterday's events - let's be fair, Kwarteng isn't the first Chancellor to be sacked or "asked to stand aside" to use the euphemism in recent times. We've had Sunak, Lawson and Lamont to name but three.
The one thing the change of Chancellor (voluntary or otherwise) is supposed to do is demonstrate the authority of the Prime Minister (primus inter pares) and it strengthens the notion of that authority to be seen to be able to dismiss someone as senior as the Chancellor.
Indeed, go back to the "Night of the Long Knives" and the dismissal of Thorneycroft, Birch and Powell by Harold MacMillan in 1958 (could one argue they were the first real Thatcherites?) and you see how a "little local difficulty" can build a Prime Minister's authority.
Yet the more I look at the circumstances of Kwarteng's resignation the more I see not a confirmation of Prime Ministerial authority but a confirmation of Prime Ministerial weakness. This isn't Blair giving Brown a free hand on the economy - this was a Prime Minister and Chancellor "in lockstep" so we were told.
An ill-timed and poorly communicated policy change which badly misread the public mood and the market reaction has claimed the carer of its creator (so we are to believe). Pace MacMillan, Truss has taken a axe to the "pro-growthers" ad cleared them out from the stables.
I can only assume Hunt has exacted a heavy price from Truss for taking this on - Campbell may be right to a point but Truss still has plenty of allies in Cabinet who can either defend her or join in the feeding frenzy.
However, to paraphrase Oscar Wilde, "to lose one Prime Minister may be regarded as misfortune, to lose two might be considered careless". Will enough people want a careless party in charge to allow the Conservatives another term in office?
Off top my head, Sunak not sacked and knight of Long Knives wasn’t 58, it was sixties when Super Mac in trouble?
To you he was knight of Long Knives, to me he will always be Sir Lance a Lot.
Whatever you’ve taken this evening, you’ve never had it so good 😆
2 x gin and red vermouth, 1 x glass Chilean pinot noir, 1 x and counting Cotes du Rhone Villages. Signing off now to watch a zombie movie. I have a 55" with stereo now, and a pretty big TV.
PS the way to approach Pinot Noir is to think of it as still, red champagne. Which is what it is.
"I have a 55" with stereo now, and a pretty big TV."
Hold on. If you have a pretty big TV what does the 55" refer to.
Am in a nice post-h*****g fug (3pm meets as is the way these days) right now as we're sharing, with a glass of Waitrose Bourgogne blanc and a bottle of Ch. Tour St Bonnet 2010 waiting for later
That was the joke. I have always wished I had a 16" penis instead of this unwieldy monster.
@elonmusk The hell with it … even though Starlink is still losing money & other companies are getting billions of taxpayer $, we’ll just keep funding Ukraine govt for free
If the companies making NLAWs and Javelins are being paid I'm not sure why Starlink isn't, but Musk should really cheer up about this. The use of Starlink by Ukraine in this war has been great advertising for them. We've been looking at houses in rural Ireland, and it's noticeable that there's a price differential for those without access to decent broadband, and Starlink looks like a practical alternative, and it's not even that much more expensive than Irish broadband prices.
A recommendation from the soldiers of Ukraine is pretty good in my book.
I believe it was Dura Ace who pointed out, that US federal law gives the government wide-ranging powers with respect to defense contractors.
In other words, they've got the brute by the short hairs. Or thereabouts.
The Lab hunting ban was like Brexit. At its core a few people who were principled but everyone else just prejudiced. And each group benefited from the other.
"And the two groups shagged and the whole thing is like having a baby"
This is v interesting, you are the only PBer about whom I know which public school their father attended, and you resent your uncle (his brother?) too. My question is this: what have a hundred foxes a year got that 30 000 pheasants haven't? Think what you would say if a hunt bred 30,000 foxes a year and aimed to kill 25,000 of them. If you think birds are in some way inferior to mammals google BF Skinner. Why the complete and utter silence on this topic? Except that you've fucked them toffs on horses who remind you of your dad, so job done?
No, we don't know each other and you're misreading me. I was hugely fond of both my father and my uncle - disagreement and affection can coexist happily. FWIW my father also tried hunting but came to a different conclusion - yes, a great spectacle, he felt, but unacceptably cruel.
But of course I'm equally against breeding pheasants in order to shoot them, for just the same reason. It's whataboutery to justify the one by reference to the other.
I'm fairly relaxed about deer-stalking and the like where the animal is eaten afterwards - I underatand that the shooter makes a point of trying to get an instant kill and quite likely it's had a better life than on many farms. But doing it just for fun? No.
OT. Just listened to Lisa Nandy being interviewed in depth by Nick Robinson. I have to say she's a very impressive person and politician and not at all belonging in the box I'd put her in with Rayner and Long Bailey. An object lesson in not judging someone by the number of letters they drop. On the basis of that interview I reckon she'd make a formidable leader.
Quite a few of us voted for her in 2020.
Nice that you have realised that not all northerners are thick.
Nandy is a complete lightweight, had she been leading Labour not Starmer I doubt Labour would now be 25% ahead in the polls
She's actually anything but. You're as guilty as I am in rushing to judgements without the facts. She's well educated bright and has had a distinguished career in public service. Knowing you to be a snob you might also be impressed that her Grandfather was a Lord. Furthermore she's a Mancunian and it's common knowledge that most of the brightest and most creative originate in Manchester
I know this isn't really important. But in all the zoom calls with politicians during lockdown I thought Lisa Nandy had the nicest room.
The account 'Bookcase credibility' judging public figures' backdrops during lockdown was a hoot, shame it had to naturally peter out.
I wonder what they'd make of me - three bookcases, one with history, one with history and theology, and one with music.
that sounds like a nice collection - may i ask if you specialise within the areas you mention?
For the first time in a long time I believe we have a grown up in what is now the most powerful political position in the country
I wish Hunt all the best not just for the conservative party but for the country
Truss is over, it is just the question of when but it won't be long
But he is in favour of fox hunting don't forget.
Good. So am I.
But BigG definitely isn't. During the Johnson/Hunt leadership contest it was a deal breaker for his vote.
Fox hunting is a long way outside the Chncellors remit though
I am implacably opposed to fox hunting but I really do not see this as an issue at this time
Because you know absolutely nothing about it.
There is not one person across our family who supports fox hunting
Ignorance and prejudice often cluster in families.
The North Ledbury Hunt took the stirrup cup in the car park of the Crown in Cradley, almost opposite where I lived. The hounds lost the scent of the fox in our back garden. How my father laughed as 30 dogs trampled his perfectly manicured garden. I thought good on the fox who had leapt the fences half an hour earlier. A very angry Assistant Hunt Master had to dismount and come into our garden and collect his dogs. I suggested "this one got away", to which he retorted "we'll dig the bastard out and feed him to the dogs anyway" which didn't seem very sporting. Anyway the fox had the last laugh, because when she died Last Wachter, the Hunt Master had all her horses and hounds put down as part of her will.
None of that makes much sense to me. There is no such thing as an Assistant Hunt Master, and the chances of anyone in that sort of role space saying dogs when he meant hounds are way below the chances of a Liz Truss 300 seat landslide in 2023.
The Lab hunting ban was like Brexit. At its core a few people who were principled but everyone else just prejudiced. And each group benefited from the other.
"And the two groups shagged and the whole thing is like having a baby"
Prepare to sue the Spectator in about two weeks.
I'm sure @Leon pays a sub to PB for all the ideas we provide.
Reflecting on yesterday's events - let's be fair, Kwarteng isn't the first Chancellor to be sacked or "asked to stand aside" to use the euphemism in recent times. We've had Sunak, Lawson and Lamont to name but three.
The one thing the change of Chancellor (voluntary or otherwise) is supposed to do is demonstrate the authority of the Prime Minister (primus inter pares) and it strengthens the notion of that authority to be seen to be able to dismiss someone as senior as the Chancellor.
Indeed, go back to the "Night of the Long Knives" and the dismissal of Thorneycroft, Birch and Powell by Harold MacMillan in 1958 (could one argue they were the first real Thatcherites?) and you see how a "little local difficulty" can build a Prime Minister's authority.
Yet the more I look at the circumstances of Kwarteng's resignation the more I see not a confirmation of Prime Ministerial authority but a confirmation of Prime Ministerial weakness. This isn't Blair giving Brown a free hand on the economy - this was a Prime Minister and Chancellor "in lockstep" so we were told.
An ill-timed and poorly communicated policy change which badly misread the public mood and the market reaction has claimed the carer of its creator (so we are to believe). Pace MacMillan, Truss has taken a axe to the "pro-growthers" ad cleared them out from the stables.
I can only assume Hunt has exacted a heavy price from Truss for taking this on - Campbell may be right to a point but Truss still has plenty of allies in Cabinet who can either defend her or join in the feeding frenzy.
However, to paraphrase Oscar Wilde, "to lose one Prime Minister may be regarded as misfortune, to lose two might be considered careless". Will enough people want a careless party in charge to allow the Conservatives another term in office?
Off top my head, Sunak not sacked and knight of Long Knives wasn’t 58, it was sixties when Super Mac in trouble?
Correct . Sunak resigned - and the Night of the Long Knives was Summer 1962 when Selwyn Lloyd was dismissed.
Yes.
I recall he made 48 before being turned inside out and edging to gully. And so it started, Knight of long Nightlife’s, or something 34 years before I was born.
The gruesome phrase, so inappropriate on anniversary of Sir David’s death, I presume is a Shakespeare reference?
No, blackshirts v borownshirts in 1934 and then macmillan 1962.
Reflecting on yesterday's events - let's be fair, Kwarteng isn't the first Chancellor to be sacked or "asked to stand aside" to use the euphemism in recent times. We've had Sunak, Lawson and Lamont to name but three.
The one thing the change of Chancellor (voluntary or otherwise) is supposed to do is demonstrate the authority of the Prime Minister (primus inter pares) and it strengthens the notion of that authority to be seen to be able to dismiss someone as senior as the Chancellor.
Indeed, go back to the "Night of the Long Knives" and the dismissal of Thorneycroft, Birch and Powell by Harold MacMillan in 1958 (could one argue they were the first real Thatcherites?) and you see how a "little local difficulty" can build a Prime Minister's authority.
Yet the more I look at the circumstances of Kwarteng's resignation the more I see not a confirmation of Prime Ministerial authority but a confirmation of Prime Ministerial weakness. This isn't Blair giving Brown a free hand on the economy - this was a Prime Minister and Chancellor "in lockstep" so we were told.
An ill-timed and poorly communicated policy change which badly misread the public mood and the market reaction has claimed the carer of its creator (so we are to believe). Pace MacMillan, Truss has taken a axe to the "pro-growthers" ad cleared them out from the stables.
I can only assume Hunt has exacted a heavy price from Truss for taking this on - Campbell may be right to a point but Truss still has plenty of allies in Cabinet who can either defend her or join in the feeding frenzy.
However, to paraphrase Oscar Wilde, "to lose one Prime Minister may be regarded as misfortune, to lose two might be considered careless". Will enough people want a careless party in charge to allow the Conservatives another term in office?
Off top my head, Sunak not sacked and knight of Long Knives wasn’t 58, it was sixties when Super Mac in trouble?
To you he was knight of Long Knives, to me he will always be Sir Lance a Lot.
Whatever you’ve taken this evening, you’ve never had it so good 😆
2 x gin and red vermouth, 1 x glass Chilean pinot noir, 1 x and counting Cotes du Rhone Villages. Signing off now to watch a zombie movie. I have a 55" with stereo now, and a pretty big TV.
PS the way to approach Pinot Noir is to think of it as still, red champagne. Which is what it is.
"I have a 55" with stereo now, and a pretty big TV."
Hold on. If you have a pretty big TV what does the 55" refer to.
Am in a nice post-h*****g fug (3pm meets as is the way these days) right now as we're sharing, with a glass of Waitrose Bourgogne blanc and a bottle of Ch. Tour St Bonnet 2010 waiting for later
Do you know it’s just occurred to me, Leon in the states is now on Wild West time, he’ll only be posting overnight. Arguing with RCS. We will miss it all.
Oh dear.
Perhaps THAT's just what KCIII was conveying, at his recent get-together with the PM?
As we all know, PB is must reading for a WIDE variety of movers and shakers!
People would represent themselves as being annoyed at a change in PM because that's what you are meant to say, but the reality is people would end up more positive toward the Tories if they did it than if they didn't.
For the first time in a long time I believe we have a grown up in what is now the most powerful political position in the country
I wish Hunt all the best not just for the conservative party but for the country
Truss is over, it is just the question of when but it won't be long
But he is in favour of fox hunting don't forget.
Good. So am I.
But BigG definitely isn't. During the Johnson/Hunt leadership contest it was a deal breaker for his vote.
Fox hunting is a long way outside the Chncellors remit though
I am implacably opposed to fox hunting but I really do not see this as an issue at this time
Because you know absolutely nothing about it.
There is not one person across our family who supports fox hunting
Ignorance and prejudice often cluster in families.
The North Ledbury Hunt took the stirrup cup in the car park of the Crown in Cradley, almost opposite where I lived. The hounds lost the scent of the fox in our back garden. How my father laughed as 30 dogs trampled his perfectly manicured garden. I thought good on the fox who had leapt the fences half an hour earlier. A very angry Assistant Hunt Master had to dismount and come into our garden and collect his dogs. I suggested "this one got away", to which he retorted "we'll dig the bastard out and feed him to the dogs anyway" which didn't seem very sporting. Anyway the fox had the last laugh, because when she died Last Wachter, the Hunt Master had all her horses and hounds put down as part of her will.
None of that makes much sense to me. There is no such thing as an Assistant Hunt Master, and the chances of anyone in that sort of role space saying dogs when he meant hounds are way below the chances of a Liz Truss 300 seat landslide in 2023.
But thanks for your contribution.
Lady Wachter was enormous. Daniel Lambert enormous. Once on the horse, which was a big old boy she was not getting off. I am, as you have concluded, no expert, so I assumed one of her minions was an Assistant Hunt Person. My mistake.
OT. Just listened to Lisa Nandy being interviewed in depth by Nick Robinson. I have to say she's a very impressive person and politician and not at all belonging in the box I'd put her in with Rayner and Long Bailey. An object lesson in not judging someone by the number of letters they drop. On the basis of that interview I reckon she'd make a formidable leader.
Quite a few of us voted for her in 2020.
Nice that you have realised that not all northerners are thick.
Nandy is a complete lightweight, had she been leading Labour not Starmer I doubt Labour would now be 25% ahead in the polls
She's actually anything but. You're as guilty as I am in rushing to judgements without the facts. She's well educated bright and has had a distinguished career in public service. Knowing you to be a snob you might also be impressed that her Grandfather was a Lord. Furthermore she's a Mancunian and it's common knowledge that most of the brightest and most creative originate in Manchester
I know this isn't really important. But in all the zoom calls with politicians during lockdown I thought Lisa Nandy had the nicest room.
The account 'Bookcase credibility' judging public figures' backdrops during lockdown was a hoot, shame it had to naturally peter out.
I wonder what they'd make of me - three bookcases, one with history, one with history and theology, and one with music.
that sounds like a nice collection - may i ask if you specialise within the areas you mention?
As a teacher it's difficult to specialise too far. However, you would find particular sections on Wars of the Roses, Russia, the Holocaust, modern British politics, New Testament Studies and twentieth century British organ music.
Fox hunting is a manifestation of extreme arrogance that perhaps comes with years of being the feudal lords and ladies of the manor as though they think they have a right to be cruel and not care because nobody will stop them . Go back a couple of hundred years and the same thing applied to the aristocracy owning slaves . I have no great wish for the state to ever intervene in private affairs but do think power (whether state or feudal ) brings extreme arrogance over time and leads to things like this.Its actually no different to communism where extreme power in the hands of a few or one person leads to Stalin purges and North Korea.Its why power shoudl be spread far and wide and look to be diluted constantly
Reflecting on yesterday's events - let's be fair, Kwarteng isn't the first Chancellor to be sacked or "asked to stand aside" to use the euphemism in recent times. We've had Sunak, Lawson and Lamont to name but three.
The one thing the change of Chancellor (voluntary or otherwise) is supposed to do is demonstrate the authority of the Prime Minister (primus inter pares) and it strengthens the notion of that authority to be seen to be able to dismiss someone as senior as the Chancellor.
Indeed, go back to the "Night of the Long Knives" and the dismissal of Thorneycroft, Birch and Powell by Harold MacMillan in 1958 (could one argue they were the first real Thatcherites?) and you see how a "little local difficulty" can build a Prime Minister's authority.
Yet the more I look at the circumstances of Kwarteng's resignation the more I see not a confirmation of Prime Ministerial authority but a confirmation of Prime Ministerial weakness. This isn't Blair giving Brown a free hand on the economy - this was a Prime Minister and Chancellor "in lockstep" so we were told.
An ill-timed and poorly communicated policy change which badly misread the public mood and the market reaction has claimed the carer of its creator (so we are to believe). Pace MacMillan, Truss has taken a axe to the "pro-growthers" ad cleared them out from the stables.
I can only assume Hunt has exacted a heavy price from Truss for taking this on - Campbell may be right to a point but Truss still has plenty of allies in Cabinet who can either defend her or join in the feeding frenzy.
However, to paraphrase Oscar Wilde, "to lose one Prime Minister may be regarded as misfortune, to lose two might be considered careless". Will enough people want a careless party in charge to allow the Conservatives another term in office?
Off top my head, Sunak not sacked and knight of Long Knives wasn’t 58, it was sixties when Super Mac in trouble?
To you he was knight of Long Knives, to me he will always be Sir Lance a Lot.
Whatever you’ve taken this evening, you’ve never had it so good 😆
2 x gin and red vermouth, 1 x glass Chilean pinot noir, 1 x and counting Cotes du Rhone Villages. Signing off now to watch a zombie movie. I have a 55" with stereo now, and a pretty big TV.
PS the way to approach Pinot Noir is to think of it as still, red champagne. Which is what it is.
"I have a 55" with stereo now, and a pretty big TV."
Hold on. If you have a pretty big TV what does the 55" refer to.
Am in a nice post-h*****g fug (3pm meets as is the way these days) right now as we're sharing, with a glass of Waitrose Bourgogne blanc and a bottle of Ch. Tour St Bonnet 2010 waiting for later
That was the joke. I have always wished I had a 16" penis instead of this unwieldy monster.
Just imagine having a sixteen foot horn on your organ's full swell.
This is v interesting, you are the only PBer about whom I know which public school their father attended, and you resent your uncle (his brother?) too. My question is this: what have a hundred foxes a year got that 30 000 pheasants haven't? Think what you would say if a hunt bred 30,000 foxes a year and aimed to kill 25,000 of them. If you think birds are in some way inferior to mammals google BF Skinner. Why the complete and utter silence on this topic? Except that you've fucked them toffs on horses who remind you of your dad, so job done?
No, we don't know each other and you're misreading me. I was hugely fond of both my father and my uncle - disagreement and affection can coexist happily. FWIW my father also tried hunting but came to a different conclusion - yes, a great spectacle, he felt, but unacceptably cruel.
But of course I'm equally against breeding pheasants in order to shoot them, for just the same reason. It's whataboutery to justify the one by reference to the other.
I'm fairly relaxed about deer-stalking and the like where the animal is eaten afterwards - I underatand that the shooter makes a point of trying to get an instant kill and quite likely it's had a better life than on many farms. But doing it just for fun? No.
But Nick hunting isn't cruel. It compromises the welfare of the fox but then so does a nice lamb shank for the lamb.
It was class driven and if you genuinely thought it was cruel you enlisted the help of a huge number of class warriors. Red meat, if you will excuse the phrase, for your party's prejudiced supporters.
As for your concern for bluebottles I am impressed. I have a fantastic zapper which I use. Forgive me.
@elonmusk The hell with it … even though Starlink is still losing money & other companies are getting billions of taxpayer $, we’ll just keep funding Ukraine govt for free
OT. Just listened to Lisa Nandy being interviewed in depth by Nick Robinson. I have to say she's a very impressive person and politician and not at all belonging in the box I'd put her in with Rayner and Long Bailey. An object lesson in not judging someone by the number of letters they drop. On the basis of that interview I reckon she'd make a formidable leader.
Quite a few of us voted for her in 2020.
Nice that you have realised that not all northerners are thick.
Nandy is a complete lightweight, had she been leading Labour not Starmer I doubt Labour would now be 25% ahead in the polls
She's actually anything but. You're as guilty as I am in rushing to judgements without the facts. She's well educated bright and has had a distinguished career in public service. Knowing you to be a snob you might also be impressed that her Grandfather was a Lord. Furthermore she's a Mancunian and it's common knowledge that most of the brightest and most creative originate in Manchester
I know this isn't really important. But in all the zoom calls with politicians during lockdown I thought Lisa Nandy had the nicest room.
The account 'Bookcase credibility' judging public figures' backdrops during lockdown was a hoot, shame it had to naturally peter out.
I wonder what they'd make of me - three bookcases, one with history, one with history and theology, and one with music.
That depends - are you a colour coordinator when it comes to books?
This is v interesting, you are the only PBer about whom I know which public school their father attended, and you resent your uncle (his brother?) too. My question is this: what have a hundred foxes a year got that 30 000 pheasants haven't? Think what you would say if a hunt bred 30,000 foxes a year and aimed to kill 25,000 of them. If you think birds are in some way inferior to mammals google BF Skinner. Why the complete and utter silence on this topic? Except that you've fucked them toffs on horses who remind you of your dad, so job done?
No, we don't know each other and you're misreading me. I was hugely fond of both my father and my uncle - disagreement and affection can coexist happily. FWIW my father also tried hunting but came to a different conclusion - yes, a great spectacle, he felt, but unacceptably cruel.
But of course I'm equally against breeding pheasants in order to shoot them, for just the same reason. It's whataboutery to justify the one by reference to the other.
I'm fairly relaxed about deer-stalking and the like where the animal is eaten afterwards - I underatand that the shooter makes a point of trying to get an instant kill and quite likely it's had a better life than on many farms. But doing it just for fun? No.
Yes, but the point is, commercial pheasant shooting is 10,000 times as cruel as fox hunting to animals generally and probably 5x as cruel to foxes. Bugger "whataboutery": you lot just do not give a toss, because you are and were after an easy scalp. Just on the numbers, pheasant shooting is literally 4 orders of magnitude as bad as fox hunting. We don't hear a squeak from you. Whatever your motivation is, it has zero or negative correlation with compassion for animals.
People would represent themselves as being annoyed at a change in PM because that's what you are meant to say, but the reality is people would end up more positive toward the Tories if they did it than if they didn't.
The fundamental issue is that they can't go into the next election with Liz as leader (I mean, good god, how would that even work?) so they have to get rid at some point.
Pretty much any change is likely to give them some boost. I think this whole episode has destroyed their chances of the next election (absent Labour implosion), but a respectable (as opposed to cataclysmic) loss is still to play for.
OT. Just listened to Lisa Nandy being interviewed in depth by Nick Robinson. I have to say she's a very impressive person and politician and not at all belonging in the box I'd put her in with Rayner and Long Bailey. An object lesson in not judging someone by the number of letters they drop. On the basis of that interview I reckon she'd make a formidable leader.
Quite a few of us voted for her in 2020.
Nice that you have realised that not all northerners are thick.
Nandy is a complete lightweight, had she been leading Labour not Starmer I doubt Labour would now be 25% ahead in the polls
She's actually anything but. You're as guilty as I am in rushing to judgements without the facts. She's well educated bright and has had a distinguished career in public service. Knowing you to be a snob you might also be impressed that her Grandfather was a Lord. Furthermore she's a Mancunian and it's common knowledge that most of the brightest and most creative originate in Manchester
I know this isn't really important. But in all the zoom calls with politicians during lockdown I thought Lisa Nandy had the nicest room.
The account 'Bookcase credibility' judging public figures' backdrops during lockdown was a hoot, shame it had to naturally peter out.
I wonder what they'd make of me - three bookcases, one with history, one with history and theology, and one with music.
That depends - are you a colour coordinator when it comes to books?
No. Strictly by subject, except for the oversize ones which have to be on particular shelves.
@elonmusk The hell with it … even though Starlink is still losing money & other companies are getting billions of taxpayer $, we’ll just keep funding Ukraine govt for free
OT. Just listened to Lisa Nandy being interviewed in depth by Nick Robinson. I have to say she's a very impressive person and politician and not at all belonging in the box I'd put her in with Rayner and Long Bailey. An object lesson in not judging someone by the number of letters they drop. On the basis of that interview I reckon she'd make a formidable leader.
Quite a few of us voted for her in 2020.
Nice that you have realised that not all northerners are thick.
Nandy is a complete lightweight, had she been leading Labour not Starmer I doubt Labour would now be 25% ahead in the polls
She's actually anything but. You're as guilty as I am in rushing to judgements without the facts. She's well educated bright and has had a distinguished career in public service. Knowing you to be a snob you might also be impressed that her Grandfather was a Lord. Furthermore she's a Mancunian and it's common knowledge that most of the brightest and most creative originate in Manchester
I know this isn't really important. But in all the zoom calls with politicians during lockdown I thought Lisa Nandy had the nicest room.
The account 'Bookcase credibility' judging public figures' backdrops during lockdown was a hoot, shame it had to naturally peter out.
I wonder what they'd make of me - three bookcases, one with history, one with history and theology, and one with music.
that sounds like a nice collection - may i ask if you specialise within the areas you mention?
As a teacher it's difficult to specialise too far. However, you would find particular sections on Wars of the Roses, Russia, the Holocaust, modern British politics, New Testament Studies and twentieth century British organ music.
Speaking of Zoom backgrounds, vividly recall the occasion when a professor (I think) was zooming with a set of bookshelves behind her, one of which featured a VERY impressive sample of Leon's flint-smithing.
OT. Just listened to Lisa Nandy being interviewed in depth by Nick Robinson. I have to say she's a very impressive person and politician and not at all belonging in the box I'd put her in with Rayner and Long Bailey. An object lesson in not judging someone by the number of letters they drop. On the basis of that interview I reckon she'd make a formidable leader.
Quite a few of us voted for her in 2020.
Nice that you have realised that not all northerners are thick.
Nandy is a complete lightweight, had she been leading Labour not Starmer I doubt Labour would now be 25% ahead in the polls
She's actually anything but. You're as guilty as I am in rushing to judgements without the facts. She's well educated bright and has had a distinguished career in public service. Knowing you to be a snob you might also be impressed that her Grandfather was a Lord. Furthermore she's a Mancunian and it's common knowledge that most of the brightest and most creative originate in Manchester
I know this isn't really important. But in all the zoom calls with politicians during lockdown I thought Lisa Nandy had the nicest room.
The account 'Bookcase credibility' judging public figures' backdrops during lockdown was a hoot, shame it had to naturally peter out.
I wonder what they'd make of me - three bookcases, one with history, one with history and theology, and one with music.
That depends - are you a colour coordinator when it comes to books?
No. Strictly by subject, except for the oversize ones which have to be on particular shelves.
Oversized books piss the hell out of me.
For my fiction bookcases it took me ages to add some bespoke holes across them all, which don't work great with the dowells unfortunately, in order that I could get all the shelves at the same heights, with sufficient space for regular hardbacks to be placed vertically.
OT. Just listened to Lisa Nandy being interviewed in depth by Nick Robinson. I have to say she's a very impressive person and politician and not at all belonging in the box I'd put her in with Rayner and Long Bailey. An object lesson in not judging someone by the number of letters they drop. On the basis of that interview I reckon she'd make a formidable leader.
Quite a few of us voted for her in 2020.
Nice that you have realised that not all northerners are thick.
Nandy is a complete lightweight, had she been leading Labour not Starmer I doubt Labour would now be 25% ahead in the polls
She's actually anything but. You're as guilty as I am in rushing to judgements without the facts. She's well educated bright and has had a distinguished career in public service. Knowing you to be a snob you might also be impressed that her Grandfather was a Lord. Furthermore she's a Mancunian and it's common knowledge that most of the brightest and most creative originate in Manchester
I know this isn't really important. But in all the zoom calls with politicians during lockdown I thought Lisa Nandy had the nicest room.
The account 'Bookcase credibility' judging public figures' backdrops during lockdown was a hoot, shame it had to naturally peter out.
I wonder what they'd make of me - three bookcases, one with history, one with history and theology, and one with music.
that sounds like a nice collection - may i ask if you specialise within the areas you mention?
As a teacher it's difficult to specialise too far. However, you would find particular sections on Wars of the Roses, Russia, the Holocaust, modern British politics, New Testament Studies and twentieth century British organ music.
Speaking of Zoom backgrounds, vividly recall the occasion when a professor (I think) was zooming with a set of bookshelves behind her, one of which featured a VERY impressive sample of Leon's flint-smithing.
Reflecting on yesterday's events - let's be fair, Kwarteng isn't the first Chancellor to be sacked or "asked to stand aside" to use the euphemism in recent times. We've had Sunak, Lawson and Lamont to name but three.
The one thing the change of Chancellor (voluntary or otherwise) is supposed to do is demonstrate the authority of the Prime Minister (primus inter pares) and it strengthens the notion of that authority to be seen to be able to dismiss someone as senior as the Chancellor.
Indeed, go back to the "Night of the Long Knives" and the dismissal of Thorneycroft, Birch and Powell by Harold MacMillan in 1958 (could one argue they were the first real Thatcherites?) and you see how a "little local difficulty" can build a Prime Minister's authority.
Yet the more I look at the circumstances of Kwarteng's resignation the more I see not a confirmation of Prime Ministerial authority but a confirmation of Prime Ministerial weakness. This isn't Blair giving Brown a free hand on the economy - this was a Prime Minister and Chancellor "in lockstep" so we were told.
An ill-timed and poorly communicated policy change which badly misread the public mood and the market reaction has claimed the carer of its creator (so we are to believe). Pace MacMillan, Truss has taken a axe to the "pro-growthers" ad cleared them out from the stables.
I can only assume Hunt has exacted a heavy price from Truss for taking this on - Campbell may be right to a point but Truss still has plenty of allies in Cabinet who can either defend her or join in the feeding frenzy.
However, to paraphrase Oscar Wilde, "to lose one Prime Minister may be regarded as misfortune, to lose two might be considered careless". Will enough people want a careless party in charge to allow the Conservatives another term in office?
Peter Thorneycroft and his Treasury team were not dismissed by Macmillan in 1958 - they resigned!
Pms losing their chancellors often means the end us nigh...lawson resigned october 1989 thatcher gone nov 1990
Reflecting on yesterday's events - let's be fair, Kwarteng isn't the first Chancellor to be sacked or "asked to stand aside" to use the euphemism in recent times. We've had Sunak, Lawson and Lamont to name but three.
The one thing the change of Chancellor (voluntary or otherwise) is supposed to do is demonstrate the authority of the Prime Minister (primus inter pares) and it strengthens the notion of that authority to be seen to be able to dismiss someone as senior as the Chancellor.
Indeed, go back to the "Night of the Long Knives" and the dismissal of Thorneycroft, Birch and Powell by Harold MacMillan in 1958 (could one argue they were the first real Thatcherites?) and you see how a "little local difficulty" can build a Prime Minister's authority.
Yet the more I look at the circumstances of Kwarteng's resignation the more I see not a confirmation of Prime Ministerial authority but a confirmation of Prime Ministerial weakness. This isn't Blair giving Brown a free hand on the economy - this was a Prime Minister and Chancellor "in lockstep" so we were told.
An ill-timed and poorly communicated policy change which badly misread the public mood and the market reaction has claimed the carer of its creator (so we are to believe). Pace MacMillan, Truss has taken a axe to the "pro-growthers" ad cleared them out from the stables.
I can only assume Hunt has exacted a heavy price from Truss for taking this on - Campbell may be right to a point but Truss still has plenty of allies in Cabinet who can either defend her or join in the feeding frenzy.
However, to paraphrase Oscar Wilde, "to lose one Prime Minister may be regarded as misfortune, to lose two might be considered careless". Will enough people want a careless party in charge to allow the Conservatives another term in office?
Peter Thorneycroft and his Treasury team were not dismissed by Macmillan in 1958 - they resigned!
Pms losing their chancellors often means the end us nigh...lawson resigned october 1989 thatcher gone nov 1990
Lamont in 1993...Javid in 2020...Callaghan in 1967.
I find it difficult to see a return to Osborne -style austerity - as favoured by Hunt and Sunak - being popular in electoral terms. The markets are likely to calm down but the impact on household budgets and public services is unlikely to be helpful to the Tories after 12 years in office - particularly when combined with the effects of tighter monetary policies via higher interest rates feeding through to very substantial jumps in mortgage repayments.
All true but there is also the fact that the public has been educated to the dangers of increasing the deficit. That will make it very difficult for Starmer to promise large increases in public expenditure because the funding will have to be genuinely realistic now even during an election campaign.
In my opinion here is only one area of relatively pain free expenditure savings and boosting of living standards and that is watering down or abandoning Net Zero. I'm not sure any of the major parties are up for that (yet). Unfortunately the current Net Zero Plans look certain to fail so will have to be changed drastically but that will probably only happen when things really hit the fan in a couple of years.
I suggest that the Covid pandemic and the ongoing Energy crisis has clearly demonstrated to the public that considerable flexibility is possible in managing the public finances when the need is sufficiently great. Johnson was very little concerned at the scale of public borrowing - and pretty well got away with it to the extent hat it raises serious questions as to whether Osborne's Austerity policies during the Coalition years were necessary after all. Increasingly they appear to have been a policy choice rather than an economic necessity.
It does make a difference if all major economies are increasing deficits, the Truss crises trigger was partly because it was out of step. We can't rerun the past but I do think running huge increasing deficits is doomed to failure.
OT. Just listened to Lisa Nandy being interviewed in depth by Nick Robinson. I have to say she's a very impressive person and politician and not at all belonging in the box I'd put her in with Rayner and Long Bailey. An object lesson in not judging someone by the number of letters they drop. On the basis of that interview I reckon she'd make a formidable leader.
Quite a few of us voted for her in 2020.
Nice that you have realised that not all northerners are thick.
Nandy is a complete lightweight, had she been leading Labour not Starmer I doubt Labour would now be 25% ahead in the polls
She's actually anything but. You're as guilty as I am in rushing to judgements without the facts. She's well educated bright and has had a distinguished career in public service. Knowing you to be a snob you might also be impressed that her Grandfather was a Lord. Furthermore she's a Mancunian and it's common knowledge that most of the brightest and most creative originate in Manchester
I know this isn't really important. But in all the zoom calls with politicians during lockdown I thought Lisa Nandy had the nicest room.
The account 'Bookcase credibility' judging public figures' backdrops during lockdown was a hoot, shame it had to naturally peter out.
I wonder what they'd make of me - three bookcases, one with history, one with history and theology, and one with music.
That depends - are you a colour coordinator when it comes to books?
Now that is weird.
I was on a work Teams call the other day and someone had a shelf of red books and a shelf of blue books.
On Fox hunting I remain deeply skeptical that if foxes are the menace that need to be dealt with (I see no reason not to defer to farmers on that point), that putting on fancy dress and getting the local amateurs to amble about is the most efficient and effective method of dealing with them, but I don't care enough to look into the matter as they insist it is indeed the most effective way.
OT. Just listened to Lisa Nandy being interviewed in depth by Nick Robinson. I have to say she's a very impressive person and politician and not at all belonging in the box I'd put her in with Rayner and Long Bailey. An object lesson in not judging someone by the number of letters they drop. On the basis of that interview I reckon she'd make a formidable leader.
Quite a few of us voted for her in 2020.
Nice that you have realised that not all northerners are thick.
Nandy is a complete lightweight, had she been leading Labour not Starmer I doubt Labour would now be 25% ahead in the polls
She's actually anything but. You're as guilty as I am in rushing to judgements without the facts. She's well educated bright and has had a distinguished career in public service. Knowing you to be a snob you might also be impressed that her Grandfather was a Lord. Furthermore she's a Mancunian and it's common knowledge that most of the brightest and most creative originate in Manchester
I know this isn't really important. But in all the zoom calls with politicians during lockdown I thought Lisa Nandy had the nicest room.
The account 'Bookcase credibility' judging public figures' backdrops during lockdown was a hoot, shame it had to naturally peter out.
I wonder what they'd make of me - three bookcases, one with history, one with history and theology, and one with music.
that sounds like a nice collection - may i ask if you specialise within the areas you mention?
As a teacher it's difficult to specialise too far. However, you would find particular sections on Wars of the Roses, Russia, the Holocaust, modern British politics, New Testament Studies and twentieth century British organ music.
Jealous and frankly a lot more high brow than my book collection - My sections are gambling , sport (with a slant to golf as I worked in golf for many years) , London, politics (of course) , British History ,Rough guides ,cinema and at the risk of sounding like sunil prasiman , Railways.
I do have a love of all things Richard the third though so interested in your War of the Roses collection
Hunt has calmed the markets, if he quits then it will be carnage, so Truss cannot afford to lose him, he will do whatever he wants.
What happens if Monday comes and the markets aren’t calmed?
The way this usually happens is there can be two weeks of calm - people say the markets have been calmed, but then it all erupts again.
Obviously you all know my theory - £400bn of Rishi splaffing (and wasting a lot) to get us through covid has maxxed out the credit - now they want to (unnecessarily, needlessly) try to get another £200bn more borrowing - the markets won’t calm till that plan is dead.
Or the £200bn becomes more like £20bn. Everything now turns on the future price of gas.
I don’t want to be really rude David, but you keep posting that “If gas falls sufficiently, the cost of the energy cap freeze drops” means don’t think you really understand it. That thinking is utter bollox.
1. We haven’t had an OBR how much Tories total promise is likely to cost. The Tories have promised to buck the UK energy market for two and a half years regardless what global energy price does. Some think tanks have had a go at pricing this and come to a quarter of a trillion pound. To be found by tax rises, borrowing or cuts or mixture thereof. Quarter of a trillion on that one policy alone. 2. Variable one. Energy prices can go down, yes, but also up, it’s a very fluid situation in supply and demand over this coming period - but at which point do energy companies need to commit to buying it in advance, so commit to passing on THAT price to both customers AND onto a government commitment to bucking the market? 3. Variable two. If global prices do come down, to what degree is the saving on the quarter of a trillion eaten into or obliterated by the more expensive borrowing costs? Out of these two variable’s, borrowing costs for this policy look certain to remain high now, the greater doubt is if energy prices will come down and stay down isn’t it?
You really think that whole £200bn comes down to £20bn? 🥹 We all know what’s really behind “but the bill freeze looks like turning out much cheaper because gas prices are coming down” argument we get spun from Tory’s on TV and on PB - they privately hate this lumbering Labour policy Tory party has adopted, they hate the ENORMOUS amount of borrowing maxing out UKs credit limit, and the regressive unConservative way the money is spewed out in indiscriminate handouts.
But. They are only fooling themselves spinning that comfort blanket, because, yes, there are variables, but the variables are very much against them.
Don’t be one of them.
There is no defence to this insane policy, Truss has been hiding behind all week.
I would agree we don't know what this policy is going to cost and I would agree that there are significant risks on the upside but there is also some reason for hope on the low side.
The government have committed to the average house bill being no more than £2500 a year. At the moment the price of gas futures are 263p/therm. It has been over 700p and has averaged around 400p of late. The cost of the UK subsidy is directly relational to that price against the price that fixes the £2500 pa average. I have been unable to work out exactly what that is because there are quite a number of other variables. Energy companies are bumping up their fixed charges as well. My best guess is that £2500 per household is going be equivalent to something like 200p/therm, roughly twice what it was last winter.
But I am not wrong is saying that there is a chance that the cost of the scheme will prove to be much lower than the worst estimates. It could also be higher of course. If it stays somewhere near our current price or goes even lower then the cost of the scheme will be less. If it goes back up again we are in trouble, no doubt about it.
Edit, and btw the OBR will have no better idea than the rest of us, it is simply unknowable.
You telling us It’s unknowable wasn’t the impression I got when you reduced it from £200bn to £20bn to spark my reply. 🙂
We know enough overall price can’t come down that much. Because the bit you seem to be avoiding is commodity price drop is to some extent offset by borrowing cost increase - goes back to the unknowable being very guessable in that the borrowing cost won’t be based on “maybe the commodity price drops and stays at x price”, who lends money on that basis?
You accept the part of the equation, political and economic, it is not necessary to provide help in this way, there other options such as sliding scale to target help where needed, not wasted where not needed, and virtually pays for itself?
I believe most UK government borrowing is fixed rate. So the increase only kicks in as new debt is issued.
Interesting the current (March) forecast it from debt interest this year to be c £83bn but to *fall* to £47bn next year… a cut in public spending baked in
If you listened to what the mini budget said - the Energy Price Freeze (a quarter of a trillion pounds) will be paid for by new borrowing, no new taxes no new cuts.
If you listed to what Liz Truss said Wednesday, public spending overall total will not show any cuts under her, simply because the quarter of a trillion Energy Price Freeze is being added to the public spending total.
What I am arguing in this thread, we don’t have to fund a quarter of a trillion pound scheme when other realistic options are available better targeted and virtually paying for themselves, I’m also arguing against those saying commodity price coming down proves the end bill will definitely be cheaper, because even with cuts even with more tax, this scheme will always need a huge amount of new borrowing at the new higher borrowing rates.
Correct me where wrong.
But I am now adding a third facet to my argument - anyone who claims Kwarteng and Truss mini budget crashed the markets I am calling an idiot peddling a myth. And I can prove it. That spiking gilt market graph they use over and over in media, expand it to see the previous 12 months and see the trajectory is up up up long before Truss got anywhere near number 10 - my argument is the budget exacerbated an already underlying problem. Anyone want to own the claim if the mini budget is reversed, annulled, reset, the trajectory on the borrowings chart graph would be down when it hasn’t been all year?
I’m arguing anyone who peddles Labour Party lies that Kwarteng and Truss mini budget crashed the markets I am calling an idiot peddling a myth, and sure I can win this argument.
I’ve been drinking all afternoon, don’t anyone want to take me on?
You're probably sleeping it off right now, but just in case, I will!
You and @Luckyguy1983 are making a similar argument, and its nonsense.
You're arguing two different things. The first is a straw man, and obviously false: "Anyone want to own the claim if the mini budget is reversed, annulled, reset, the trajectory on the borrowings chart graph would be down when it hasn’t been all year?" Nah, no thanks, the economy was already getting worse before the Trustterf*ck.
The second argument obviously doesn't follow: "I’m arguing anyone who peddles Labour Party lies that Kwarteng and Truss mini budget crashed the markets I am calling an idiot peddling a myth, and sure I can win this argument." Nah you can't. The markets were already pretty unhappy, they dropped a Trussterbomb in the middle of it. They bear full responsibility for moving the markets from 'err...we don't really like this
If I was to say, sorry about that clusterbomb I dropped last week, I'll just clean up all the shrapnel from my clusterbomb and pretend it never happened, the maimed children might have something to say about it.
Lucky for you, I’m still wide awake and drinking. 😵💫
Your post is just spin - you actually agree with my central point, that I’m right because you have to, but saying I’m wrong all over the place.
If Labour had held a budget the same day, without the tax cutting, I’m arguing what you call a Trusster fuck would still have happened. It would be a Starmerfuck. Because the fundamentals in the economy, the maxxed out credit card, cannot handle the quarter of a trillion extra for Energy hand outs, not simply the fundamental maths of it making the loan/borrowing risk - the markets don’t see a need for us to use this particular scheme. So when you break it down, The gilty graph has been on upward trajectory all year - fact if the mini budget is completely reversed the gilty trajectory will still be an upward trajectory, not downward - fact thus proving conclusively the idea Truss Kwasi budget crashed the economy is a myth, a myth peddled by Labour and their friends in the media and also mouthed by people who can’t think for themselves, the aim being to create a polling crash - because with just what the markets are doing without a polling crash, Kwarteng would still be there. Fact.
What we actually need to hear from Labour if they think they can form a government on Monday morning - why is the borrowing cost on an upward trajectory all year, long before the mini budget came along, and what policy do they have to put it on downward trajectory?
Hint. The answer is Labour are clueless on this, as Starmer agreed with Truss quarter of a billion of unnecessary further borrowing in the trap he fell into in last weeks PMQs.
and that I am without doubt winning this argument.
OT. Just listened to Lisa Nandy being interviewed in depth by Nick Robinson. I have to say she's a very impressive person and politician and not at all belonging in the box I'd put her in with Rayner and Long Bailey. An object lesson in not judging someone by the number of letters they drop. On the basis of that interview I reckon she'd make a formidable leader.
Quite a few of us voted for her in 2020.
Nice that you have realised that not all northerners are thick.
Nandy is a complete lightweight, had she been leading Labour not Starmer I doubt Labour would now be 25% ahead in the polls
She's actually anything but. You're as guilty as I am in rushing to judgements without the facts. She's well educated bright and has had a distinguished career in public service. Knowing you to be a snob you might also be impressed that her Grandfather was a Lord. Furthermore she's a Mancunian and it's common knowledge that most of the brightest and most creative originate in Manchester
I know this isn't really important. But in all the zoom calls with politicians during lockdown I thought Lisa Nandy had the nicest room.
The account 'Bookcase credibility' judging public figures' backdrops during lockdown was a hoot, shame it had to naturally peter out.
I wonder what they'd make of me - three bookcases, one with history, one with history and theology, and one with music.
That depends - are you a colour coordinator when it comes to books?
No. Strictly by subject, except for the oversize ones which have to be on particular shelves.
i bet that frustrates you that the shelf is not quite big enough!
@elonmusk The hell with it … even though Starlink is still losing money & other companies are getting billions of taxpayer $, we’ll just keep funding Ukraine govt for free
Either he's drunk, or Biden has read parts of his CIA file he doesn't want making public to him.
Puts the Ukrainian government in a bit of a fix too. They've spent days slagging him off and now they have to grovel in gratitude!
No they don't. Biden has their back, and he has the legal authority - actual, not pretend like his predecessor - to drop the shithammer on Muskmelon (that's what his head looks like - apologies to actual muskmelons!)
Fox hunting is a manifestation of extreme arrogance that perhaps comes with years of being the feudal lords and ladies of the manor as though they think they have a right to be cruel and not care because nobody will stop them . Go back a couple of hundred years and the same thing applied to the aristocracy owning slaves . I have no great wish for the state to ever intervene in private affairs but do think power (whether state or feudal ) brings extreme arrogance over time and leads to things like this.Its actually no different to communism where extreme power in the hands of a few or one person leads to Stalin purges and North Korea.Its why power shoudl be spread far and wide and look to be diluted constantly
I hadn't previously recognised what an utter jerk you are, thanks for clarifying. I have got lots of money, mainly thanks to some "cotton merchant" hur hur ancestors. I feel terrible about it. Genuinely. But this has zero to do with foxhunting. Here's a clue: in the days of foxhunting, I used to hunt with my cleaner and with someone who was on the tills in Tescos. When I shoot grouse and pheasant, I do not find people like that next to me.
OT. Just listened to Lisa Nandy being interviewed in depth by Nick Robinson. I have to say she's a very impressive person and politician and not at all belonging in the box I'd put her in with Rayner and Long Bailey. An object lesson in not judging someone by the number of letters they drop. On the basis of that interview I reckon she'd make a formidable leader.
Quite a few of us voted for her in 2020.
Nice that you have realised that not all northerners are thick.
Nandy is a complete lightweight, had she been leading Labour not Starmer I doubt Labour would now be 25% ahead in the polls
She's actually anything but. You're as guilty as I am in rushing to judgements without the facts. She's well educated bright and has had a distinguished career in public service. Knowing you to be a snob you might also be impressed that her Grandfather was a Lord. Furthermore she's a Mancunian and it's common knowledge that most of the brightest and most creative originate in Manchester
I know this isn't really important. But in all the zoom calls with politicians during lockdown I thought Lisa Nandy had the nicest room.
The account 'Bookcase credibility' judging public figures' backdrops during lockdown was a hoot, shame it had to naturally peter out.
I wonder what they'd make of me - three bookcases, one with history, one with history and theology, and one with music.
That depends - are you a colour coordinator when it comes to books?
Now that is weird.
I was on a work Teams call the other day and someone had a shelf of red books and a shelf of blue books.
Spectral filing.
I do have some number of penguin books that go together in their orange glory, but for the most part it is just by subject (history chronological, as much as can be managed), with fiction alphabetical by author.
OT. Just listened to Lisa Nandy being interviewed in depth by Nick Robinson. I have to say she's a very impressive person and politician and not at all belonging in the box I'd put her in with Rayner and Long Bailey. An object lesson in not judging someone by the number of letters they drop. On the basis of that interview I reckon she'd make a formidable leader.
Quite a few of us voted for her in 2020.
Nice that you have realised that not all northerners are thick.
Nandy is a complete lightweight, had she been leading Labour not Starmer I doubt Labour would now be 25% ahead in the polls
She's actually anything but. You're as guilty as I am in rushing to judgements without the facts. She's well educated bright and has had a distinguished career in public service. Knowing you to be a snob you might also be impressed that her Grandfather was a Lord. Furthermore she's a Mancunian and it's common knowledge that most of the brightest and most creative originate in Manchester
I know this isn't really important. But in all the zoom calls with politicians during lockdown I thought Lisa Nandy had the nicest room.
The account 'Bookcase credibility' judging public figures' backdrops during lockdown was a hoot, shame it had to naturally peter out.
I wonder what they'd make of me - three bookcases, one with history, one with history and theology, and one with music.
that sounds like a nice collection - may i ask if you specialise within the areas you mention?
As a teacher it's difficult to specialise too far. However, you would find particular sections on Wars of the Roses, Russia, the Holocaust, modern British politics, New Testament Studies and twentieth century British organ music.
Jealous and frankly a lot more high brow than my book collection - My sections are gambling , sport (with a slant to golf as I worked in golf for many years) , London, politics (of course) , British History ,Rough guides ,cinema and at the risk of sounding like sunil prasiman , Railways.
I do have a love of all things Richard the third though so interested in your War of the Roses collection
I've got a section on railways, but there isn't room for it in the study so it's in another room. Mostly labour relations on them.
OT. Just listened to Lisa Nandy being interviewed in depth by Nick Robinson. I have to say she's a very impressive person and politician and not at all belonging in the box I'd put her in with Rayner and Long Bailey. An object lesson in not judging someone by the number of letters they drop. On the basis of that interview I reckon she'd make a formidable leader.
Quite a few of us voted for her in 2020.
Nice that you have realised that not all northerners are thick.
Nandy is a complete lightweight, had she been leading Labour not Starmer I doubt Labour would now be 25% ahead in the polls
She's actually anything but. You're as guilty as I am in rushing to judgements without the facts. She's well educated bright and has had a distinguished career in public service. Knowing you to be a snob you might also be impressed that her Grandfather was a Lord. Furthermore she's a Mancunian and it's common knowledge that most of the brightest and most creative originate in Manchester
I know this isn't really important. But in all the zoom calls with politicians during lockdown I thought Lisa Nandy had the nicest room.
The account 'Bookcase credibility' judging public figures' backdrops during lockdown was a hoot, shame it had to naturally peter out.
I wonder what they'd make of me - three bookcases, one with history, one with history and theology, and one with music.
That depends - are you a colour coordinator when it comes to books?
No. Strictly by subject, except for the oversize ones which have to be on particular shelves.
i bet that frustrates you that the shelf is not quite big enough!
Fox hunting is a manifestation of extreme arrogance that perhaps comes with years of being the feudal lords and ladies of the manor as though they think they have a right to be cruel and not care because nobody will stop them . Go back a couple of hundred years and the same thing applied to the aristocracy owning slaves . I have no great wish for the state to ever intervene in private affairs but do think power (whether state or feudal ) brings extreme arrogance over time and leads to things like this.Its actually no different to communism where extreme power in the hands of a few or one person leads to Stalin purges and North Korea.Its why power shoudl be spread far and wide and look to be diluted constantly
I hadn't previously recognised what an utter jerk you are, thanks for clarifying. I have got lots of money, mainly thanks to some "cotton merchant" hur hur ancestors. I feel terrible about it. Genuinely. But this has zero to do with foxhunting. Here's a clue: in the days of foxhunting, I used to hunt with my cleaner and with someone who was on the tills in Tescos. When I shoot grouse and pheasant, I do not find people like that next to me.
Hunt was 48 on BF for next leader yesterday lunchtime when I bet on him.
Now 4.8
Has an MP ever come in faster on the betting?
Given Hunt was eliminated in the first MPs round of voting in the leadership contest and polled worse than Sunak with members let alone Truss or Badenoch, I fail to see how he gets it. Chancellor is probably the highest post he is going to have
Reflecting on yesterday's events - let's be fair, Kwarteng isn't the first Chancellor to be sacked or "asked to stand aside" to use the euphemism in recent times. We've had Sunak, Lawson and Lamont to name but three.
The one thing the change of Chancellor (voluntary or otherwise) is supposed to do is demonstrate the authority of the Prime Minister (primus inter pares) and it strengthens the notion of that authority to be seen to be able to dismiss someone as senior as the Chancellor.
Indeed, go back to the "Night of the Long Knives" and the dismissal of Thorneycroft, Birch and Powell by Harold MacMillan in 1958 (could one argue they were the first real Thatcherites?) and you see how a "little local difficulty" can build a Prime Minister's authority.
Yet the more I look at the circumstances of Kwarteng's resignation the more I see not a confirmation of Prime Ministerial authority but a confirmation of Prime Ministerial weakness. This isn't Blair giving Brown a free hand on the economy - this was a Prime Minister and Chancellor "in lockstep" so we were told.
An ill-timed and poorly communicated policy change which badly misread the public mood and the market reaction has claimed the carer of its creator (so we are to believe). Pace MacMillan, Truss has taken a axe to the "pro-growthers" ad cleared them out from the stables.
I can only assume Hunt has exacted a heavy price from Truss for taking this on - Campbell may be right to a point but Truss still has plenty of allies in Cabinet who can either defend her or join in the feeding frenzy.
However, to paraphrase Oscar Wilde, "to lose one Prime Minister may be regarded as misfortune, to lose two might be considered careless". Will enough people want a careless party in charge to allow the Conservatives another term in office?
Off top my head, Sunak not sacked and knight of Long Knives wasn’t 58, it was sixties when Super Mac in trouble?
Correct . Sunak resigned - and the Night of the Long Knives was Summer 1962 when Selwyn Lloyd was dismissed.
Yes.
I recall he made 48 before being turned inside out and edging to gully. And so it started, Knight of long Nightlife’s, or something 34 years before I was born.
The gruesome phrase, so inappropriate on anniversary of Sir David’s death, I presume is a Shakespeare reference?
No, blackshirts v borownshirts in 1934 and then macmillan 1962.
I had a memory that it originated with Native Americans and on checking so it did (long knives=cavalry sabres). No doubt there was some slaughter of a village that took place on the night of.
Fox hunting is a manifestation of extreme arrogance that perhaps comes with years of being the feudal lords and ladies of the manor as though they think they have a right to be cruel and not care because nobody will stop them . Go back a couple of hundred years and the same thing applied to the aristocracy owning slaves . I have no great wish for the state to ever intervene in private affairs but do think power (whether state or feudal ) brings extreme arrogance over time and leads to things like this.Its actually no different to communism where extreme power in the hands of a few or one person leads to Stalin purges and North Korea.Its why power shoudl be spread far and wide and look to be diluted constantly
I hadn't previously recognised what an utter jerk you are, thanks for clarifying. I have got lots of money, mainly thanks to some "cotton merchant" hur hur ancestors. I feel terrible about it. Genuinely. But this has zero to do with foxhunting. Here's a clue: in the days of foxhunting, I used to hunt with my cleaner and with someone who was on the tills in Tescos. When I shoot grouse and pheasant, I do not find people like that next to me.
I'm confused, does the class of people involved matter or not? From your earlier posts I assumed not, but this one seems to be implying the people involved in pheasant shooting is as big a problem as the shooting itself.
Lots of news on the twitters this evening: - France to start training of Ukrainian soldiers. - Prison for political prisoners in Tehran on fire. - Possibly 16 Russian soldiers shot by other Russian soldiers at a training ground in Belgorod Oblast. - China renewing its Travel Alert telling its citizens to leave Ukraine (have they been tipped off to something?)
On Fox hunting I remain deeply skeptical that if foxes are the menace that need to be dealt with (I see no reason not to defer to farmers on that point), that putting on fancy dress and getting the local amateurs to amble about is the most efficient and effective method of dealing with them, but I don't care enough to look into the matter as they insist it is indeed the most effective way.
Hunting doesn't aim to rid the world of every fox. It is a typically British compromise. It used to kill enough.
Now foxes are shot and gassed and gamekeepers of large and not so large estates will tell you how there are none to be found on their land.
They are a designated pest. And killed as such by many. But there are unlikely to be adorable documentaries on killing them on the BBC as there have been for example on Sealyhams killing rats.
Hunt has almost certainly said enough to mollify the markets. But: 1. He’s done it by essentially reversing the entire Truss leadership pitch to the Conservative Party. 2. This is going to be staggeringly unpopular with the public. 3. Delivering this agenda is going to be tough.
Hunt was 48 on BF for next leader yesterday lunchtime when I bet on him.
Now 4.8
Has an MP ever come in faster on the betting?
Given Hunt was eliminated in the first MPs round of voting in the leadership contest and polled worse than Sunak with members let alone Truss or Badenoch, I fail to see how he gets it. Chancellor is probably the highest post he is going to have
That he was out so early ironically makes him more likely a compromise candidate for me, in seeking to secure a coronation. He didn't get involved in the argy bargy of the debates.
Contrarily, whilst people might want to avoid the members voting this time, picking the guy they most definitely rejected, would make crowning Sunak quite the provocation to them.
Fox hunting is a manifestation of extreme arrogance that perhaps comes with years of being the feudal lords and ladies of the manor as though they think they have a right to be cruel and not care because nobody will stop them . Go back a couple of hundred years and the same thing applied to the aristocracy owning slaves . I have no great wish for the state to ever intervene in private affairs but do think power (whether state or feudal ) brings extreme arrogance over time and leads to things like this.Its actually no different to communism where extreme power in the hands of a few or one person leads to Stalin purges and North Korea.Its why power shoudl be spread far and wide and look to be diluted constantly
I hadn't previously recognised what an utter jerk you are, thanks for clarifying. I have got lots of money, mainly thanks to some "cotton merchant" hur hur ancestors. I feel terrible about it. Genuinely. But this has zero to do with foxhunting. Here's a clue: in the days of foxhunting, I used to hunt with my cleaner and with someone who was on the tills in Tescos. When I shoot grouse and pheasant, I do not find people like that next to me.
I'm confused, does the class of people involved matter or not? From your earlier posts I assumed not, but this one seems to be implying the people involved in pheasant shooting is as big a problem as the shooting itself.
Fox hunting is a manifestation of extreme arrogance that perhaps comes with years of being the feudal lords and ladies of the manor as though they think they have a right to be cruel and not care because nobody will stop them . Go back a couple of hundred years and the same thing applied to the aristocracy owning slaves . I have no great wish for the state to ever intervene in private affairs but do think power (whether state or feudal ) brings extreme arrogance over time and leads to things like this.Its actually no different to communism where extreme power in the hands of a few or one person leads to Stalin purges and North Korea.Its why power shoudl be spread far and wide and look to be diluted constantly
I hadn't previously recognised what an utter jerk you are, thanks for clarifying. I have got lots of money, mainly thanks to some "cotton merchant" hur hur ancestors. I feel terrible about it. Genuinely. But this has zero to do with foxhunting. Here's a clue: in the days of foxhunting, I used to hunt with my cleaner and with someone who was on the tills in Tescos. When I shoot grouse and pheasant, I do not find people like that next to me.
"I used to hunt with my cleaner" hahaha
I am prepared to bet you £100,000 at evens that that is true.
Fox hunting is a manifestation of extreme arrogance that perhaps comes with years of being the feudal lords and ladies of the manor as though they think they have a right to be cruel and not care because nobody will stop them . Go back a couple of hundred years and the same thing applied to the aristocracy owning slaves . I have no great wish for the state to ever intervene in private affairs but do think power (whether state or feudal ) brings extreme arrogance over time and leads to things like this.Its actually no different to communism where extreme power in the hands of a few or one person leads to Stalin purges and North Korea.Its why power shoudl be spread far and wide and look to be diluted constantly
I hadn't previously recognised what an utter jerk you are, thanks for clarifying. I have got lots of money, mainly thanks to some "cotton merchant" hur hur ancestors. I feel terrible about it. Genuinely. But this has zero to do with foxhunting. Here's a clue: in the days of foxhunting, I used to hunt with my cleaner and with someone who was on the tills in Tescos. When I shoot grouse and pheasant, I do not find people like that next to me.
"I used to hunt with my cleaner" hahaha
Venture out with a hunt and you will find dukes and dustmen. Literally dukes and dustmen.
Or are you making fun of someone because they have a cleaner?
Reflecting on yesterday's events - let's be fair, Kwarteng isn't the first Chancellor to be sacked or "asked to stand aside" to use the euphemism in recent times. We've had Sunak, Lawson and Lamont to name but three.
The one thing the change of Chancellor (voluntary or otherwise) is supposed to do is demonstrate the authority of the Prime Minister (primus inter pares) and it strengthens the notion of that authority to be seen to be able to dismiss someone as senior as the Chancellor.
Indeed, go back to the "Night of the Long Knives" and the dismissal of Thorneycroft, Birch and Powell by Harold MacMillan in 1958 (could one argue they were the first real Thatcherites?) and you see how a "little local difficulty" can build a Prime Minister's authority.
Yet the more I look at the circumstances of Kwarteng's resignation the more I see not a confirmation of Prime Ministerial authority but a confirmation of Prime Ministerial weakness. This isn't Blair giving Brown a free hand on the economy - this was a Prime Minister and Chancellor "in lockstep" so we were told.
An ill-timed and poorly communicated policy change which badly misread the public mood and the market reaction has claimed the carer of its creator (so we are to believe). Pace MacMillan, Truss has taken a axe to the "pro-growthers" ad cleared them out from the stables.
I can only assume Hunt has exacted a heavy price from Truss for taking this on - Campbell may be right to a point but Truss still has plenty of allies in Cabinet who can either defend her or join in the feeding frenzy.
However, to paraphrase Oscar Wilde, "to lose one Prime Minister may be regarded as misfortune, to lose two might be considered careless". Will enough people want a careless party in charge to allow the Conservatives another term in office?
Off top my head, Sunak not sacked and knight of Long Knives wasn’t 58, it was sixties when Super Mac in trouble?
Correct . Sunak resigned - and the Night of the Long Knives was Summer 1962 when Selwyn Lloyd was dismissed.
Yes.
I recall he made 48 before being turned inside out and edging to gully. And so it started, Knight of long Nightlife’s, or something 34 years before I was born.
The gruesome phrase, so inappropriate on anniversary of Sir David’s death, I presume is a Shakespeare reference?
No, blackshirts v borownshirts in 1934 and then macmillan 1962.
I had a memory that it originated with Native Americans and on checking so it did (long knives=cavalry sabres). No doubt there was some slaughter of a village that took place on the night of.
This is v interesting, you are the only PBer about whom I know which public school their father attended, and you resent your uncle (his brother?) too. My question is this: what have a hundred foxes a year got that 30 000 pheasants haven't? Think what you would say if a hunt bred 30,000 foxes a year and aimed to kill 25,000 of them. If you think birds are in some way inferior to mammals google BF Skinner. Why the complete and utter silence on this topic? Except that you've fucked them toffs on horses who remind you of your dad, so job done?
No, we don't know each other and you're misreading me. I was hugely fond of both my father and my uncle - disagreement and affection can coexist happily. FWIW my father also tried hunting but came to a different conclusion - yes, a great spectacle, he felt, but unacceptably cruel.
But of course I'm equally against breeding pheasants in order to shoot them, for just the same reason. It's whataboutery to justify the one by reference to the other.
I'm fairly relaxed about deer-stalking and the like where the animal is eaten afterwards - I underatand that the shooter makes a point of trying to get an instant kill and quite likely it's had a better life than on many farms. But doing it just for fun? No.
Yes, but the point is, commercial pheasant shooting is 10,000 times as cruel as fox hunting to animals generally and probably 5x as cruel to foxes. Bugger "whataboutery": you lot just do not give a toss, because you are and were after an easy scalp. Just on the numbers, pheasant shooting is literally 4 orders of magnitude as bad as fox hunting. We don't hear a squeak from you. Whatever your motivation is, it has zero or negative correlation with compassion for animals.
You seem oddly determined to dismiss the motives of people who disagree with you - you think it's about class prejudice, and you've conjured up some sort of non-existent family feud in my case. Still, we've aired it enough, so I'm going to leave the discussion there
Hunt has almost certainly said enough to mollify the markets. But: 1. He’s done it by essentially reversing the entire Truss leadership pitch to the Conservative Party. 2. This is going to be staggeringly unpopular with the public. 3. Delivering this agenda is going to be tough.
The previous agenda failing was also going to be staggeringly unpopular with the public. This way it might be unpopular but not lead to total crisis, in which case they might simply lose rather than be hammered.
This is v interesting, you are the only PBer about whom I know which public school their father attended, and you resent your uncle (his brother?) too. My question is this: what have a hundred foxes a year got that 30 000 pheasants haven't? Think what you would say if a hunt bred 30,000 foxes a year and aimed to kill 25,000 of them. If you think birds are in some way inferior to mammals google BF Skinner. Why the complete and utter silence on this topic? Except that you've fucked them toffs on horses who remind you of your dad, so job done?
No, we don't know each other and you're misreading me. I was hugely fond of both my father and my uncle - disagreement and affection can coexist happily. FWIW my father also tried hunting but came to a different conclusion - yes, a great spectacle, he felt, but unacceptably cruel.
But of course I'm equally against breeding pheasants in order to shoot them, for just the same reason. It's whataboutery to justify the one by reference to the other.
I'm fairly relaxed about deer-stalking and the like where the animal is eaten afterwards - I underatand that the shooter makes a point of trying to get an instant kill and quite likely it's had a better life than on many farms. But doing it just for fun? No.
Yes, but the point is, commercial pheasant shooting is 10,000 times as cruel as fox hunting to animals generally and probably 5x as cruel to foxes. Bugger "whataboutery": you lot just do not give a toss, because you are and were after an easy scalp. Just on the numbers, pheasant shooting is literally 4 orders of magnitude as bad as fox hunting. We don't hear a squeak from you. Whatever your motivation is, it has zero or negative correlation with compassion for animals.
You seem oddly determined to dismiss the motives of people who disagree with you - you think it's about class prejudice, and you've conjured up some sort of non-existent family feud in my case. Still, we've aired it enough, so I'm going to leave the discussion there
As I said Nick, you as a principled person enlisted the help of the prejudiced masses. Like Brexit. Not my preferred way of doing politics but very effective.
Fox hunting is a manifestation of extreme arrogance that perhaps comes with years of being the feudal lords and ladies of the manor as though they think they have a right to be cruel and not care because nobody will stop them . Go back a couple of hundred years and the same thing applied to the aristocracy owning slaves . I have no great wish for the state to ever intervene in private affairs but do think power (whether state or feudal ) brings extreme arrogance over time and leads to things like this.Its actually no different to communism where extreme power in the hands of a few or one person leads to Stalin purges and North Korea.Its why power shoudl be spread far and wide and look to be diluted constantly
I hadn't previously recognised what an utter jerk you are, thanks for clarifying. I have got lots of money, mainly thanks to some "cotton merchant" hur hur ancestors. I feel terrible about it. Genuinely. But this has zero to do with foxhunting. Here's a clue: in the days of foxhunting, I used to hunt with my cleaner and with someone who was on the tills in Tescos. When I shoot grouse and pheasant, I do not find people like that next to me.
I'm confused, does the class of people involved matter or not? From your earlier posts I assumed not, but this one seems to be implying the people involved in pheasant shooting is as big a problem as the shooting itself.
What? He said fox hunting is about class. I said, it isn't, but other much more wildlife-unfriendly pursuits, actually are.
It is very much starting to look as though the Iranian government is facing the exact situation Louis XVI did on the 14th July 1789.
Police deciding to publicly rape a young woman has rather undermined their claims to moral authority and protecting chastity.
I do hope so. And I hope it doesn't take four years for them to share his fate either. It couldn't happen to a more deserving bunch of absolute depraved Massive Hunts.
Hunt has almost certainly said enough to mollify the markets. But: 1. He’s done it by essentially reversing the entire Truss leadership pitch to the Conservative Party. 2. This is going to be staggeringly unpopular with the public. 3. Delivering this agenda is going to be tough.
It will be tough, but he has the capital to spend and needs must so it will go through. Liz will be blamed for every bit of bad economic news this winter now. That's not a positive for the Tories in the short term, but gives the COE and (likely) a new PM a shield to beaver away over the next few months trying to fix things.
Reflecting on yesterday's events - let's be fair, Kwarteng isn't the first Chancellor to be sacked or "asked to stand aside" to use the euphemism in recent times. We've had Sunak, Lawson and Lamont to name but three.
The one thing the change of Chancellor (voluntary or otherwise) is supposed to do is demonstrate the authority of the Prime Minister (primus inter pares) and it strengthens the notion of that authority to be seen to be able to dismiss someone as senior as the Chancellor.
Indeed, go back to the "Night of the Long Knives" and the dismissal of Thorneycroft, Birch and Powell by Harold MacMillan in 1958 (could one argue they were the first real Thatcherites?) and you see how a "little local difficulty" can build a Prime Minister's authority.
Yet the more I look at the circumstances of Kwarteng's resignation the more I see not a confirmation of Prime Ministerial authority but a confirmation of Prime Ministerial weakness. This isn't Blair giving Brown a free hand on the economy - this was a Prime Minister and Chancellor "in lockstep" so we were told.
An ill-timed and poorly communicated policy change which badly misread the public mood and the market reaction has claimed the carer of its creator (so we are to believe). Pace MacMillan, Truss has taken a axe to the "pro-growthers" ad cleared them out from the stables.
I can only assume Hunt has exacted a heavy price from Truss for taking this on - Campbell may be right to a point but Truss still has plenty of allies in Cabinet who can either defend her or join in the feeding frenzy.
However, to paraphrase Oscar Wilde, "to lose one Prime Minister may be regarded as misfortune, to lose two might be considered careless". Will enough people want a careless party in charge to allow the Conservatives another term in office?
Off top my head, Sunak not sacked and knight of Long Knives wasn’t 58, it was sixties when Super Mac in trouble?
Correct . Sunak resigned - and the Night of the Long Knives was Summer 1962 when Selwyn Lloyd was dismissed.
Yes.
I recall he made 48 before being turned inside out and edging to gully. And so it started, Knight of long Nightlife’s, or something 34 years before I was born.
The gruesome phrase, so inappropriate on anniversary of Sir David’s death, I presume is a Shakespeare reference?
No, blackshirts v borownshirts in 1934 and then macmillan 1962.
I had a memory that it originated with Native Americans and on checking so it did (long knives=cavalry sabres). No doubt there was some slaughter of a village that took place on the night of.
Source, please?
Not specifically cavalry sabres but swords in general it seems.
Fox hunting is a manifestation of extreme arrogance that perhaps comes with years of being the feudal lords and ladies of the manor as though they think they have a right to be cruel and not care because nobody will stop them . Go back a couple of hundred years and the same thing applied to the aristocracy owning slaves . I have no great wish for the state to ever intervene in private affairs but do think power (whether state or feudal ) brings extreme arrogance over time and leads to things like this.Its actually no different to communism where extreme power in the hands of a few or one person leads to Stalin purges and North Korea.Its why power shoudl be spread far and wide and look to be diluted constantly
I hadn't previously recognised what an utter jerk you are, thanks for clarifying. I have got lots of money, mainly thanks to some "cotton merchant" hur hur ancestors. I feel terrible about it. Genuinely. But this has zero to do with foxhunting. Here's a clue: in the days of foxhunting, I used to hunt with my cleaner and with someone who was on the tills in Tescos. When I shoot grouse and pheasant, I do not find people like that next to me.
I'm confused, does the class of people involved matter or not? From your earlier posts I assumed not, but this one seems to be implying the people involved in pheasant shooting is as big a problem as the shooting itself.
What? He said fox hunting is about class. I said, it isn't, but other much more wildlife-unfriendly pursuits, actually are.
But do you think that matters, or is it just something to note alongside your objection to the pursuit itself?
There been a mass shooting at a Russian military base in Belgorod. The Russians are blaming it on a terrorist act carried out by citizens of a CIS state.
Fox hunting is a manifestation of extreme arrogance that perhaps comes with years of being the feudal lords and ladies of the manor as though they think they have a right to be cruel and not care because nobody will stop them . Go back a couple of hundred years and the same thing applied to the aristocracy owning slaves . I have no great wish for the state to ever intervene in private affairs but do think power (whether state or feudal ) brings extreme arrogance over time and leads to things like this.Its actually no different to communism where extreme power in the hands of a few or one person leads to Stalin purges and North Korea.Its why power shoudl be spread far and wide and look to be diluted constantly
I hadn't previously recognised what an utter jerk you are, thanks for clarifying. I have got lots of money, mainly thanks to some "cotton merchant" hur hur ancestors. I feel terrible about it. Genuinely. But this has zero to do with foxhunting. Here's a clue: in the days of foxhunting, I used to hunt with my cleaner and with someone who was on the tills in Tescos. When I shoot grouse and pheasant, I do not find people like that next to me.
"I used to hunt with my cleaner" hahaha
You're not singing any more.
Don't want to look as if I am bullying you with big number bets, so let's reduce it: I bet you £10,000 at evens that I have regularly been hunting on a horse with someone also on a horse who has regularly cleaned my house for cash.
Fox hunting is a manifestation of extreme arrogance that perhaps comes with years of being the feudal lords and ladies of the manor as though they think they have a right to be cruel and not care because nobody will stop them . Go back a couple of hundred years and the same thing applied to the aristocracy owning slaves . I have no great wish for the state to ever intervene in private affairs but do think power (whether state or feudal ) brings extreme arrogance over time and leads to things like this.Its actually no different to communism where extreme power in the hands of a few or one person leads to Stalin purges and North Korea.Its why power shoudl be spread far and wide and look to be diluted constantly
I hadn't previously recognised what an utter jerk you are, thanks for clarifying. I have got lots of money, mainly thanks to some "cotton merchant" hur hur ancestors. I feel terrible about it. Genuinely. But this has zero to do with foxhunting. Here's a clue: in the days of foxhunting, I used to hunt with my cleaner and with someone who was on the tills in Tescos. When I shoot grouse and pheasant, I do not find people like that next to me.
I'm confused, does the class of people involved matter or not? From your earlier posts I assumed not, but this one seems to be implying the people involved in pheasant shooting is as big a problem as the shooting itself.
Fox hunting is a manifestation of extreme arrogance that perhaps comes with years of being the feudal lords and ladies of the manor as though they think they have a right to be cruel and not care because nobody will stop them . Go back a couple of hundred years and the same thing applied to the aristocracy owning slaves . I have no great wish for the state to ever intervene in private affairs but do think power (whether state or feudal ) brings extreme arrogance over time and leads to things like this.Its actually no different to communism where extreme power in the hands of a few or one person leads to Stalin purges and North Korea.Its why power shoudl be spread far and wide and look to be diluted constantly
I hadn't previously recognised what an utter jerk you are, thanks for clarifying. I have got lots of money, mainly thanks to some "cotton merchant" hur hur ancestors. I feel terrible about it. Genuinely. But this has zero to do with foxhunting. Here's a clue: in the days of foxhunting, I used to hunt with my cleaner and with someone who was on the tills in Tescos. When I shoot grouse and pheasant, I do not find people like that next to me.
"I used to hunt with my cleaner" hahaha
I am prepared to bet you £100,000 at evens that that is true.
Hunt has almost certainly said enough to mollify the markets. But: 1. He’s done it by essentially reversing the entire Truss leadership pitch to the Conservative Party. 2. This is going to be staggeringly unpopular with the public. 3. Delivering this agenda is going to be tough.
The previous agenda failing was also going to be staggeringly unpopular with the public. This way it might be unpopular but not lead to total crisis, in which case they might simply lose rather than be hammered.
It seems like every possible policy is unpopular with the public.
Fox hunting is a manifestation of extreme arrogance that perhaps comes with years of being the feudal lords and ladies of the manor as though they think they have a right to be cruel and not care because nobody will stop them . Go back a couple of hundred years and the same thing applied to the aristocracy owning slaves . I have no great wish for the state to ever intervene in private affairs but do think power (whether state or feudal ) brings extreme arrogance over time and leads to things like this.Its actually no different to communism where extreme power in the hands of a few or one person leads to Stalin purges and North Korea.Its why power shoudl be spread far and wide and look to be diluted constantly
I hadn't previously recognised what an utter jerk you are, thanks for clarifying. I have got lots of money, mainly thanks to some "cotton merchant" hur hur ancestors. I feel terrible about it. Genuinely. But this has zero to do with foxhunting. Here's a clue: in the days of foxhunting, I used to hunt with my cleaner and with someone who was on the tills in Tescos. When I shoot grouse and pheasant, I do not find people like that next to me.
"I used to hunt with my cleaner" hahaha
You're not singing any more.
Don't want to look as if I am bullying you with big number bets, so let's reduce it: I bet you £10,000 at evens that I have regularly been hunting on a horse with someone also on a horse who has regularly cleaned my house for cash.
He doesn't doubt it at all. He was laughing at you because you have a cleaner.
In Seattle just past noon, it's a nice, bright early Fall day. EXCEPT for the fact that the air quality index = 153 which is in downright "unhealthy" for everybody category.
Actually, location of my humble abode currently has some of the BEST air in the city and vicinity. But it's been getting worse and worse all morning. With conditions NOT expected to improve significantly until Monday.
Worst part is, have zero desire to go outside at present. Worse than the COVID (here anyway) in that respect.
But, as Brendan Behan used to say (in his cups mostly), what cannot be cured must be endured.
It is very much starting to look as though the Iranian government is facing the exact situation Louis XVI did on the 14th July 1789.
Police deciding to publicly rape a young woman has rather undermined their claims to moral authority and protecting chastity.
Being a corrupt, hypocritcal, allegedly theocratic authoritarian state, using standard oppressive tactics to justify the dictatorial rule of a bunch of old men, I'm not sure their claims were ever very strong. But the people there know that better than I of course.
@elonmusk The hell with it … even though Starlink is still losing money & other companies are getting billions of taxpayer $, we’ll just keep funding Ukraine govt for free
This is v interesting, you are the only PBer about whom I know which public school their father attended, and you resent your uncle (his brother?) too. My question is this: what have a hundred foxes a year got that 30 000 pheasants haven't? Think what you would say if a hunt bred 30,000 foxes a year and aimed to kill 25,000 of them. If you think birds are in some way inferior to mammals google BF Skinner. Why the complete and utter silence on this topic? Except that you've fucked them toffs on horses who remind you of your dad, so job done?
No, we don't know each other and you're misreading me. I was hugely fond of both my father and my uncle - disagreement and affection can coexist happily. FWIW my father also tried hunting but came to a different conclusion - yes, a great spectacle, he felt, but unacceptably cruel.
But of course I'm equally against breeding pheasants in order to shoot them, for just the same reason. It's whataboutery to justify the one by reference to the other.
I'm fairly relaxed about deer-stalking and the like where the animal is eaten afterwards - I underatand that the shooter makes a point of trying to get an instant kill and quite likely it's had a better life than on many farms. But doing it just for fun? No.
Yes, but the point is, commercial pheasant shooting is 10,000 times as cruel as fox hunting to animals generally and probably 5x as cruel to foxes. Bugger "whataboutery": you lot just do not give a toss, because you are and were after an easy scalp. Just on the numbers, pheasant shooting is literally 4 orders of magnitude as bad as fox hunting. We don't hear a squeak from you. Whatever your motivation is, it has zero or negative correlation with compassion for animals.
You seem oddly determined to dismiss the motives of people who disagree with you - you think it's about class prejudice, and you've conjured up some sort of non-existent family feud in my case. Still, we've aired it enough, so I'm going to leave the discussion there
That's what I do with arguments I am losing, too. "There are protests" is a trillion miles away from "I put my heart and soul as a MP into the protests." And you have the argument back to front: it is the utter weakness of the substantive argument which compels me to look for ulterior motives.
It is very much starting to look as though the Iranian government is facing the exact situation Louis XVI did on the 14th July 1789.
Police deciding to publicly rape a young woman has rather undermined their claims to moral authority and protecting chastity.
Being a corrupt, hypocritcal, allegedly theocratic authoritarian state, using standard oppressive tactics to justify the dictatorial rule of a bunch of old men, I'm not sure their claims were ever very strong. But the people there know that better than I of course.
Whether they were strong or not is irrelevant. It's whether they convinced enough people to support them on that basis, particularly in the army and police.
Which it looks like they haven't any more...
There would be a certain delicious irony if the Islamic Republic were overthrown for being unIslamic, although heaven only knows what the replacements would be like.
Ok, we've established colour coding is of the devil, but what about size ordering? I'd like to put books of the same dimensions together, within each section, so they gently rise together, but I feel like it would probably be more trouble than it was worth.
In Seattle just past noon, it's a nice, bright early Fall day. EXCEPT for the fact that the air quality index = 153 which is in downright "unhealthy" for everybody category.
Actually, location of my humble abode currently has some of the BEST air in the city and vicinity. But it's been getting worse and worse all morning. With conditions NOT expected to improve significantly until Monday.
Worst part is, have zero desire to go outside at present. Worse than the COVID (here anyway) in that respect.
But, as Brendan Behan used to say (in his cups mostly), what cannot be cured must be endured.
Fox hunting is a manifestation of extreme arrogance that perhaps comes with years of being the feudal lords and ladies of the manor as though they think they have a right to be cruel and not care because nobody will stop them . Go back a couple of hundred years and the same thing applied to the aristocracy owning slaves . I have no great wish for the state to ever intervene in private affairs but do think power (whether state or feudal ) brings extreme arrogance over time and leads to things like this.Its actually no different to communism where extreme power in the hands of a few or one person leads to Stalin purges and North Korea.Its why power shoudl be spread far and wide and look to be diluted constantly
I hadn't previously recognised what an utter jerk you are, thanks for clarifying. I have got lots of money, mainly thanks to some "cotton merchant" hur hur ancestors. I feel terrible about it. Genuinely. But this has zero to do with foxhunting. Here's a clue: in the days of foxhunting, I used to hunt with my cleaner and with someone who was on the tills in Tescos. When I shoot grouse and pheasant, I do not find people like that next to me.
"I used to hunt with my cleaner" hahaha
Venture out with a hunt and you will find dukes and dustmen. Literally dukes and dustmen.
Or are you making fun of someone because they have a cleaner?
Fox hunting is a manifestation of extreme arrogance that perhaps comes with years of being the feudal lords and ladies of the manor as though they think they have a right to be cruel and not care because nobody will stop them . Go back a couple of hundred years and the same thing applied to the aristocracy owning slaves . I have no great wish for the state to ever intervene in private affairs but do think power (whether state or feudal ) brings extreme arrogance over time and leads to things like this.Its actually no different to communism where extreme power in the hands of a few or one person leads to Stalin purges and North Korea.Its why power shoudl be spread far and wide and look to be diluted constantly
I hadn't previously recognised what an utter jerk you are, thanks for clarifying. I have got lots of money, mainly thanks to some "cotton merchant" hur hur ancestors. I feel terrible about it. Genuinely. But this has zero to do with foxhunting. Here's a clue: in the days of foxhunting, I used to hunt with my cleaner and with someone who was on the tills in Tescos. When I shoot grouse and pheasant, I do not find people like that next to me.
"I used to hunt with my cleaner" hahaha
You're not singing any more.
Don't want to look as if I am bullying you with big number bets, so let's reduce it: I bet you £10,000 at evens that I have regularly been hunting on a horse with someone also on a horse who has regularly cleaned my house for cash.
He doesn't doubt it at all. He was laughing at you because you have a cleaner.
I thought it was funny because the general image people have of fox hunting is posh people chasing poor Mr Fox around with their gardeners/cleaners helping out. Not doing a great job at dispelling that.
Hunt was 48 on BF for next leader yesterday lunchtime when I bet on him.
Now 4.8
Has an MP ever come in faster on the betting?
Given Hunt was eliminated in the first MPs round of voting in the leadership contest and polled worse than Sunak with members let alone Truss or Badenoch, I fail to see how he gets it. Chancellor is probably the highest post he is going to have
That he was out so early ironically makes him more likely a compromise candidate for me, in seeking to secure a coronation. He didn't get involved in the argy bargy of the debates.
Contrarily, whilst people might want to avoid the members voting this time, picking the guy they most definitely rejected, would make crowning Sunak quite the provocation to them.
If there is a Tory leader Farage would be licking his lips over, it is Hunt.
Farage would return to lead RefUK in 5 minutes if Hunt took over.
@elonmusk The hell with it … even though Starlink is still losing money & other companies are getting billions of taxpayer $, we’ll just keep funding Ukraine govt for free
Fox hunting is a manifestation of extreme arrogance that perhaps comes with years of being the feudal lords and ladies of the manor as though they think they have a right to be cruel and not care because nobody will stop them . Go back a couple of hundred years and the same thing applied to the aristocracy owning slaves . I have no great wish for the state to ever intervene in private affairs but do think power (whether state or feudal ) brings extreme arrogance over time and leads to things like this.Its actually no different to communism where extreme power in the hands of a few or one person leads to Stalin purges and North Korea.Its why power shoudl be spread far and wide and look to be diluted constantly
I hadn't previously recognised what an utter jerk you are, thanks for clarifying. I have got lots of money, mainly thanks to some "cotton merchant" hur hur ancestors. I feel terrible about it. Genuinely. But this has zero to do with foxhunting. Here's a clue: in the days of foxhunting, I used to hunt with my cleaner and with someone who was on the tills in Tescos. When I shoot grouse and pheasant, I do not find people like that next to me.
"I used to hunt with my cleaner" hahaha
You're not singing any more.
Don't want to look as if I am bullying you with big number bets, so let's reduce it: I bet you £10,000 at evens that I have regularly been hunting on a horse with someone also on a horse who has regularly cleaned my house for cash.
He doesn't doubt it at all. He was laughing at you because you have a cleaner.
So the law of comparative advantage is too difficult for him.
Is there some sort of charity I can contribute to to make his life easier?
Hunt has almost certainly said enough to mollify the markets. But: 1. He’s done it by essentially reversing the entire Truss leadership pitch to the Conservative Party. 2. This is going to be staggeringly unpopular with the public. 3. Delivering this agenda is going to be tough.
The previous agenda failing was also going to be staggeringly unpopular with the public. This way it might be unpopular but not lead to total crisis, in which case they might simply lose rather than be hammered.
It seems like every possible policy is unpopular with the public.
Earlier today I made the point that voters generally get the sort of governments they deserve - ones which pretend difficult choices aren't necessary and everyone is a special case. A mythology daily drummed into them by the vast majority of the news hacks from Sky, BBC, etc, etc
On Fox hunting I remain deeply skeptical that if foxes are the menace that need to be dealt with (I see no reason not to defer to farmers on that point), that putting on fancy dress and getting the local amateurs to amble about is the most efficient and effective method of dealing with them, but I don't care enough to look into the matter as they insist it is indeed the most effective way.
Hunting doesn't aim to rid the world of every fox. It is a typically British compromise. It used to kill enough.
Now foxes are shot and gassed and gamekeepers of large and not so large estates will tell you how there are none to be found on their land.
They are a designated pest. And killed as such by many. But there are unlikely to be adorable documentaries on killing them on the BBC as there have been for example on Sealyhams killing rats.
Ain't life strange.
Jesus...how can you even begin to comment from a background of such ignorance on the matter. Fact 1: fox hunting never stopped...it's as prevalent now as it was pre-ban. Hunts continue to kill dozens of foxes each season. Fact 2: foxes are not being gassed...it's been illegal for decades and the penalties are draconian. Foxes are being shot just as they were shot pre-ban. Fact 3: go to any hunt now and there is no shortage of foxes. Fact 4: foxes are not and never have been "designated pests"
Fox hunting is a manifestation of extreme arrogance that perhaps comes with years of being the feudal lords and ladies of the manor as though they think they have a right to be cruel and not care because nobody will stop them . Go back a couple of hundred years and the same thing applied to the aristocracy owning slaves . I have no great wish for the state to ever intervene in private affairs but do think power (whether state or feudal ) brings extreme arrogance over time and leads to things like this.Its actually no different to communism where extreme power in the hands of a few or one person leads to Stalin purges and North Korea.Its why power shoudl be spread far and wide and look to be diluted constantly
I hadn't previously recognised what an utter jerk you are, thanks for clarifying. I have got lots of money, mainly thanks to some "cotton merchant" hur hur ancestors. I feel terrible about it. Genuinely. But this has zero to do with foxhunting. Here's a clue: in the days of foxhunting, I used to hunt with my cleaner and with someone who was on the tills in Tescos. When I shoot grouse and pheasant, I do not find people like that next to me.
"I used to hunt with my cleaner" hahaha
You're not singing any more.
Don't want to look as if I am bullying you with big number bets, so let's reduce it: I bet you £10,000 at evens that I have regularly been hunting on a horse with someone also on a horse who has regularly cleaned my house for cash.
He doesn't doubt it at all. He was laughing at you because you have a cleaner.
So the law of comparative advantage is too difficult for him.
Is there some sort of charity I can contribute to to make his life easier?
Reflecting on yesterday's events - let's be fair, Kwarteng isn't the first Chancellor to be sacked or "asked to stand aside" to use the euphemism in recent times. We've had Sunak, Lawson and Lamont to name but three.
The one thing the change of Chancellor (voluntary or otherwise) is supposed to do is demonstrate the authority of the Prime Minister (primus inter pares) and it strengthens the notion of that authority to be seen to be able to dismiss someone as senior as the Chancellor.
Indeed, go back to the "Night of the Long Knives" and the dismissal of Thorneycroft, Birch and Powell by Harold MacMillan in 1958 (could one argue they were the first real Thatcherites?) and you see how a "little local difficulty" can build a Prime Minister's authority.
Yet the more I look at the circumstances of Kwarteng's resignation the more I see not a confirmation of Prime Ministerial authority but a confirmation of Prime Ministerial weakness. This isn't Blair giving Brown a free hand on the economy - this was a Prime Minister and Chancellor "in lockstep" so we were told.
An ill-timed and poorly communicated policy change which badly misread the public mood and the market reaction has claimed the carer of its creator (so we are to believe). Pace MacMillan, Truss has taken a axe to the "pro-growthers" ad cleared them out from the stables.
I can only assume Hunt has exacted a heavy price from Truss for taking this on - Campbell may be right to a point but Truss still has plenty of allies in Cabinet who can either defend her or join in the feeding frenzy.
However, to paraphrase Oscar Wilde, "to lose one Prime Minister may be regarded as misfortune, to lose two might be considered careless". Will enough people want a careless party in charge to allow the Conservatives another term in office?
Off top my head, Sunak not sacked and knight of Long Knives wasn’t 58, it was sixties when Super Mac in trouble?
Correct . Sunak resigned - and the Night of the Long Knives was Summer 1962 when Selwyn Lloyd was dismissed.
Yes.
I recall he made 48 before being turned inside out and edging to gully. And so it started, Knight of long Nightlife’s, or something 34 years before I was born.
The gruesome phrase, so inappropriate on anniversary of Sir David’s death, I presume is a Shakespeare reference?
No, blackshirts v borownshirts in 1934 and then macmillan 1962.
I had a memory that it originated with Native Americans and on checking so it did (long knives=cavalry sabres). No doubt there was some slaughter of a village that took place on the night of.
Source, please?
Not specifically cavalry sabres but swords in general it seems.
Ok, we've established colour coding is of the devil, but what about size ordering? I'd like to put books of the same dimensions together, within each section, so they gently rise together, but I feel like it would probably be more trouble than it was worth.
Fair point. But still think members voting has been a bad thing.
Ridiculous to scapegoat Conservative members - at the most generous estimate, just 128 MPs voted for candidates offering a radically different economic strategy than Liz Truss. She was the chosen candidate of the previous PM and the Daily Mail.
In Seattle just past noon, it's a nice, bright early Fall day. EXCEPT for the fact that the air quality index = 153 which is in downright "unhealthy" for everybody category.
Actually, location of my humble abode currently has some of the BEST air in the city and vicinity. But it's been getting worse and worse all morning. With conditions NOT expected to improve significantly until Monday.
Worst part is, have zero desire to go outside at present. Worse than the COVID (here anyway) in that respect.
But, as Brendan Behan used to say (in his cups mostly), what cannot be cured must be endured.
Is Covid still a thing in Seattle?
As a mass emergency, no. As a continuing fact of life, yes. Friend of mine & his wife got it last week, another friend last month.
Hunt has almost certainly said enough to mollify the markets. But: 1. He’s done it by essentially reversing the entire Truss leadership pitch to the Conservative Party. 2. This is going to be staggeringly unpopular with the public. 3. Delivering this agenda is going to be tough.
The previous agenda failing was also going to be staggeringly unpopular with the public. This way it might be unpopular but not lead to total crisis, in which case they might simply lose rather than be hammered.
It seems like every possible policy is unpopular with the public.
Earlier today I made the point that voters generally get the sort of governments they deserve - ones which pretend difficult choices aren't necessary and everyone is a special case. A mythology daily drummed into them by the vast majority of the news hacks from Sky, BBC, etc, etc
Not helped by hyperfocusing on every tiny negative impact of any policy, when even in a good situation there will be someone who comes out worse or something that hasn't gone quite right.
Hunt was 48 on BF for next leader yesterday lunchtime when I bet on him.
Now 4.8
Has an MP ever come in faster on the betting?
Given Hunt was eliminated in the first MPs round of voting in the leadership contest and polled worse than Sunak with members let alone Truss or Badenoch, I fail to see how he gets it. Chancellor is probably the highest post he is going to have
That he was out so early ironically makes him more likely a compromise candidate for me, in seeking to secure a coronation. He didn't get involved in the argy bargy of the debates.
Contrarily, whilst people might want to avoid the members voting this time, picking the guy they most definitely rejected, would make crowning Sunak quite the provocation to them.
If there is a Tory leader Farage would be licking his lips over, it is Hunt.
Farage would return to lead RefUK in 5 minutes if Hunt took over.
Farage should just retire already. He's got his most important policy through, does he really want to spend his time setting up and running fractious parties to act as a pressure group on the Tories, rather than just be a pundit?
Ok, we've established colour coding is of the devil, but what about size ordering? I'd like to put books of the same dimensions together, within each section, so they gently rise together, but I feel like it would probably be more trouble than it was worth.
The Letters and Speeches of Oliver Cromwell must be a real page turner! Do you read a few pages out loud for the kids every night before bedtime?
Actually have a collection of OC's greatest hits (in old mass market paperback edition) must say it was heavy going.
Addendum - Also have same edition of The Stuart Parliaments.
Fair point. But still think members voting has been a bad thing.
Ridiculous to scapegoat Conservative members - at the most generous estimate, just 128 MPs voted for candidates offering a radically different economic strategy than Liz Truss. She was the chosen candidate of the previous PM and the Daily Mail.
Fox hunting is a manifestation of extreme arrogance that perhaps comes with years of being the feudal lords and ladies of the manor as though they think they have a right to be cruel and not care because nobody will stop them . Go back a couple of hundred years and the same thing applied to the aristocracy owning slaves . I have no great wish for the state to ever intervene in private affairs but do think power (whether state or feudal ) brings extreme arrogance over time and leads to things like this.Its actually no different to communism where extreme power in the hands of a few or one person leads to Stalin purges and North Korea.Its why power shoudl be spread far and wide and look to be diluted constantly
I hadn't previously recognised what an utter jerk you are, thanks for clarifying. I have got lots of money, mainly thanks to some "cotton merchant" hur hur ancestors. I feel terrible about it. Genuinely. But this has zero to do with foxhunting. Here's a clue: in the days of foxhunting, I used to hunt with my cleaner and with someone who was on the tills in Tescos. When I shoot grouse and pheasant, I do not find people like that next to me.
"I used to hunt with my cleaner" hahaha
You're not singing any more.
Don't want to look as if I am bullying you with big number bets, so let's reduce it: I bet you £10,000 at evens that I have regularly been hunting on a horse with someone also on a horse who has regularly cleaned my house for cash.
He doesn't doubt it at all. He was laughing at you because you have a cleaner.
So the law of comparative advantage is too difficult for him.
Is there some sort of charity I can contribute to to make his life easier?
Absolutely fucking cracking. A photo of a dewy eyed foxy woxy because that pulls in SO much more money than a pheasanty weasanty. Just like the Children in need thing has to downplay the extent to which it distributes money to foreign chidlren and darkies.
You are a poster child for brainless prejudice, you really are.
Ok, we've established colour coding is of the devil, but what about size ordering? I'd like to put books of the same dimensions together, within each section, so they gently rise together, but I feel like it would probably be more trouble than it was worth.
The Letters and Speeches of Oliver Cromwell must be a real page turner! Do you read a few pages out loud for the kids every night before bedtime?
Actually have a collection of OC's greatest hits (in old mass market paperback edition) must say it was heavy going.
Addendum - Also have same edition of The Stuart Parliaments.
Cromwell? boring?
I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be mistaken.
Comments
In other words, they've got the brute by the short hairs. Or thereabouts.
Prepare to sue the Spectator in about two weeks.
But of course I'm equally against breeding pheasants in order to shoot them, for just the same reason. It's whataboutery to justify the one by reference to the other.
I'm fairly relaxed about deer-stalking and the like where the animal is eaten afterwards - I underatand that the shooter makes a point of trying to get an instant kill and quite likely it's had a better life than on many farms. But doing it just for fun? No.
But thanks for your contribution.
As we all know, PB is must reading for a WIDE variety of movers and shakers!
All adults
Support 32%
Oppose 27%
Neither 21%
Labour
Support 54%
Oppose 12%
Neither 20%
Conservatives
Support 21%
Oppose 40%
Neither 28%
https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1581341044842471424?s=20&t=m1281K5xSWbAQu7Y8JYKyg
It was class driven and if you genuinely thought it was cruel you enlisted the help of a huge number of class warriors. Red meat, if you will excuse the phrase, for your party's prejudiced supporters.
As for your concern for bluebottles I am impressed. I have a fantastic zapper which I use. Forgive me.
Pretty much any change is likely to give them some boost. I think this whole episode has destroyed their chances of the next election (absent Labour implosion), but a respectable (as opposed to cataclysmic) loss is still to play for.
Puts the Ukrainian government in a bit of a fix too. They've spent days slagging him off and now they have to grovel in gratitude!
For my fiction bookcases it took me ages to add some bespoke holes across them all, which don't work great with the dowells unfortunately, in order that I could get all the shelves at the same heights, with sufficient space for regular hardbacks to be placed vertically.
But few of them openly admit it.
I was on a work Teams call the other day and someone had a shelf of red books and a shelf of blue books.
Spectral filing.
I do have a love of all things Richard the third though so interested in your War of the Roses collection
Your post is just spin - you actually agree with my central point, that I’m right because you have to, but saying I’m wrong all over the place.
If Labour had held a budget the same day, without the tax cutting, I’m arguing what you call a Trusster fuck would still have happened. It would be a Starmerfuck. Because the fundamentals in the economy, the maxxed out credit card, cannot handle the quarter of a trillion extra for Energy hand outs, not simply the fundamental maths of it making the loan/borrowing risk - the markets don’t see a need for us to use this particular scheme.
So when you break it down,
The gilty graph has been on upward trajectory all year - fact
if the mini budget is completely reversed the gilty trajectory will still be an upward trajectory, not downward - fact
thus proving conclusively the idea Truss Kwasi budget crashed the economy is a myth, a myth peddled by Labour and their friends in the media and also mouthed by people who can’t think for themselves, the aim being to create a polling crash - because with just what the markets are doing without a polling crash, Kwarteng would still be there. Fact.
What we actually need to hear from Labour if they think they can form a government on Monday morning - why is the borrowing cost on an upward trajectory all year, long before the mini budget came along, and what policy do they have to put it on downward trajectory?
Hint. The answer is Labour are clueless on this, as Starmer agreed with Truss quarter of a billion of unnecessary further borrowing in the trap he fell into in last weeks PMQs.
and that I am without doubt winning this argument.
Unfortunately I am going to have to move my “library”. It’s not really so compatible with Manhattan living.
Now 4.8
Has an MP ever come in faster on the betting?
But the key irony here is that this looks a lot like a branch of the Anti-Growth Coalition.
- France to start training of Ukrainian soldiers.
- Prison for political prisoners in Tehran on fire.
- Possibly 16 Russian soldiers shot by other Russian soldiers at a training ground in Belgorod Oblast.
- China renewing its Travel Alert telling its citizens to leave Ukraine (have they been tipped off to something?)
Now foxes are shot and gassed and gamekeepers of large and not so large estates will tell you how there are none to be found on their land.
They are a designated pest. And killed as such by many. But there are unlikely to be adorable documentaries on killing them on the BBC as there have been for example on Sealyhams killing rats.
Ain't life strange.
Duncan Weldon
@DuncanWeldon
Hunt has almost certainly said enough to mollify the markets. But:
1. He’s done it by essentially reversing the entire Truss leadership pitch to the Conservative Party.
2. This is going to be staggeringly unpopular with the public.
3. Delivering this agenda is going to be tough.
Contrarily, whilst people might want to avoid the members voting this time, picking the guy they most definitely rejected, would make crowning Sunak quite the provocation to them.
Deal or no deal?
Or are you making fun of someone because they have a cleaner?
You seem oddly determined to dismiss the motives of people who disagree with you - you think it's about class prejudice, and you've conjured up some sort of non-existent family feud in my case. Still, we've aired it enough, so I'm going to leave the discussion there
Police deciding to publicly rape a young woman has rather undermined their claims to moral authority and protecting chastity.
I do hope so. And I hope it doesn't take four years for them to share his fate either. It couldn't happen to a more deserving bunch of absolute depraved Massive Hunts.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_knives
Don't want to look as if I am bullying you with big number bets, so let's reduce it: I bet you £10,000 at evens that I have regularly been hunting on a horse with someone also on a horse who has regularly cleaned my house for cash.
In Seattle just past noon, it's a nice, bright early Fall day. EXCEPT for the fact that the air quality index = 153 which is in downright "unhealthy" for everybody category.
Actually, location of my humble abode currently has some of the BEST air in the city and vicinity. But it's been getting worse and worse all morning. With conditions NOT expected to improve significantly until Monday.
Worst part is, have zero desire to go outside at present. Worse than the COVID (here anyway) in that respect.
But, as Brendan Behan used to say (in his cups mostly), what cannot be cured must be endured.
Which it looks like they haven't any more...
There would be a certain delicious irony if the Islamic Republic were overthrown for being unIslamic, although heaven only knows what the replacements would be like.
Farage would return to lead RefUK in 5 minutes if Hunt took over.
Is there some sort of charity I can contribute to to make his life easier?
My own guess is, they were conjuring up the St Bartholomew's Day Massacre (with apologies to Barty). And also, maybe, the Sicilian Vespers.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Bartholomew's_Day_massacre
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sicilian_Vespers
Ridiculous to scapegoat Conservative members - at the most generous estimate, just 128 MPs voted for candidates offering a radically different economic strategy than Liz Truss. She was the chosen candidate of the previous PM and the Daily Mail.
https://twitter.com/stephenkb/status/1581257845340635138?cxt=HHwWhICgnb3o4PErAAAA
Actually have a collection of OC's greatest hits (in old mass market paperback edition) must say it was heavy going.
Addendum - Also have same edition of The Stuart Parliaments.
You are a poster child for brainless prejudice, you really are.
I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be mistaken.