Howdy, Stranger!

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

A LAB majority back as general election favourite – politicalbetting.com

1234689

Comments

  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,226
    kle4 said:

    If Russia has struck Poland then Poland absolutely has the right to Invoke Article 5 of NATO.

    Russia can always choose to stop striking at other countries and pull back to its own, internationally recognised borders.

    They probably have the right, but I doubt even now there is NATO support to go in fully on the basis of this. But reaction is surely required in this situation, so what could it be?
    What makes you think it’s a stray missile and not a deliberate provocation to test NATO’s resolve?
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,841
    kle4 said:

    If Russia has struck Poland then Poland absolutely has the right to Invoke Article 5 of NATO.

    Russia can always choose to stop striking at other countries and pull back to its own, internationally recognised borders.

    They probably have the right, but I doubt even now there is NATO support to go in fully on the basis of this. But reaction is surely required in this situation, so what could it be?
    NFZ over Ukraine, increased Black sea presence
  • stodgestodge Posts: 12,741

    algarkirk said:


    Council tax (is it still called that?) is exactly that - a tax on property. I have a really fabulous idea though, why not tax people instead, for the privilege of existing, calling it perhaps a Poll Tax. What could possibly......

    No its not, is a tax paid by residents in the Council, not the owners of the property.
    It's a bit of both really - property owners pay it but those living in the property become responsible for it if they are tenants. I suppose they could have insisted it was paid for by the owner who would then seek redress via the rent but that's not how it operates.

    It's a stupid tax because the valuations originally carried out in 1991 stand and the original eight bandings in no way reflect the range of values across the country. To change the former is one thing - to change the latter would mean updating all the software in every authority and you couldn't do that by April starting in mid November.

    The other problem is it's not a fair tax simply because the country isn't uniform - unlike income tax where it makes no difference if you earn £50k in Newham or Newcastle in terms of how much tax you pay, with Council Tax some authorities, such as Surrey, derive 70% of their income from it while poorer areas can't raise the sums and remain heavily reliant on Government largesse which in turn becomes politically motivated.
  • novanova Posts: 525
    Chris said:

    nova said:

    Chris said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "Thousands of older Londoners have called on Sadiq Khan to reinstate their free travel during the morning rush hour.

    The benefit – which is given to about 1.3m people over 60 – was suspended soon after the start of the pandemic in June 2020 for weekday journeys before 9am, primarily to ensure public transport was kept free for key workers.

    But the mayor is due to decide by the end of the year whether to retain the restriction on a permanent basis, which would generate about £15m to £18m in fares for cash-strapped Transport for London.

    The charity Age UK London presented a petition signed by more than 10,000 people, demanding the reinstatement of the benefit, to City Hall on Tuesday afternoon."

    https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/contactless-oyster-travel-over-60s-before-9am-city-hall-sadiq-khan-petition-tfl-age-uk-b1039803.html

    I don’t see why someone in their early 60s, who is still in work, should get subsidised travel.
    Who said anything about "still in work"? The post you were replying to indicates those not in work were penalised for the benefit of those in work.
    The article suggests that the largest group of pensioners that need to travel at peak times are those going to work.
    As it's behind a paywall I can't be bothered to going to the trouble to get access.

    But why would pensioners be going to work? Do you mean 'over 60s' when you say pensioners?
    Yes - the travel passes were for over 60s.

    And the article talks about which over 60s uses them before 9am, and the largest group identified was people going to work (in % terms marginally more were going to health appts, but obviously even pensioners go to work a lot more often than they go to the doctors!)
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,958

    kle4 said:

    If Russia has struck Poland then Poland absolutely has the right to Invoke Article 5 of NATO.

    Russia can always choose to stop striking at other countries and pull back to its own, internationally recognised borders.

    They probably have the right, but I doubt even now there is NATO support to go in fully on the basis of this. But reaction is surely required in this situation, so what could it be?
    NFZ over Ukraine, increased Black sea presence
    Long range HIMARS, bring the whole of Crimea in range.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    moonshine said:

    kle4 said:

    If Russia has struck Poland then Poland absolutely has the right to Invoke Article 5 of NATO.

    Russia can always choose to stop striking at other countries and pull back to its own, internationally recognised borders.

    They probably have the right, but I doubt even now there is NATO support to go in fully on the basis of this. But reaction is surely required in this situation, so what could it be?
    What makes you think it’s a stray missile and not a deliberate provocation to test NATO’s resolve?
    Well, I generally assume stupidity not malice, but admittedly that's not been the right approach in this war and the line between them is about a planck length at times.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,751

    dixiedean said:

    @WarMonitor3
    “Two stray rockets fell in the town of Przewodów in Poland on the border with Ukraine. They hit the grain dryers. Two people died.”


    https://twitter.com/WarMonitor3/status/1592581319758053376

    That's an attack on a NATO country is it not?
    No, it’s an accident. An accident is clearly not an attack. I mean, Russia should be more careful with its rockets, and of course they shouldn’t even be shooting them at Ukraine, but, no, don’t be silly, it’s not an attack on a NATO country.
    That may not be a good enough answer. One reason Lyndon Johnson never considered using nukes in North Vietnam and was very careful not to bomb too close to the Chinese border was precisely to avoid unintentionally hitting China, 'and before you know it I'll have World War III on my hands.'

    At the very least, Russia have been criminally negligent. At worst, they have committed an act of war in the hope that NATO will not respond. Madness, if so, but the Kremlin have shown no sign of sanity for at least the last eight years.

    However, I doubt if NATO would send nuclear weapons to Moscow. Much more likely they would offer to take over garrison duties in Ukraine, the Belarusian border etc, to free up Ukrainian troops to strike elsewhere.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,517

    If Russia has struck Poland then Poland absolutely has the right to Invoke Article 5 of NATO.

    (Snip)

    There will be (must?) be very specific rules and situations under which Article 5 can be invoked. I've no idea what they are, but I can imagine this sort of situation would *not* give them the right - at least until the attack can be proved deliberate.

    As someone elsewhere states: might this just have been an ill-timed grain powder explosion if it was a silo? (yes, that's unlikely, especially as a piccie shows something claiming to be part of a missile (*), and the fact there were allegedly two explosions).

    If they were Russian missiles, I expect Poland to react in a manner that does not invoke Art. 5. But I may be wrong...

    (*) I don't know if it is.
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 4,339
    edited November 2022
    Fuck ‘em. All diplomats gone tomorrow, NATO wide. Gloves off on donations to Ukraine. Aggressive NATO air defence widened into Ukraine border regions on the pretext we need to avoid future “accidents”.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,517

    kle4 said:

    If Russia has struck Poland then Poland absolutely has the right to Invoke Article 5 of NATO.

    Russia can always choose to stop striking at other countries and pull back to its own, internationally recognised borders.

    They probably have the right, but I doubt even now there is NATO support to go in fully on the basis of this. But reaction is surely required in this situation, so what could it be?
    NFZ over Ukraine, increased Black sea presence
    Long range HIMARS, bring the whole of Crimea in range.
    I'm surprised you're not calling for the Kerch Bridge to be taken down in such a manner as it makes the Sea of Azov into a tidal lagoon. ;)
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,751

    kle4 said:

    If Russia has struck Poland then Poland absolutely has the right to Invoke Article 5 of NATO.

    Russia can always choose to stop striking at other countries and pull back to its own, internationally recognised borders.

    They probably have the right, but I doubt even now there is NATO support to go in fully on the basis of this. But reaction is surely required in this situation, so what could it be?
    NFZ over Ukraine, increased Black sea presence
    As @Dura_Ace has consistently pointed out, a NFZ would require NATO to bomb targets inside Russia. That's WWIII in 48 hours. They wouldn't do it short of Russia using nukes.

    Can't see how they have a greater 'presence' in the Black Sea either given the restrictions on travel through the Bosporus.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,841

    kle4 said:

    If Russia has struck Poland then Poland absolutely has the right to Invoke Article 5 of NATO.

    Russia can always choose to stop striking at other countries and pull back to its own, internationally recognised borders.

    They probably have the right, but I doubt even now there is NATO support to go in fully on the basis of this. But reaction is surely required in this situation, so what could it be?
    NFZ over Ukraine, increased Black sea presence
    Long range HIMARS, bring the whole of Crimea in range.
    I think the West should insist a defeated Russia is completely denuked.
  • DJ41DJ41 Posts: 792
    edited November 2022
    biggles said:

    Fuck ‘em. All diplomats gone tomorrow, NATO wide. Gloves off on donations to Ukraine. Aggressive NATO air defence widened into Ukraine on the pretext we need to avoid future “accidents”.

    Just kill everyone. God will know his own.

    Lol.

    PS Close every single Russian's account in Savile Row too. And expel every single Russian citizen's son from every single Clarendon school. Deprive the enemy of fuel. He'll soon roll over.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392

    DJ41 said:

    dixiedean said:

    @WarMonitor3
    “Two stray rockets fell in the town of Przewodów in Poland on the border with Ukraine. They hit the grain dryers. Two people died.”


    https://twitter.com/WarMonitor3/status/1592581319758053376

    That's an attack on a NATO country is it not?
    No, it’s an accident. An accident is clearly not an attack. I mean, Russia should be more careful with its rockets, and of course they shouldn’t even be shooting them at Ukraine, but, no, don’t be silly, it’s not an attack on a NATO country.

    Just a coincidence they fell on the grain dryers, obviously.

    Russia was reckless as to the risk. Fire them in the general direction of Poland - and they face the consequences of those reckless actions. Would certainly speed things up if Poland treated it as an act of war.
    I don't know what happened but if it's thought that Russia may have launched rockets that hit Poland that's obviously f***ing serious.

    Speed things up? "God Save the King" playing as cricketers start a friendly match in Konigsberg before Christmas?
    Are you mad? Cricket in December?
    Thanks to global warming, everything is possible. The Siberian Wolverines will be competing in the global T20 cup against the Nunavut Narwhals before too long, you can be sure.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,751
    Of course, there is one thing that NATO could do that might just seriously fuck up Putin's war and at the same time possibly do some good on another level.

    They could attack Iran.

    I don't think they will, but it's possible it would (a) cut off the supply of drones and (b) might just destabilise the government long enough for the protests to take effect.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,958

    kle4 said:

    If Russia has struck Poland then Poland absolutely has the right to Invoke Article 5 of NATO.

    Russia can always choose to stop striking at other countries and pull back to its own, internationally recognised borders.

    They probably have the right, but I doubt even now there is NATO support to go in fully on the basis of this. But reaction is surely required in this situation, so what could it be?
    NFZ over Ukraine, increased Black sea presence
    Long range HIMARS, bring the whole of Crimea in range.
    I'm surprised you're not calling for the Kerch Bridge to be taken down in such a manner as it makes the Sea of Azov into a tidal lagoon. ;)
    Even then, not sure the tidal range would be adequate.....

    But I like your thinking.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,841
    DJ41 said:

    biggles said:

    Fuck ‘em. All diplomats gone tomorrow, NATO wide. Gloves off on donations to Ukraine. Aggressive NATO air defence widened into Ukraine on the pretext we need to avoid future “accidents”.

    Just kill everyone. God will know his own.

    Lol.
    I think we csn handle the cobwebs and 50 year old rust in Russias nuclear arsenal
  • kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 3,911
    ydoethur said:

    Of course, there is one thing that NATO could do that might just seriously fuck up Putin's war and at the same time possibly do some good on another level.

    They could attack Iran.

    I don't think they will, but it's possible it would (a) cut off the supply of drones and (b) might just destabilise the government long enough for the protests to take effect.

    Isn't this literally how nuclear war starts in Threads?
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,851

    kinabalu said:

    kle4 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Myth is a funny thing.

    In many peoples' minds, the Thatcherite governments of the early 80s cut taxes and that reduction in taxes led to economic growth and they therefore paid for themselves.

    That is not what her government did. In fact, that is the very opposite of Thatcherism. That's Keynesianism - i.e. injecting demand into the economy via reduces taxes (albeit the Keynesians usually increased spending too).

    The first thing that the Thatcher/Howe government did was to raise taxes to close the budget deficit. They did this by freezing personal allowances which significantly increased tax take. They also removed the prevailing double lock on pensions, and allowed them to just move up with inflation (rather than previously, the higher of inflation and wages.)

    Raising taxes and cutting spending was considered madness. 364 economists wrote to the Times decrying its foolishness.

    But it worked, and it worked because the core economic tenet of Thatcherism was that if you balanced your budget, you would have less inflation and lower interest rates, and therefore one would be able to cut taxes. Lower taxes were the consequence of holding spending down, and not frittering away money on interest payments.

    I therefore find it extraordinary that some people think that the Truss government was enacting Thatcherite policies. On the contrary, it was the very opposite of Thatcherite. It wanted a return to the 60s and 70s where governments spent more and taxed less to stimulate the economy and hope it grew faster than the budget deficits. It resulted in persistently high inflation and economic growth that lagged peers.

    That doesn't sound right to me. I'm pretty sure the only things Thatcher ever did in her time in office was to cut taxes and say she was not for turning. Also something something whatever someone on the right wants to support right now.
    And win back the Falklands and tell Gorbachev that "she could do business" with him.
    And sell council housing at a discount to those who had been paying rent on them for ages. That was huge.
    Political gold but negative for real housing needs.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,958

    kle4 said:

    If Russia has struck Poland then Poland absolutely has the right to Invoke Article 5 of NATO.

    Russia can always choose to stop striking at other countries and pull back to its own, internationally recognised borders.

    They probably have the right, but I doubt even now there is NATO support to go in fully on the basis of this. But reaction is surely required in this situation, so what could it be?
    NFZ over Ukraine, increased Black sea presence
    Long range HIMARS, bring the whole of Crimea in range.
    I think the West should insist a defeated Russia is completely denuked.
    At which point, China takes everything east of the Urals...
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,841
    edited November 2022
    kyf_100 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Of course, there is one thing that NATO could do that might just seriously fuck up Putin's war and at the same time possibly do some good on another level.

    They could attack Iran.

    I don't think they will, but it's possible it would (a) cut off the supply of drones and (b) might just destabilise the government long enough for the protests to take effect.

    Isn't this literally how nuclear war starts in Threads?
    No that starts with USSR/US in Iran
    Edit - ooops i mean yes!
    Ussr puts Nukes in iran, then tactucal nukes are used, then its hasta la vista Sheffield
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 4,339
    DJ41 said:

    biggles said:

    Fuck ‘em. All diplomats gone tomorrow, NATO wide. Gloves off on donations to Ukraine. Aggressive NATO air defence widened into Ukraine on the pretext we need to avoid future “accidents”.

    Just kill everyone. God will know his own.

    Lol.
    Eh? Your appear to have confused me with someone arguing for a position of direct intervention.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,009
    nova said:

    Chris said:

    nova said:

    Chris said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "Thousands of older Londoners have called on Sadiq Khan to reinstate their free travel during the morning rush hour.

    The benefit – which is given to about 1.3m people over 60 – was suspended soon after the start of the pandemic in June 2020 for weekday journeys before 9am, primarily to ensure public transport was kept free for key workers.

    But the mayor is due to decide by the end of the year whether to retain the restriction on a permanent basis, which would generate about £15m to £18m in fares for cash-strapped Transport for London.

    The charity Age UK London presented a petition signed by more than 10,000 people, demanding the reinstatement of the benefit, to City Hall on Tuesday afternoon."

    https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/contactless-oyster-travel-over-60s-before-9am-city-hall-sadiq-khan-petition-tfl-age-uk-b1039803.html

    I don’t see why someone in their early 60s, who is still in work, should get subsidised travel.
    Who said anything about "still in work"? The post you were replying to indicates those not in work were penalised for the benefit of those in work.
    The article suggests that the largest group of pensioners that need to travel at peak times are those going to work.
    As it's behind a paywall I can't be bothered to going to the trouble to get access.

    But why would pensioners be going to work? Do you mean 'over 60s' when you say pensioners?
    Yes - the travel passes were for over 60s.

    And the article talks about which over 60s uses them before 9am, and the largest group identified was people going to work (in % terms marginally more were going to health appts, but obviously even pensioners go to work a lot more often than they go to the doctors!)
    I'm still guessing about what you mean when you say "pensioners", if you think they go to work more often than going to the doctors. Especially considering that you don't show any sign of realising "pensioners" may mean something different from "over 60s".

    Maybe you should take the trouble to try to post something coherent and/or intelligible.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,081

    The Lib Dems have fallen to a 17-month low in the polls, from a peak of 13.0% in July to just 7.9% now.

    electionmaps.uk/polling


    https://twitter.com/electionmapsuk/status/1592495169068486656?s=46&t=kauyGoQWOWWYQhb-p-yE4g

    It really is bizarre how much they have fallen
    Nope. The electorate have decided they want rid of the Tories. That means voting Labour in England and Wales and SNP in Scotland. The Lib Dems are surplus to requirements.
    Lib dems are not surplus in the South of England, Often they will be the best vote to oust a Tory.
    Nope.

    Rest of South
    Lab 47%
    Con 32%
    LD 9%
    Grn 8%
    Ref 3%
    UKIP 2%

    (Deltapoll; Fieldwork 10-14 November)
    I assume you have not seen this

    https://twitter.com/electpoliticsuk/status/1592564326405373952?t=X2aPcYkhHoPzCcuAUTtlwQ&s=19
    Thank you. Very interesting. However, in my humble opinion, R&W are the worst pollster currently trading their wares. Who is paying for this crap?
    It is nevertheless true that people don’t really weigh up the opposition parties, either nationally or in their local patch, until the election is upon us, and third party poll ratings in mid-term have relatively little information to convey about how such parties will perform in their target seats when the election comes around.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392

    kle4 said:

    If Russia has struck Poland then Poland absolutely has the right to Invoke Article 5 of NATO.

    Russia can always choose to stop striking at other countries and pull back to its own, internationally recognised borders.

    They probably have the right, but I doubt even now there is NATO support to go in fully on the basis of this. But reaction is surely required in this situation, so what could it be?
    NFZ over Ukraine, increased Black sea presence
    Long range HIMARS, bring the whole of Crimea in range.
    I think the West should insist a defeated Russia is completely denuked.
    I'm not one to suggest a casual need to provide offramps for Russia, but feels like they'd fight to the bitter end to keep the last thing giving them any geopolitical importance besides hawking gas.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,009
    biggles said:

    Fuck ‘em. All diplomats gone tomorrow, NATO wide. Gloves off on donations to Ukraine. Aggressive NATO air defence widened into Ukraine border regions on the pretext we need to avoid future “accidents”.

    My bet on the human race not surviving beyond 2050 is still looking good.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 19,611

    nova said:

    I think that may just be a statistical blip that can disappear with more polls. For example, the line from Techne would be straight up and now in thirties, I’m predicting next Saturday’s Opinium to be 31+. We haven’t had a Kantor for a while.

    Your worm that turned can be gone next time you look. A case of Ephemeral Worms.
    Have we returned to analysing hypothetical polls published at some vaguely defined point in the future?
    Well. To be bluff. Yes.

    You see different polls whose methodologies favour different results report at different times, maybe not even spaced but in clusters. People polling for example had a reform at 8 and others at six from their method, therefore a con of 21 last week, even though it sits away from the polling average or herding they are not remotely outliers for the firm, it’s what people polling been doing since they appeared, so it’s not an outlier because it’s in sequence to their method. Similarly Kantor, Techne and Opinium tend to produce higher Con share and they feed into this graph too - so where you have a statistical blip at the moment, next Techne 30 or 29, Opinium 31+ and a Kantor in 30s will make the blip vanish forever - the more recent ticks on the graph can be ephemeral.
    We've had four polls in a row where that company's swing towards the Tories has slowed virtually to a halt, or started reversing. That might be a short term trend, but it's still a real trend, rather than a reporting quirk.

    I understand your point about Opinium giving a higher Tory figure, but even their last two polls showed movement back towards Labour.
    It’s a mixed picture right now, still to early to say the new leader bounce has peaked and gone into reverse - and rather shockingly didn’t really get anywhere in the first place.

    It is beginning to look like that though. 😕
    I thought you predicted that it would do exactly that?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,081
    kle4 said:

    DJ41 said:

    dixiedean said:

    @WarMonitor3
    “Two stray rockets fell in the town of Przewodów in Poland on the border with Ukraine. They hit the grain dryers. Two people died.”


    https://twitter.com/WarMonitor3/status/1592581319758053376

    That's an attack on a NATO country is it not?
    No, it’s an accident. An accident is clearly not an attack. I mean, Russia should be more careful with its rockets, and of course they shouldn’t even be shooting them at Ukraine, but, no, don’t be silly, it’s not an attack on a NATO country.

    Just a coincidence they fell on the grain dryers, obviously.

    Russia was reckless as to the risk. Fire them in the general direction of Poland - and they face the consequences of those reckless actions. Would certainly speed things up if Poland treated it as an act of war.
    I don't know what happened but if it's thought that Russia may have launched rockets that hit Poland that's obviously f***ing serious.

    Speed things up? "God Save the King" playing as cricketers start a friendly match in Konigsberg before Christmas?
    Are you mad? Cricket in December?
    Thanks to global warming, everything is possible. The Siberian Wolverines will be competing in the global T20 cup against the Nunavut Narwhals before too long, you can be sure.
    Nevertheless the original idea of cricket was to fill those few dead months during the summer when dedicated sports fans have no football to watch. Somewhere along the line cricket has gone crazy-stupid and decided to put on matches day and night at all times of year.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,841
    edited November 2022
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    If Russia has struck Poland then Poland absolutely has the right to Invoke Article 5 of NATO.

    Russia can always choose to stop striking at other countries and pull back to its own, internationally recognised borders.

    They probably have the right, but I doubt even now there is NATO support to go in fully on the basis of this. But reaction is surely required in this situation, so what could it be?
    NFZ over Ukraine, increased Black sea presence
    Long range HIMARS, bring the whole of Crimea in range.
    I think the West should insist a defeated Russia is completely denuked.
    I'm not one to suggest a casual need to provide offramps for Russia, but feels like they'd fight to the bitter end to keep the last thing giving them any geopolitical importance besides hawking gas.
    If it goes to WW3, minimum requirement after victory. If it stays a Ukraine Russia affair then maybe not
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,751
    IanB2 said:

    kle4 said:

    DJ41 said:

    dixiedean said:

    @WarMonitor3
    “Two stray rockets fell in the town of Przewodów in Poland on the border with Ukraine. They hit the grain dryers. Two people died.”


    https://twitter.com/WarMonitor3/status/1592581319758053376

    That's an attack on a NATO country is it not?
    No, it’s an accident. An accident is clearly not an attack. I mean, Russia should be more careful with its rockets, and of course they shouldn’t even be shooting them at Ukraine, but, no, don’t be silly, it’s not an attack on a NATO country.

    Just a coincidence they fell on the grain dryers, obviously.

    Russia was reckless as to the risk. Fire them in the general direction of Poland - and they face the consequences of those reckless actions. Would certainly speed things up if Poland treated it as an act of war.
    I don't know what happened but if it's thought that Russia may have launched rockets that hit Poland that's obviously f***ing serious.

    Speed things up? "God Save the King" playing as cricketers start a friendly match in Konigsberg before Christmas?
    Are you mad? Cricket in December?
    Thanks to global warming, everything is possible. The Siberian Wolverines will be competing in the global T20 cup against the Nunavut Narwhals before too long, you can be sure.
    Nevertheless the original idea of cricket was to fill those few dead months during the summer when dedicated sports fans have no football to watch. Somewhere along the line cricket has gone crazy-stupid and decided to put on matches day and night at all times of year.
    Actually, the original idea of football was to fill up those months when the days were too short and too cold to play cricket.
  • RattersRatters Posts: 756
    Hmm, difficult decision as to how to respond to the missile killing two in Poland.

    I don't think it's reasonable to assume it was an accident. But equally hard to prove it was deliberate.

    A response is needed and quickly. One that is a meaningful increase in support for Ukraine but not direct intervention, I think. Improved offensive weaponry seems the obvious option.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,841
    edited November 2022
    Even Hungary are in emergency defence meeting mode
    'Interesting times'
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 4,339
    Chris said:

    biggles said:

    Fuck ‘em. All diplomats gone tomorrow, NATO wide. Gloves off on donations to Ukraine. Aggressive NATO air defence widened into Ukraine border regions on the pretext we need to avoid future “accidents”.

    My bet on the human race not surviving beyond 2050 is still looking good.
    If you provide the collateral directly to me pre-nuclear annihilation then I’ll offer you any odds you like against……
  • pm215pm215 Posts: 926
    edited November 2022

    kle4 said:

    I think the West should insist a defeated Russia is completely denuked.

    I'm not one to suggest a casual need to provide offramps for Russia, but feels like they'd fight to the bitter end to keep the last thing giving them any geopolitical importance besides hawking gas.
    If it goes to WW3, minimum requirement after victory. If it stays a Ukraine Russia affair then maybe not
    If it goes to WW3 then I suspect that the world will be so different on the other side as to make any time spent now on pondering post-war actions rather moot...
  • DJ41DJ41 Posts: 792

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    If Russia has struck Poland then Poland absolutely has the right to Invoke Article 5 of NATO.

    Russia can always choose to stop striking at other countries and pull back to its own, internationally recognised borders.

    They probably have the right, but I doubt even now there is NATO support to go in fully on the basis of this. But reaction is surely required in this situation, so what could it be?
    NFZ over Ukraine, increased Black sea presence
    Long range HIMARS, bring the whole of Crimea in range.
    I think the West should insist a defeated Russia is completely denuked.
    I'm not one to suggest a casual need to provide offramps for Russia, but feels like they'd fight to the bitter end to keep the last thing giving them any geopolitical importance besides hawking gas.
    If it goes to WW3, minimum requirement after victory. If it stays a Ukraine Russia affair then maybe not
    "Mutually Assured Destruction"? Load of ol' rubbish!

    As Margaret Thatcher, tax-raiser of yore, put it in 1982, "Failure? Do you remember what Queen Victoria once said? “Failure - the possibilities do not exist” . That is the way we must look at it."

    It's just like the Falklands all over again.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,751

    Even Hungary are in emergency defence meeting mode
    'Interesting times'

    While Orban is a Putin Minime, the last thing he wants is for countries bordering Ukraine to be hit with Russian missiles. It might be him next.
  • rcs1000 said:

    Myth is a funny thing.

    In many peoples' minds, the Thatcherite governments of the early 80s cut taxes and that reduction in taxes led to economic growth and they therefore paid for themselves.

    That is not what her government did. In fact, that is the very opposite of Thatcherism. That's Keynesianism - i.e. injecting demand into the economy via reduces taxes (albeit the Keynesians usually increased spending too).

    The first thing that the Thatcher/Howe government did was to raise taxes to close the budget deficit. They did this by freezing personal allowances which significantly increased tax take. They also removed the prevailing double lock on pensions, and allowed them to just move up with inflation (rather than previously, the higher of inflation and wages.)

    Raising taxes and cutting spending was considered madness. 364 economists wrote to the Times decrying its foolishness.

    But it worked, and it worked because the core economic tenet of Thatcherism was that if you balanced your budget, you would have less inflation and lower interest rates, and therefore one would be able to cut taxes. Lower taxes were the consequence of holding spending down, and not frittering away money on interest payments.

    I therefore find it extraordinary that some people think that the Truss government was enacting Thatcherite policies. On the contrary, it was the very opposite of Thatcherite. It wanted a return to the 60s and 70s where governments spent more and taxed less to stimulate the economy and hope it grew faster than the budget deficits. It resulted in persistently high inflation and economic growth that lagged peers.

    This is completely on the money. Take my word for it. I was there.

    I can’t help but be struck by the array of voices, here and elsewhere, calling for the government to borrow shedloads of money to stimulate the economy in pursuit of growth. It’s true that when it comes to the exact nature of that stimulation there’s a minor doctrinal difference between advocates of tax cuts as against those calling for higher public spending; but the basic idea is the same in both cases and I wonder whether the two groups, who undoubtedly consider themselves poles apart politically, realize how much they have in common.

    Of course thanks to the recent Truss we now know what happens if you go for unfunded tax cuts. Is there any reason to think the markets’ reaction to an unfunded spending splurge would be different?
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 12,415
    nova said:

    nova said:

    nova said:

    nova said:

    nova said:

    I think that may just be a statistical blip that can disappear with more polls. For example, the line from Techne would be straight up and now in thirties, I’m predicting next Saturday’s Opinium to be 31+. We haven’t had a Kantor for a while.

    Your worm that turned can be gone next time you look. A case of Ephemeral Worms.
    Have we returned to analysing hypothetical polls published at some vaguely defined point in the future?
    Well. To be bluff. Yes.

    You see different polls whose methodologies favour different results report at different times, maybe not even spaced but in clusters. People polling for example had a reform at 8 and others at six from their method, therefore a con of 21 last week, even though it sits away from the polling average or herding they are not remotely outliers for the firm, it’s what people polling been doing since they appeared, so it’s not an outlier because it’s in sequence to their method. Similarly Kantor, Techne and Opinium tend to produce higher Con share and they feed into this graph too - so where you have a statistical blip at the moment, next Techne 30 or 29, Opinium 31+ and a Kantor in 30s will make the blip vanish forever - the more recent ticks on the graph can be ephemeral.
    We've had four polls in a row where that company's swing towards the Tories has slowed virtually to a halt, or started reversing. That might be a short term trend, but it's still a real trend, rather than a reporting quirk.

    I understand your point about Opinium giving a higher Tory figure, but even their last two polls showed movement back towards Labour.
    It’s a mixed picture right now, still to early to say the new leader bounce has peaked and gone into reverse - and rather shockingly didn’t really get anywhere in the first place.

    It is beginning to look like that though. 😕
    Definitely too early - but I don't see where it's mixed. If we had a selection of polls showing the lead coming solidly down, then that would be mixed, but they pretty much all seem to be slowing/reversing.

    It's also a reasonable bounce - not many leaders start from 30%+ down, so it was always going to take time. He was always up against it, and I can't imagine people will be on a budget that raises tax and cuts spending.

    I suspect they're looking to hang on till hopefully Ukraine win, and we see fuel prices and inflation fall, and they will claim it as a win for "grown-up politics" or some other nonsense.
    It’s mixed because I’m not looking at gap between parties - if Starmgasm belches back to libdems 6% it stole the lead drops even if Tories rise not one iota. I am looking at the Tory share for their recovery, and the last three Techne each show an increase as one example of how it’s mixed, and the down tick does not tell us it’s mixed because of things like people polling con 21 and low yougov that didn’t move built in.
    Isn't the Tory share doing exactly the same?

    It was going up with when Rishi took over with just about every polling company.

    Now it's going down, static, or the rise has slowed almost to a halt with every poll from the last week and that's from half a dozen different pollsters. People polling was down to 14pts before Rishi, so 14-20 was a jump, while 20-21-21 is a stalling. Techne has shown a 4pt jump, then a 3pt jump, and now a 1pt jump. That's technically three increases in a row, but it's also a clear slow down that every other polling company has reflected recently.
    But a slow down is not a stop. Speed is not of the essence here, just direction of travel.

    It’s still a mixed picture on polling, a good 7 days for Tory share and todays little kink in graph vanishes. you seem to be edging toward admitting it.
    Have I missed something? I thought you were suggesting that the Rishi bounce was continuing, when we've had six polls in the last week or so, which all show it stalling.

    We've gone from a steady increase, reflected across all the polls, to a week where the Tory vote change for each polling company is -2, -2, -1, +1, 0, 0. That's not mixed, that's pretty consistently showing that, for now, the Tory share is no longer going up.

    It may go up again if they have a good week, but that doesn't make this week disappear.
    I understand what you are trying to say, but this is where you are wrong.

    The way you apply your sequence to your paragraph implies they are all apples of the same variety, but each one is of a different variety, any moment we can have a Kantor variety, Opinium variety. YouGov tend to be random could show +4 next regardless of anything else.

    I think I am trying to take a longer bigger picture than you are. I think I am trying to be careful not to draw conclusions a honeymoon is over too soon as next set of polls could make mockery of that - yes it can make the kink in todays graph disappear into a smooth upward one. Over generous to the Tories my approach maybe right now, but only on basis of trying to be right and fair.
    Opinium were included in that list. YouGov went from 19% before Rishi, to 23 then 24. They're the only polling company, apart from the 6 I mentioned, that I can see that have polled regularly through Truss/Rishi, who haven't polled in the last week or so, but I guess you could stick them in the same box of apples as they had a 4% honeymoon bounce, followed by a 1% change. There aren't lots of other polling companies that have polled throughout that we can identify any short term trends from.

    If six polling companies all pretty much follow the same pattern, then it's a real thing, not a statistical quirk. It's also not going to make that bend into a smooth curve no matter what happens.

    You can argue that Rishi might do something to restart his recovery - but it will still have stalled in the last week.
    So, what are you saying? The honeymoon is over?
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 4,339
    Actually our boiler broke today. Do you think that I’ll get the call out fee back from British Gas in the event we all all die in thermonuclear war before they can get round? I also might not need my heating anyway, given the thermal blast.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,958
    Art 5: While it does *not* oblige NATO to go to war, it does commit NATO to go to... the UN:

    "Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the [UNSC]."

    SC meets on 🇺🇦 tomorrow.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,841
    DJ41 said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    If Russia has struck Poland then Poland absolutely has the right to Invoke Article 5 of NATO.

    Russia can always choose to stop striking at other countries and pull back to its own, internationally recognised borders.

    They probably have the right, but I doubt even now there is NATO support to go in fully on the basis of this. But reaction is surely required in this situation, so what could it be?
    NFZ over Ukraine, increased Black sea presence
    Long range HIMARS, bring the whole of Crimea in range.
    I think the West should insist a defeated Russia is completely denuked.
    I'm not one to suggest a casual need to provide offramps for Russia, but feels like they'd fight to the bitter end to keep the last thing giving them any geopolitical importance besides hawking gas.
    If it goes to WW3, minimum requirement after victory. If it stays a Ukraine Russia affair then maybe not
    "Mutually Assured Destruction"? Load of ol' rubbish!

    As Margaret Thatcher, tax-raiser of yore, put it in 1982, "Failure? Do you remember what Queen Victoria once said? “Failure - the possibilities do not exist” . That is the way we must look at it."

    It's just like the Falklands all over again.
    Russia's nuclear capability is likely in the same shape as its conventional - rotting and useless.
  • moonshine said:

    stodge said:

    moonshine said:

    dixiedean said:

    @WarMonitor3
    “Two stray rockets fell in the town of Przewodów in Poland on the border with Ukraine. They hit the grain dryers. Two people died.”


    https://twitter.com/WarMonitor3/status/1592581319758053376

    That's an attack on a NATO country is it not?
    No, it’s an accident. An accident is clearly not an attack. I mean, Russia should be more careful with its rockets, and of course they shouldn’t even be shooting them at Ukraine, but, no, don’t be silly, it’s not an attack on a NATO country.

    Bollocks to that. We should use it as a pretext to destroy every Russian plane, tank, barrel and soldier on Ukrainian sovereign territory and have done with this thing.
    I see - someone else wishing to start World War 3 and have me incinerated.

    This is hardly the first time - we remember (or perhaps we don't) Turkish and "Syrian" planes shooting each other down - I use the inverted commas because the Syrian planes were probably Russian planes re-painted and probably flown by Russians.

    No one claimed at the time it was a casus belli for a general conflict.
    I’ve had enough of this now. Just give Ukraine the assets it needs to finish the job and quit fucking about. Mid terms are done, give them longer range missiles, a proper shield, American planes and German tanks.

    Tbh you having enough of this now is pretty far down* the list of reasons why stuff should happen.

    *not even on the list.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,841

    Art 5: While it does *not* oblige NATO to go to war, it does commit NATO to go to... the UN:

    "Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the [UNSC]."

    SC meets on 🇺🇦 tomorrow.

    UN = Chocolate fire guard
  • DJ41DJ41 Posts: 792
    edited November 2022
    ydoethur said:

    Even Hungary are in emergency defence meeting mode
    'Interesting times'

    While Orban is a Putin Minime, the last thing he wants is for countries bordering Ukraine to be hit with Russian missiles. It might be him next.
    Some clearly just want an escalation.

    News items to be looking out for include:

    * any official Polish statement or diplomatic or other move (so far, they say they're investigating - the wimps clearly don't get their news from the Daily Express or PB)

    * any official Russian statement

    * any official NATO statement

    * similar surprise lethal possible-accident possible-attack events in any country
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 4,339

    moonshine said:

    stodge said:

    moonshine said:

    dixiedean said:

    @WarMonitor3
    “Two stray rockets fell in the town of Przewodów in Poland on the border with Ukraine. They hit the grain dryers. Two people died.”


    https://twitter.com/WarMonitor3/status/1592581319758053376

    That's an attack on a NATO country is it not?
    No, it’s an accident. An accident is clearly not an attack. I mean, Russia should be more careful with its rockets, and of course they shouldn’t even be shooting them at Ukraine, but, no, don’t be silly, it’s not an attack on a NATO country.

    Bollocks to that. We should use it as a pretext to destroy every Russian plane, tank, barrel and soldier on Ukrainian sovereign territory and have done with this thing.
    I see - someone else wishing to start World War 3 and have me incinerated.

    This is hardly the first time - we remember (or perhaps we don't) Turkish and "Syrian" planes shooting each other down - I use the inverted commas because the Syrian planes were probably Russian planes re-painted and probably flown by Russians.

    No one claimed at the time it was a casus belli for a general conflict.
    I’ve had enough of this now. Just give Ukraine the assets it needs to finish the job and quit fucking about. Mid terms are done, give them longer range missiles, a proper shield, American planes and German tanks.

    Tbh you having enough of this now is pretty far down* the list of reasons why stuff should happen.

    *not even on the list.
    To be fair they are an anonymous poster. Could be Joe Biden.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    WW3 back in the box?

    Alternatively it might not be a Russian missile at all.

    @OAlexanderDK

    Have not yet been able to make a conclusive ID of the debris found at the site in Poland.

    At this time though, I would not rule out a Ukrainian S-300 malfunctioning. This piece of debris does look similar to end of the rocket engine. twitter.com/AmichaiStein1/…

    https://twitter.com/Samfr/status/1592595920642019328?cxt=HHwWgMDUianjhJosAAAA
  • LeonLeon Posts: 46,248
    Well that’s that then

    I’ve really enjoyed human civilization. Ah well
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,841
    kle4 said:

    WW3 back in the box?

    Alternatively it might not be a Russian missile at all.

    @OAlexanderDK

    Have not yet been able to make a conclusive ID of the debris found at the site in Poland.

    At this time though, I would not rule out a Ukrainian S-300 malfunctioning. This piece of debris does look similar to end of the rocket engine. twitter.com/AmichaiStein1/…

    https://twitter.com/Samfr/status/1592595920642019328?cxt=HHwWgMDUianjhJosAAAA

    War with Ukraine instead then?
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 4,339
    edited November 2022
    Domestic political point. If this was Russia, the PM won’t be wanting to announce anything wobbly on defence on Thursday. Suspect someone is rapidly considering redrafts.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,958

    Art 5: While it does *not* oblige NATO to go to war, it does commit NATO to go to... the UN:

    "Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the [UNSC]."

    SC meets on 🇺🇦 tomorrow.

    UN = Chocolate fire guard
    The Security Council is clearly broken, when a belligerent can veto any action against it.

    The act of being a belligerent should rob it of that veto. The UN should have been able to put a peacekeeping force into Ukraine as soon as its borders were breached. One armed to the teeth.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,517
    Ratters said:

    Hmm, difficult decision as to how to respond to the missile killing two in Poland.

    I don't think it's reasonable to assume it was an accident. But equally hard to prove it was deliberate.

    A response is needed and quickly. One that is a meaningful increase in support for Ukraine but not direct intervention, I think. Improved offensive weaponry seems the obvious option.

    Here's my hot take on a possible response:

    Poland (and possibly other NATO nations) call a no-fly zone over western, northern and southwestern Ukraine, tasked to shoot down missiles and, if possible, drones. Russia are now flying virtually no sorties outside their occupied areas due to Ukrainian air defences, so the risks of conflict between NATO and Russian aircraft would be minimal. It would also help Ukraine immensely. A buffer area of (say) 100 miles could be left between the front lines and the patrol areas.

    It would be risky, but Russia have given them an excuse.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 14,878
    Chris said:

    biggles said:

    Fuck ‘em. All diplomats gone tomorrow, NATO wide. Gloves off on donations to Ukraine. Aggressive NATO air defence widened into Ukraine border regions on the pretext we need to avoid future “accidents”.

    My bet on the human race not surviving beyond 2050 is still looking good.
    Seems unlikely that everyone will be dead, Red Dwarf style. Still, if you win, who pays?
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 6,762
    nova said:

    nova said:

    nova said:

    I think that may just be a statistical blip that can disappear with more polls. For example, the line from Techne would be straight up and now in thirties, I’m predicting next Saturday’s Opinium to be 31+. We haven’t had a Kantor for a while.

    Your worm that turned can be gone next time you look. A case of Ephemeral Worms.
    Have we returned to analysing hypothetical polls published at some vaguely defined point in the future?
    Well. To be bluff. Yes.

    You see different polls whose methodologies favour different results report at different times, maybe not even spaced but in clusters. People polling for example had a reform at 8 and others at six from their method, therefore a con of 21 last week, even though it sits away from the polling average or herding they are not remotely outliers for the firm, it’s what people polling been doing since they appeared, so it’s not an outlier because it’s in sequence to their method. Similarly Kantor, Techne and Opinium tend to produce higher Con share and they feed into this graph too - so where you have a statistical blip at the moment, next Techne 30 or 29, Opinium 31+ and a Kantor in 30s will make the blip vanish forever - the more recent ticks on the graph can be ephemeral.
    We've had four polls in a row where that company's swing towards the Tories has slowed virtually to a halt, or started reversing. That might be a short term trend, but it's still a real trend, rather than a reporting quirk.

    I understand your point about Opinium giving a higher Tory figure, but even their last two polls showed movement back towards Labour.
    It’s a mixed picture right now, still to early to say the new leader bounce has peaked and gone into reverse - and rather shockingly didn’t really get anywhere in the first place.

    It is beginning to look like that though. 😕
    Definitely too early - but I don't see where it's mixed. If we had a selection of polls showing the lead coming solidly down, then that would be mixed, but they pretty much all seem to be slowing/reversing.

    It's also a reasonable bounce - not many leaders start from 30%+ down, so it was always going to take time. He was always up against it, and I can't imagine people will be on a budget that raises tax and cuts spending.

    I suspect they're looking to hang on till hopefully Ukraine win, and we see fuel prices and inflation fall, and they will claim it as a win for "grown-up politics" or some other nonsense.
    It’s mixed because I’m not looking at gap between parties - if Starmgasm belches back to libdems 6% it stole the lead drops even if Tories rise not one iota. I am looking at the Tory share for their recovery, and the last three Techne each show an increase as one example of how it’s mixed, and the down tick does not tell us it’s mixed because of things like people polling con 21 and low yougov that didn’t move built in.
    Isn't the Tory share doing exactly the same?

    It was going up with when Rishi took over with just about every polling company.


    Now it's going down, static, or the rise has slowed almost to a halt with every poll from the last week and that's from half a dozen different pollsters. People polling was down to 14pts before Rishi, so 14-20 was a jump, while 20-21-21 is a stalling. Techne has shown a 4pt jump, then a 3pt jump, and now a 1pt jump. That's technically three increases in a row, but it's also a clear slow down that every other polling company has reflected recently.
    That’s logical thought if you believe in cohort theory

    Truss Baseline

    + people who are relieved she is gone = where we are today

    Post the budget he may gain some sound money folks offset by anti-austerity folks

    In six months he may gain some coherent government folks
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,958
    edited November 2022
    kle4 said:

    WW3 back in the box?

    Alternatively it might not be a Russian missile at all.

    @OAlexanderDK

    Have not yet been able to make a conclusive ID of the debris found at the site in Poland.

    At this time though, I would not rule out a Ukrainian S-300 malfunctioning. This piece of debris does look similar to end of the rocket engine. twitter.com/AmichaiStein1/…

    https://twitter.com/Samfr/status/1592595920642019328?cxt=HHwWgMDUianjhJosAAAA

    Of course, both Russia and Ukraine have S-300.

    Only Russia has routinely been using it as a ground to ground missile.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,574
    Chris said:

    biggles said:

    Fuck ‘em. All diplomats gone tomorrow, NATO wide. Gloves off on donations to Ukraine. Aggressive NATO air defence widened into Ukraine border regions on the pretext we need to avoid future “accidents”.

    My bet on the human race not surviving beyond 2050 is still looking good.
    I hope you’ve made it with Leon’s AIs/aliens, or it’s not going to pay out,
  • Ratters said:

    Hmm, difficult decision as to how to respond to the missile killing two in Poland.

    I don't think it's reasonable to assume it was an accident. But equally hard to prove it was deliberate.

    A response is needed and quickly. One that is a meaningful increase in support for Ukraine but not direct intervention, I think. Improved offensive weaponry seems the obvious option.

    And that, if it wasn't an accident, would be the point. Find a way of nudging over the line of acceptability. Many responses would be over-reactions, spinning us all into a really dark place. Or a place with a brief bright bucket of sunshine followed by lots and lots of darkness. But no response at all, and the nudger has won a bit by crossing the line.

    Very glad it's not my problem to solve, and hoping that the people solving it are very wise indeed.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,958
    Apropos of nothing, my snowdrops are poking through already....
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392

    kle4 said:

    WW3 back in the box?

    Alternatively it might not be a Russian missile at all.

    @OAlexanderDK

    Have not yet been able to make a conclusive ID of the debris found at the site in Poland.

    At this time though, I would not rule out a Ukrainian S-300 malfunctioning. This piece of debris does look similar to end of the rocket engine. twitter.com/AmichaiStein1/…

    https://twitter.com/Samfr/status/1592595920642019328?cxt=HHwWgMDUianjhJosAAAA

    War with Ukraine instead then?
    They immediately surrender and accept absorption into Poland, thus making the Russian invasion an invasion of NATO territory?

    These false flags are getting more and more elaborate.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 46,248
    kle4 said:

    WW3 back in the box?

    Alternatively it might not be a Russian missile at all.

    @OAlexanderDK

    Have not yet been able to make a conclusive ID of the debris found at the site in Poland.

    At this time though, I would not rule out a Ukrainian S-300 malfunctioning. This piece of debris does look similar to end of the rocket engine. twitter.com/AmichaiStein1/…

    https://twitter.com/Samfr/status/1592595920642019328?cxt=HHwWgMDUianjhJosAAAA

    If this is a mistake, and if Russia can convince NATO it is a mistake, it will suit everyone to pretend it didn’t happen

    Big ifs, tho
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,841
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    WW3 back in the box?

    Alternatively it might not be a Russian missile at all.

    @OAlexanderDK

    Have not yet been able to make a conclusive ID of the debris found at the site in Poland.

    At this time though, I would not rule out a Ukrainian S-300 malfunctioning. This piece of debris does look similar to end of the rocket engine. twitter.com/AmichaiStein1/…

    https://twitter.com/Samfr/status/1592595920642019328?cxt=HHwWgMDUianjhJosAAAA

    War with Ukraine instead then?
    They immediately surrender and accept absorption into Poland, thus making the Russian invasion an invasion of NATO territory?

    These false flags are getting more and more elaborate.
    Wars snd rumours of wars
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,751
    DJ41 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Even Hungary are in emergency defence meeting mode
    'Interesting times'

    While Orban is a Putin Minime, the last thing he wants is for countries bordering Ukraine to be hit with Russian missiles. It might be him next.
    Some clearly just want an escalation.

    News items to be looking out for include:

    * any official Polish statement or diplomatic or other move (so far, they say they're investigating - the wimps clearly don't get their news from the Daily Express or PB)

    * any official Russian statement

    * any official NATO statement

    * similar surprise lethal possible-accident possible-attack events in any country
    Russia, for a start...
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 14,772
    ydoethur said:

    Of course, there is one thing that NATO could do that might just seriously fuck up Putin's war and at the same time possibly do some good on another level.

    They could attack Iran.

    I don't think they will, but it's possible it would (a) cut off the supply of drones and (b) might just destabilise the government long enough for the protests to take effect.

    It is tempting to hit Iran to stop supplies reaching Russia, but NATO will want to avoid any escalation that leads to further Russian attacks on NATO territory. An attack on Iranian supplies to Russia invites Russia to attack NATO supplies to Ukraine as they transit through Rzeszów airbase in Poland.

    Personally I'd be tempted to send a few dozen cruise missiles at one of the bomber airbases, to take out the bombers that launched the missiles that landed in Poland. Proportionate, linked to the missiles, contained. That then should draw a line under it.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,841
    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    WW3 back in the box?

    Alternatively it might not be a Russian missile at all.

    @OAlexanderDK

    Have not yet been able to make a conclusive ID of the debris found at the site in Poland.

    At this time though, I would not rule out a Ukrainian S-300 malfunctioning. This piece of debris does look similar to end of the rocket engine. twitter.com/AmichaiStein1/…

    https://twitter.com/Samfr/status/1592595920642019328?cxt=HHwWgMDUianjhJosAAAA

    If this is a mistake, and if Russia can convince NATO it is a mistake, it will suit everyone to pretend it didn’t happen

    Big ifs, tho
    The MIC would rather it erupted into a larger war of course, and the banks fund everyone so its only really us that would rather it went away
  • novanova Posts: 525

    nova said:

    nova said:

    nova said:

    nova said:

    nova said:

    I think that may just be a statistical blip that can disappear with more polls. For example, the line from Techne would be straight up and now in thirties, I’m predicting next Saturday’s Opinium to be 31+. We haven’t had a Kantor for a while.

    Your worm that turned can be gone next time you look. A case of Ephemeral Worms.
    Have we returned to analysing hypothetical polls published at some vaguely defined point in the future?
    Well. To be bluff. Yes.

    You see different polls whose methodologies favour different results report at different times, maybe not even spaced but in clusters. People polling for example had a reform at 8 and others at six from their method, therefore a con of 21 last week, even though it sits away from the polling average or herding they are not remotely outliers for the firm, it’s what people polling been doing since they appeared, so it’s not an outlier because it’s in sequence to their method. Similarly Kantor, Techne and Opinium tend to produce higher Con share and they feed into this graph too - so where you have a statistical blip at the moment, next Techne 30 or 29, Opinium 31+ and a Kantor in 30s will make the blip vanish forever - the more recent ticks on the graph can be ephemeral.
    We've had four polls in a row where that company's swing towards the Tories has slowed virtually to a halt, or started reversing. That might be a short term trend, but it's still a real trend, rather than a reporting quirk.

    I understand your point about Opinium giving a higher Tory figure, but even their last two polls showed movement back towards Labour.
    It’s a mixed picture right now, still to early to say the new leader bounce has peaked and gone into reverse - and rather shockingly didn’t really get anywhere in the first place.

    It is beginning to look like that though. 😕
    Definitely too early - but I don't see where it's mixed. If we had a selection of polls showing the lead coming solidly down, then that would be mixed, but they pretty much all seem to be slowing/reversing.

    It's also a reasonable bounce - not many leaders start from 30%+ down, so it was always going to take time. He was always up against it, and I can't imagine people will be on a budget that raises tax and cuts spending.

    I suspect they're looking to hang on till hopefully Ukraine win, and we see fuel prices and inflation fall, and they will claim it as a win for "grown-up politics" or some other nonsense.
    It’s mixed because I’m not looking at gap between parties - if Starmgasm belches back to libdems 6% it stole the lead drops even if Tories rise not one iota. I am looking at the Tory share for their recovery, and the last three Techne each show an increase as one example of how it’s mixed, and the down tick does not tell us it’s mixed because of things like people polling con 21 and low yougov that didn’t move built in.
    Isn't the Tory share doing exactly the same?

    It was going up with when Rishi took over with just about every polling company.

    Now it's going down, static, or the rise has slowed almost to a halt with every poll from the last week and that's from half a dozen different pollsters. People polling was down to 14pts before Rishi, so 14-20 was a jump, while 20-21-21 is a stalling. Techne has shown a 4pt jump, then a 3pt jump, and now a 1pt jump. That's technically three increases in a row, but it's also a clear slow down that every other polling company has reflected recently.
    But a slow down is not a stop. Speed is not of the essence here, just direction of travel.

    It’s still a mixed picture on polling, a good 7 days for Tory share and todays little kink in graph vanishes. you seem to be edging toward admitting it.
    Have I missed something? I thought you were suggesting that the Rishi bounce was continuing, when we've had six polls in the last week or so, which all show it stalling.

    We've gone from a steady increase, reflected across all the polls, to a week where the Tory vote change for each polling company is -2, -2, -1, +1, 0, 0. That's not mixed, that's pretty consistently showing that, for now, the Tory share is no longer going up.

    It may go up again if they have a good week, but that doesn't make this week disappear.
    I understand what you are trying to say, but this is where you are wrong.

    The way you apply your sequence to your paragraph implies they are all apples of the same variety, but each one is of a different variety, any moment we can have a Kantor variety, Opinium variety. YouGov tend to be random could show +4 next regardless of anything else.

    I think I am trying to take a longer bigger picture than you are. I think I am trying to be careful not to draw conclusions a honeymoon is over too soon as next set of polls could make mockery of that - yes it can make the kink in todays graph disappear into a smooth upward one. Over generous to the Tories my approach maybe right now, but only on basis of trying to be right and fair.
    Opinium were included in that list. YouGov went from 19% before Rishi, to 23 then 24. They're the only polling company, apart from the 6 I mentioned, that I can see that have polled regularly through Truss/Rishi, who haven't polled in the last week or so, but I guess you could stick them in the same box of apples as they had a 4% honeymoon bounce, followed by a 1% change. There aren't lots of other polling companies that have polled throughout that we can identify any short term trends from.

    If six polling companies all pretty much follow the same pattern, then it's a real thing, not a statistical quirk. It's also not going to make that bend into a smooth curve no matter what happens.

    You can argue that Rishi might do something to restart his recovery - but it will still have stalled in the last week.
    So, what are you saying? The honeymoon is over?
    I was replying to your post that said, "I think that may just be a statistical blip that can disappear with more polls".

    It's not a statistical blip, and it won't "disappear into a smooth upward one".

    Whether the honeymoon is over is a different question :)
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,279
    Chris said:

    biggles said:

    Fuck ‘em. All diplomats gone tomorrow, NATO wide. Gloves off on donations to Ukraine. Aggressive NATO air defence widened into Ukraine border regions on the pretext we need to avoid future “accidents”.

    My bet on the human race not surviving beyond 2050 is still looking good.
    It survived the 20th century.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,958
    Leon said:

    Well that’s that then

    I’ve really enjoyed human civilization. Ah well

    Come off it, you were bored to tears a couple of nights back.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 6,762

    algarkirk said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    algarkirk said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    John Redwood outlines the choice that faces Hunt and Sunak:
    https://johnredwoodsdiary.com/2022/11/15/a-budget-to-beat-recession-from-conservative-home/

    The Autumn Statement will be one of the most crucial budgets ever delivered. Rishi and Jeremy have in their hands the opportunity to rescue the Uk economy from poor performance and recession if they wish, or they can accept the depressing official advice and double down with austerity. Tax rises and the wrong spending cuts now will turn a downturn into a nasty and long recession. This will lead to job losses, struggling businesses and a bigger state deficit.

    Their challenge should be to put forward a budget and plan for growth as Liz Truss proposed, but one with forecasts, numbers and sensible controls over spending and borrowing which in his haste Kwasi left out. This is important for the whole country, and for MPs’ constituents. It is also important for the Conservative party whose reputation for economic competence hinges on it.

    Over the last fifty years we have seen Labour lose badly on two occasions and Conservatives lose twice, once badly, thanks to presiding over recessions

    Edward Heath presided over the 1973-4 recession. His 1970-2 policies of competition and credit control were inflationary leading to a borrowing binge . The inflation was worsened by the energy crisis when OPEC hiked the oil price. He tightened too much in response and lost the 1974 election.

    Harold Wilson lost control of the economy in 1974-5, created a recession and left office. Labour lost the next election under his successor.

    John Major on official advice put us into the Exchange rate Mechanism. As I warned it took us through a very predictable violent boom/bust cycle with a five quarter recession. This led to a huge defeat in 1997 which took the Conservatives 13 years to recover from.

    Gordon Brown created his own disaster, leading and encouraging the wrong official advice. He put us through a banking and credit boom, only to collapse it too fast through severe policy. The five quarter recession took the economy down by more than 6% . Labour have still not won an election in the 12 years that followed, with their reputation for economics in tatters.

    So he thinks we can abolish boom and bust.
    So you support an Austerity budget this week, on grounds there’s a sixty billion black hole to fill?
    There is no need for austerity, the £60bn could be raised through taxes on the wealthy.
    Austerity for the Rich has to at least be in the mix surely. They can't pull the same stunt as last time.
    Depends on your definition of austerity I guess.

    What would you envisage as austerity for the rich'? Sounds like tax rises by another name to me.
    Is what I mean, yes. I also agree with you about a Wealth Tax. That has to happen fairly soon imo. Probably under Labour. Maybe ease it in rather than big bang.
    It seems to me a straight wealth tax is not feasible. No-one has yet been able to organise a workable inheritance tax that raises big money. Driving wealth overseas is not a great idea.

    The area to look at is property and land. This has these great merits; you can't hide it, you can't take it abroad and much of it is massively undertaxed in relation to both value and CG, (especially in the south, as I live in the north, which of course should be exempt.)

    Naturally all such taxes should start at a place a fair bit above the assets of whoever is speaking at the time.
    A workable IHT isn't difficult, just unpalatable. Scrap exemptions for inter vivos transfer, to individuals or to trusts, and bingo. Where's the problem?
    It is difficult not least because of the unpalatable nature of the effects if there are no exemptions. Taxing inter vivos transactions of course is quite different from IHT (you aren't dead).

    Agricultural land?

    Why should agricultural land be exempt from IHT?

    If someone acquires ownership of commercial land through inheritance they ought to be able to take out a loan to pay any taxes due if required for a lot less than someone else could buy it for on the open market.

    And if they can't pay their taxes, then sell it.
    The belief that there is social value in communities. If someone is forced to sell their farm because it is reduced to non-viable levels then they move away
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 14,772

    If Russia has struck Poland then Poland absolutely has the right to Invoke Article 5 of NATO.

    (Snip)

    There will be (must?) be very specific rules and situations under which Article 5 can be invoked. I've no idea what they are, but I can imagine this sort of situation would *not* give them the right - at least until the attack can be proved deliberate.

    As someone elsewhere states: might this just have been an ill-timed grain powder explosion if it was a silo? (yes, that's unlikely, especially as a piccie shows something claiming to be part of a missile (*), and the fact there were allegedly two explosions).

    If they were Russian missiles, I expect Poland to react in a manner that does not invoke Art. 5. But I may be wrong...

    (*) I don't know if it is.
    Invoking Article 5 is ultimately a political decision. That's why the US was able to invoke Article 5 after 9/11, even though terrorism wasn't in mind when the NATO treaty was written.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,751

    algarkirk said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    algarkirk said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    John Redwood outlines the choice that faces Hunt and Sunak:
    https://johnredwoodsdiary.com/2022/11/15/a-budget-to-beat-recession-from-conservative-home/

    The Autumn Statement will be one of the most crucial budgets ever delivered. Rishi and Jeremy have in their hands the opportunity to rescue the Uk economy from poor performance and recession if they wish, or they can accept the depressing official advice and double down with austerity. Tax rises and the wrong spending cuts now will turn a downturn into a nasty and long recession. This will lead to job losses, struggling businesses and a bigger state deficit.

    Their challenge should be to put forward a budget and plan for growth as Liz Truss proposed, but one with forecasts, numbers and sensible controls over spending and borrowing which in his haste Kwasi left out. This is important for the whole country, and for MPs’ constituents. It is also important for the Conservative party whose reputation for economic competence hinges on it.

    Over the last fifty years we have seen Labour lose badly on two occasions and Conservatives lose twice, once badly, thanks to presiding over recessions

    Edward Heath presided over the 1973-4 recession. His 1970-2 policies of competition and credit control were inflationary leading to a borrowing binge . The inflation was worsened by the energy crisis when OPEC hiked the oil price. He tightened too much in response and lost the 1974 election.

    Harold Wilson lost control of the economy in 1974-5, created a recession and left office. Labour lost the next election under his successor.

    John Major on official advice put us into the Exchange rate Mechanism. As I warned it took us through a very predictable violent boom/bust cycle with a five quarter recession. This led to a huge defeat in 1997 which took the Conservatives 13 years to recover from.

    Gordon Brown created his own disaster, leading and encouraging the wrong official advice. He put us through a banking and credit boom, only to collapse it too fast through severe policy. The five quarter recession took the economy down by more than 6% . Labour have still not won an election in the 12 years that followed, with their reputation for economics in tatters.

    So he thinks we can abolish boom and bust.
    So you support an Austerity budget this week, on grounds there’s a sixty billion black hole to fill?
    There is no need for austerity, the £60bn could be raised through taxes on the wealthy.
    Austerity for the Rich has to at least be in the mix surely. They can't pull the same stunt as last time.
    Depends on your definition of austerity I guess.

    What would you envisage as austerity for the rich'? Sounds like tax rises by another name to me.
    Is what I mean, yes. I also agree with you about a Wealth Tax. That has to happen fairly soon imo. Probably under Labour. Maybe ease it in rather than big bang.
    It seems to me a straight wealth tax is not feasible. No-one has yet been able to organise a workable inheritance tax that raises big money. Driving wealth overseas is not a great idea.

    The area to look at is property and land. This has these great merits; you can't hide it, you can't take it abroad and much of it is massively undertaxed in relation to both value and CG, (especially in the south, as I live in the north, which of course should be exempt.)

    Naturally all such taxes should start at a place a fair bit above the assets of whoever is speaking at the time.
    A workable IHT isn't difficult, just unpalatable. Scrap exemptions for inter vivos transfer, to individuals or to trusts, and bingo. Where's the problem?
    It is difficult not least because of the unpalatable nature of the effects if there are no exemptions. Taxing inter vivos transactions of course is quite different from IHT (you aren't dead).

    Agricultural land?

    Why should agricultural land be exempt from IHT?

    If someone acquires ownership of commercial land through inheritance they ought to be able to take out a loan to pay any taxes due if required for a lot less than someone else could buy it for on the open market.

    And if they can't pay their taxes, then sell it.
    The belief that there is social value in communities. If someone is forced to sell their farm because it is reduced to non-viable levels then they move away
    Also, the belief there is value in local food production. Agricultural land isn't usually sold to farmers but to builders.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 46,248
    Former Kremlin advisor Sergei Markov claims that Poland started World War II due to its "arrogance and self-confidence" and warns that Poland could now start World War III for the same reasons


    https://twitter.com/samramani2/status/1592603091274149888?s=61&t=Mb7GoxAiejXTvgJnePlV5A
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,279
    edited November 2022
    rcs1000 said:

    Myth is a funny thing.

    In many peoples' minds, the Thatcherite governments of the early 80s cut taxes and that reduction in taxes led to economic growth and they therefore paid for themselves.

    That is not what her government did. In fact, that is the very opposite of Thatcherism. That's Keynesianism - i.e. injecting demand into the economy via reduces taxes (albeit the Keynesians usually increased spending too).

    The first thing that the Thatcher/Howe government did was to raise taxes to close the budget deficit. They did this by freezing personal allowances which significantly increased tax take. They also removed the prevailing double lock on pensions, and allowed them to just move up with inflation (rather than previously, the higher of inflation and wages.)

    Raising taxes and cutting spending was considered madness. 364 economists wrote to the Times decrying its foolishness.

    But it worked, and it worked because the core economic tenet of Thatcherism was that if you balanced your budget, you would have less inflation and lower interest rates, and therefore one would be able to cut taxes. Lower taxes were the consequence of holding spending down, and not frittering away money on interest payments.

    I therefore find it extraordinary that some people think that the Truss government was enacting Thatcherite policies. On the contrary, it was the very opposite of Thatcherite. It wanted a return to the 60s and 70s where governments spent more and taxed less to stimulate the economy and hope it grew faster than the budget deficits. It resulted in persistently high inflation and economic growth that lagged peers.

    People forget that the top rate of tax was 60% until 10 years into Thatcher's time in number 10, and the top rate of tax was 40% for about 99.5% of Blair and Brown's time in Downing Street.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,841
    Russia claiming a bigger boy did it and ran away.
  • DJ41DJ41 Posts: 792
    edited November 2022
    ydoethur said:

    DJ41 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Even Hungary are in emergency defence meeting mode
    'Interesting times'

    While Orban is a Putin Minime, the last thing he wants is for countries bordering Ukraine to be hit with Russian missiles. It might be him next.
    Some clearly just want an escalation.

    News items to be looking out for include:

    * any official Polish statement or diplomatic or other move (so far, they say they're investigating - the wimps clearly don't get their news from the Daily Express or PB)

    * any official Russian statement

    * any official NATO statement

    * similar surprise lethal possible-accident possible-attack events in any country
    Russia, for a start...
    It's possible.

    At the moment the Russian language coverage by TASS of the explosion in Poland is limited to saying ... that the US Pentagon isn't saying anything at the moment about what contacts it may have had with Warsaw about it. Is that just filler, or is the Russian government thinking primarily in terms of Moscow-Washington?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,751
    edited November 2022
    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    WW3 back in the box?

    Alternatively it might not be a Russian missile at all.

    @OAlexanderDK

    Have not yet been able to make a conclusive ID of the debris found at the site in Poland.

    At this time though, I would not rule out a Ukrainian S-300 malfunctioning. This piece of debris does look similar to end of the rocket engine. twitter.com/AmichaiStein1/…

    https://twitter.com/Samfr/status/1592595920642019328?cxt=HHwWgMDUianjhJosAAAA

    If this is a mistake, and if Russia can convince NATO it is a mistake, it will suit everyone to pretend it didn’t happen

    Big ifs, tho
    'The war never happened Vimes,' said Vetinari. 'It was all a - misunderstanding.'

    'Misunderstanding? People died!' said Vimes.

    'Quite so,' replied Vetinari. 'And that suggests, does it not, that we should try to understand one another as much as possible?'
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    Leon said:

    Former Kremlin advisor Sergei Markov claims that Poland started World War II due to its "arrogance and self-confidence" and warns that Poland could now start World War III for the same reasons

    https://twitter.com/samramani2/status/1592603091274149888?s=61&t=Mb7GoxAiejXTvgJnePlV5A

    When you regard asserting a right to exist with arrogant provocation that makes total sense. To a lunatic.

    Although,

    Markov claims that Poland’s Russophobia prevented the Soviet Army from exerting full control and gave Nazi Germany an opening to invade Poland


    Well, it's only slightly more ridiculous than some other claims of Russophobia I've seen.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 6,762

    kinabalu said:

    algarkirk said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    John Redwood outlines the choice that faces Hunt and Sunak:
    https://johnredwoodsdiary.com/2022/11/15/a-budget-to-beat-recession-from-conservative-home/

    The Autumn Statement will be one of the most crucial budgets ever delivered. Rishi and Jeremy have in their hands the opportunity to rescue the Uk economy from poor performance and recession if they wish, or they can accept the depressing official advice and double down with austerity. Tax rises and the wrong spending cuts now will turn a downturn into a nasty and long recession. This will lead to job losses, struggling businesses and a bigger state deficit.

    Their challenge should be to put forward a budget and plan for growth as Liz Truss proposed, but one with forecasts, numbers and sensible controls over spending and borrowing which in his haste Kwasi left out. This is important for the whole country, and for MPs’ constituents. It is also important for the Conservative party whose reputation for economic competence hinges on it.

    Over the last fifty years we have seen Labour lose badly on two occasions and Conservatives lose twice, once badly, thanks to presiding over recessions

    Edward Heath presided over the 1973-4 recession. His 1970-2 policies of competition and credit control were inflationary leading to a borrowing binge . The inflation was worsened by the energy crisis when OPEC hiked the oil price. He tightened too much in response and lost the 1974 election.

    Harold Wilson lost control of the economy in 1974-5, created a recession and left office. Labour lost the next election under his successor.

    John Major on official advice put us into the Exchange rate Mechanism. As I warned it took us through a very predictable violent boom/bust cycle with a five quarter recession. This led to a huge defeat in 1997 which took the Conservatives 13 years to recover from.

    Gordon Brown created his own disaster, leading and encouraging the wrong official advice. He put us through a banking and credit boom, only to collapse it too fast through severe policy. The five quarter recession took the economy down by more than 6% . Labour have still not won an election in the 12 years that followed, with their reputation for economics in tatters.

    So he thinks we can abolish boom and bust.
    So you support an Austerity budget this week, on grounds there’s a sixty billion black hole to fill?
    There is no need for austerity, the £60bn could be raised through taxes on the wealthy.
    Austerity for the Rich has to at least be in the mix surely. They can't pull the same stunt as last time.
    Depends on your definition of austerity I guess.

    What would you envisage as austerity for the rich'? Sounds like tax rises by another name to me.
    Is what I mean, yes. I also agree with you about a Wealth Tax. That has to happen fairly soon imo. Probably under Labour. Maybe ease it in rather than big bang.
    It seems to me a straight wealth tax is not feasible. No-one has yet been able to organise a workable inheritance tax that raises big money. Driving wealth overseas is not a great idea.

    The area to look at is property and land. This has these great merits; you can't hide it, you can't take it abroad and much of it is massively undertaxed in relation to both value and CG, (especially in the south, as I live in the north, which of course should be exempt.)

    Naturally all such taxes should start at a place a fair bit above the assets of whoever is speaking at the time.
    To me a Wealth Tax is levying a (small %) charge on Wealth each year rather than only on death. The latter being specifically an Inheritance Tax - which we already have. So then the big question is what Wealth. And I agree that property must feature.

    As for that last rather familiar sentiment, I'm going to have to nominate for the @Anabobazina list. :smile:
    I agree that annual taxes are better than one off ones.

    If it were up to me as a starting point I'd have something like:

    0.25% land tax+ per month for all Property with an 80% discount if that Property is the owners primary residence.

    100% surcharge for residential property owned by anyone non domiciled for taxation.

    Potentially a separate rate for agriculture and commercial.

    No exceptions or ways to evade the tax. Council Tax, Stamp Duty etc abolished.
    3% pa property tax very high
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,841
    YouGov will shortly have something out confirming 68% would support compulsory face masks during armageddon
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,771
    DJ41 said:

    kinabalu said:

    kle4 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Myth is a funny thing.

    In many peoples' minds, the Thatcherite governments of the early 80s cut taxes and that reduction in taxes led to economic growth and they therefore paid for themselves.

    That is not what her government did. In fact, that is the very opposite of Thatcherism. That's Keynesianism - i.e. injecting demand into the economy via reduces taxes (albeit the Keynesians usually increased spending too).

    The first thing that the Thatcher/Howe government did was to raise taxes to close the budget deficit. They did this by freezing personal allowances which significantly increased tax take. They also removed the prevailing double lock on pensions, and allowed them to just move up with inflation (rather than previously, the higher of inflation and wages.)

    Raising taxes and cutting spending was considered madness. 364 economists wrote to the Times decrying its foolishness.

    But it worked, and it worked because the core economic tenet of Thatcherism was that if you balanced your budget, you would have less inflation and lower interest rates, and therefore one would be able to cut taxes. Lower taxes were the consequence of holding spending down, and not frittering away money on interest payments.

    I therefore find it extraordinary that some people think that the Truss government was enacting Thatcherite policies. On the contrary, it was the very opposite of Thatcherite. It wanted a return to the 60s and 70s where governments spent more and taxed less to stimulate the economy and hope it grew faster than the budget deficits. It resulted in persistently high inflation and economic growth that lagged peers.

    That doesn't sound right to me. I'm pretty sure the only things Thatcher ever did in her time in office was to cut taxes and say she was not for turning. Also something something whatever someone on the right wants to support right now.
    And win back the Falklands and tell Gorbachev that "she could do business" with him.
    And sell council housing at a discount to those who had been paying rent on them for ages. That was huge.
    In her first budget, Thatcher cut the top rate of income tax from 83% to 60% and cut the basic rate too. When she left office IIRC the rates were at 40% and 25%.

    The Sunday Times pushed the Laffer curve sh*t like hell too. Less is more!

    Down the memory hole with it all.
    In the first Thatcher/Howe budget, while income tax rates were cut, VAT was raised from 8% to 15%.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,751
    DJ41 said:

    ydoethur said:

    DJ41 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Even Hungary are in emergency defence meeting mode
    'Interesting times'

    While Orban is a Putin Minime, the last thing he wants is for countries bordering Ukraine to be hit with Russian missiles. It might be him next.
    Some clearly just want an escalation.

    News items to be looking out for include:

    * any official Polish statement or diplomatic or other move (so far, they say they're investigating - the wimps clearly don't get their news from the Daily Express or PB)

    * any official Russian statement

    * any official NATO statement

    * similar surprise lethal possible-accident possible-attack events in any country
    Russia, for a start...
    It's possible.

    At the moment the Russian language coverage by TASS of the explosion in Poland is limited to saying ... that the US Pentagon isn't saying anything at the moment about what contacts it may have had with Warsaw about it. Is that just filler, or is the Russian government thinking primarily in terms of Moscow-Washington?
    Washington is saying the same thing.

    However, it has also said, and I quote: 'When it comes to our security commitments and Article 5, we've been crystal-clear that we will defend every inch of Nato territory.”

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-asia-63593855?ns_mchannel=social&ns_source=twitter&ns_campaign=bbc_live&ns_linkname=6373e93949d9ef23494ba85d&Pentagon looking into Poland missile strike reports&2022-11-15T19:32:52.904Z&ns_fee=0&pinned_post_locator=urn:asset:86fb0868-ea05-496f-836d-67bd2013d381&pinned_post_asset_id=6373e93949d9ef23494ba85d&pinned_post_type=share
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 19,611

    Ratters said:

    Hmm, difficult decision as to how to respond to the missile killing two in Poland.

    I don't think it's reasonable to assume it was an accident. But equally hard to prove it was deliberate.

    A response is needed and quickly. One that is a meaningful increase in support for Ukraine but not direct intervention, I think. Improved offensive weaponry seems the obvious option.

    Here's my hot take on a possible response:

    Poland (and possibly other NATO nations) call a no-fly zone over western, northern and southwestern Ukraine, tasked to shoot down missiles and, if possible, drones. Russia are now flying virtually no sorties outside their occupied areas due to Ukrainian air defences, so the risks of conflict between NATO and Russian aircraft would be minimal. It would also help Ukraine immensely. A buffer area of (say) 100 miles could be left between the front lines and the patrol areas.

    It would be risky, but Russia have given them an excuse.
    FFS. Spare us the PB Toy Soldiers.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,751
    Leon said:

    Former Kremlin advisor Sergei Markov claims that Poland started World War II due to its "arrogance and self-confidence" and warns that Poland could now start World War III for the same reasons


    https://twitter.com/samramani2/status/1592603091274149888?s=61&t=Mb7GoxAiejXTvgJnePlV5A

    You know, if we want to stop this war the key thing is to find the sabotage where somebody has put LSD in the vodka supplied to the Kremlin.

    I mean, a joke's a joke but this is going waaaaaay too far now.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,279
    edited November 2022
    Breaking news BBC:

    Missiles hit Poland. 2 killed.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,771
    kyf_100 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Of course, there is one thing that NATO could do that might just seriously fuck up Putin's war and at the same time possibly do some good on another level.

    They could attack Iran.

    I don't think they will, but it's possible it would (a) cut off the supply of drones and (b) might just destabilise the government long enough for the protests to take effect.

    Isn't this literally how nuclear war starts in Threads?
    By the way, who won in Threads?
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,278

    algarkirk said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    algarkirk said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    John Redwood outlines the choice that faces Hunt and Sunak:
    https://johnredwoodsdiary.com/2022/11/15/a-budget-to-beat-recession-from-conservative-home/

    The Autumn Statement will be one of the most crucial budgets ever delivered. Rishi and Jeremy have in their hands the opportunity to rescue the Uk economy from poor performance and recession if they wish, or they can accept the depressing official advice and double down with austerity. Tax rises and the wrong spending cuts now will turn a downturn into a nasty and long recession. This will lead to job losses, struggling businesses and a bigger state deficit.

    Their challenge should be to put forward a budget and plan for growth as Liz Truss proposed, but one with forecasts, numbers and sensible controls over spending and borrowing which in his haste Kwasi left out. This is important for the whole country, and for MPs’ constituents. It is also important for the Conservative party whose reputation for economic competence hinges on it.

    Over the last fifty years we have seen Labour lose badly on two occasions and Conservatives lose twice, once badly, thanks to presiding over recessions

    Edward Heath presided over the 1973-4 recession. His 1970-2 policies of competition and credit control were inflationary leading to a borrowing binge . The inflation was worsened by the energy crisis when OPEC hiked the oil price. He tightened too much in response and lost the 1974 election.

    Harold Wilson lost control of the economy in 1974-5, created a recession and left office. Labour lost the next election under his successor.

    John Major on official advice put us into the Exchange rate Mechanism. As I warned it took us through a very predictable violent boom/bust cycle with a five quarter recession. This led to a huge defeat in 1997 which took the Conservatives 13 years to recover from.

    Gordon Brown created his own disaster, leading and encouraging the wrong official advice. He put us through a banking and credit boom, only to collapse it too fast through severe policy. The five quarter recession took the economy down by more than 6% . Labour have still not won an election in the 12 years that followed, with their reputation for economics in tatters.

    So he thinks we can abolish boom and bust.
    So you support an Austerity budget this week, on grounds there’s a sixty billion black hole to fill?
    There is no need for austerity, the £60bn could be raised through taxes on the wealthy.
    Austerity for the Rich has to at least be in the mix surely. They can't pull the same stunt as last time.
    Depends on your definition of austerity I guess.

    What would you envisage as austerity for the rich'? Sounds like tax rises by another name to me.
    Is what I mean, yes. I also agree with you about a Wealth Tax. That has to happen fairly soon imo. Probably under Labour. Maybe ease it in rather than big bang.
    It seems to me a straight wealth tax is not feasible. No-one has yet been able to organise a workable inheritance tax that raises big money. Driving wealth overseas is not a great idea.

    The area to look at is property and land. This has these great merits; you can't hide it, you can't take it abroad and much of it is massively undertaxed in relation to both value and CG, (especially in the south, as I live in the north, which of course should be exempt.)

    Naturally all such taxes should start at a place a fair bit above the assets of whoever is speaking at the time.
    A workable IHT isn't difficult, just unpalatable. Scrap exemptions for inter vivos transfer, to individuals or to trusts, and bingo. Where's the problem?
    It is difficult not least because of the unpalatable nature of the effects if there are no exemptions. Taxing inter vivos transactions of course is quite different from IHT (you aren't dead).

    Agricultural land?

    Why should agricultural land be exempt from IHT?

    If someone acquires ownership of commercial land through inheritance they ought to be able to take out a loan to pay any taxes due if required for a lot less than someone else could buy it for on the open market.

    And if they can't pay their taxes, then sell it.
    The belief that there is social value in communities. If someone is forced to sell their farm because it is reduced to non-viable levels then they move away
    Well it didn't work.

    100 years ago there were a dozen farms in our village; today there is one. The land has been bought up by larger farms or is used for horses. The farmhouses have become country pads for (mainly) London emigres.

    It's a nonsense to think farms are a significant part of rural communities these days.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,851

    Ratters said:

    Hmm, difficult decision as to how to respond to the missile killing two in Poland.

    I don't think it's reasonable to assume it was an accident. But equally hard to prove it was deliberate.

    A response is needed and quickly. One that is a meaningful increase in support for Ukraine but not direct intervention, I think. Improved offensive weaponry seems the obvious option.

    And that, if it wasn't an accident, would be the point. Find a way of nudging over the line of acceptability. Many responses would be over-reactions, spinning us all into a really dark place. Or a place with a brief bright bucket of sunshine followed by lots and lots of darkness. But no response at all, and the nudger has won a bit by crossing the line.

    Very glad it's not my problem to solve, and hoping that the people solving it are very wise indeed.
    We could have worse than Joe Biden imo. I think he's just right for handling this Ukraine war. Resolute, experienced, pragmatic, humane, unbellicose.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 46,248

    Leon said:

    Well that’s that then

    I’ve really enjoyed human civilization. Ah well

    Come off it, you were bored to tears a couple of nights back.
    Somewhere out there is a lonely PB-er in a turf rooted house trying to work out how nuclear annihilation is ‘a positive for the cause of Scottish independence’
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,278
    Andy_JS said:

    Breaking news BBC:

    Missiles hit Poland.

    I think that news broke some time ago tbf.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,841
    rcs1000 said:

    kyf_100 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Of course, there is one thing that NATO could do that might just seriously fuck up Putin's war and at the same time possibly do some good on another level.

    They could attack Iran.

    I don't think they will, but it's possible it would (a) cut off the supply of drones and (b) might just destabilise the government long enough for the protests to take effect.

    Isn't this literally how nuclear war starts in Threads?
    By the way, who won in Threads?
    Not Reece Dinsdale. He deaded.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,279

    Andy_JS said:

    Breaking news BBC:

    Missiles hit Poland.

    I think that news broke some time ago tbf.
    Did it? Oh.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,574

    If Russia has struck Poland then Poland absolutely has the right to Invoke Article 5 of NATO.

    (Snip)

    There will be (must?) be very specific rules and situations under which Article 5 can be invoked. I've no idea what they are, but I can imagine this sort of situation would *not* give them the right - at least until the attack can be proved deliberate.

    As someone elsewhere states: might this just have been an ill-timed grain powder explosion if it was a silo? (yes, that's unlikely, especially as a piccie shows something claiming to be part of a missile (*), and the fact there were allegedly two explosions).

    If they were Russian missiles, I expect Poland to react in a manner that does not invoke Art. 5. But I may be wrong...

    (*) I don't know if it is.
    Invoking Article 5 is ultimately a political decision. That's why the US was able to invoke Article 5 after 9/11, even though terrorism wasn't in mind when the NATO treaty was written.
    The Russian missile screw-up that ended up killing two Poles will result in NATO invoking article 4 not article 5 (see below). The consultation will probably result in more support for Ukraine, particularly air and anti-air power. Will give Poland some real influence.
    https://twitter.com/PhillipsPOBrien/status/1592598256512798720
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 6,762

    From Twitter

    "Tories ruthless cuts warning"

    Spelling mistake??

    Ruthless curs?
    Rootless cuts?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,751
    rcs1000 said:

    kyf_100 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Of course, there is one thing that NATO could do that might just seriously fuck up Putin's war and at the same time possibly do some good on another level.

    They could attack Iran.

    I don't think they will, but it's possible it would (a) cut off the supply of drones and (b) might just destabilise the government long enough for the protests to take effect.

    Isn't this literally how nuclear war starts in Threads?
    By the way, who won in Threads?
    The people who cottoned on quickest.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392

    Ratters said:

    Hmm, difficult decision as to how to respond to the missile killing two in Poland.

    I don't think it's reasonable to assume it was an accident. But equally hard to prove it was deliberate.

    A response is needed and quickly. One that is a meaningful increase in support for Ukraine but not direct intervention, I think. Improved offensive weaponry seems the obvious option.

    Here's my hot take on a possible response:

    Poland (and possibly other NATO nations) call a no-fly zone over western, northern and southwestern Ukraine, tasked to shoot down missiles and, if possible, drones. Russia are now flying virtually no sorties outside their occupied areas due to Ukrainian air defences, so the risks of conflict between NATO and Russian aircraft would be minimal. It would also help Ukraine immensely. A buffer area of (say) 100 miles could be left between the front lines and the patrol areas.

    It would be risky, but Russia have given them an excuse.
    FFS. Spare us the PB Toy Soldiers.
    Alternatively, people can react to breaking news and not be required to be experts in international military relations, and thus risk making fools of themselves with either over or under reaction.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 14,878
    ydoethur said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    WW3 back in the box?

    Alternatively it might not be a Russian missile at all.

    @OAlexanderDK

    Have not yet been able to make a conclusive ID of the debris found at the site in Poland.

    At this time though, I would not rule out a Ukrainian S-300 malfunctioning. This piece of debris does look similar to end of the rocket engine. twitter.com/AmichaiStein1/…

    https://twitter.com/Samfr/status/1592595920642019328?cxt=HHwWgMDUianjhJosAAAA

    If this is a mistake, and if Russia can convince NATO it is a mistake, it will suit everyone to pretend it didn’t happen

    Big ifs, tho
    'The war never happened Vimes,' said Vetinari. 'It was all a - misunderstanding.'

    'Misunderstanding? People died!' said Vimes.

    'Quite so,' replied Vetinari. 'And that suggests, does it not, that we should try to understand one another as much as possible?'
    That book should be on the national curriculum.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,787
    @JuliaDavisNews
    Head of RT Margarita Simonyan: "Now Poland has its own Belgorod region. What did you expect?"


    https://twitter.com/JuliaDavisNews/status/1592598533424943106
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,751
    edited November 2022

    ydoethur said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    WW3 back in the box?

    Alternatively it might not be a Russian missile at all.

    @OAlexanderDK

    Have not yet been able to make a conclusive ID of the debris found at the site in Poland.

    At this time though, I would not rule out a Ukrainian S-300 malfunctioning. This piece of debris does look similar to end of the rocket engine. twitter.com/AmichaiStein1/…

    https://twitter.com/Samfr/status/1592595920642019328?cxt=HHwWgMDUianjhJosAAAA

    If this is a mistake, and if Russia can convince NATO it is a mistake, it will suit everyone to pretend it didn’t happen

    Big ifs, tho
    'The war never happened Vimes,' said Vetinari. 'It was all a - misunderstanding.'

    'Misunderstanding? People died!' said Vimes.

    'Quite so,' replied Vetinari. 'And that suggests, does it not, that we should try to understand one another as much as possible?'
    That book should be on the national curriculum.
    Yes, by Jingo!

    Edit - given it involves transgenderism I'm slightly surprised it's not already compulsory reading in Scotland, with armed police patrolling to ensure any women who show even the slightest concern at the idea of a man dressed as a woman getting into a female-only space being given 50 lashes there and then.
  • This is going to result in increased NATO drills and probably the deployment of anti-missile weaponry to the borders. The realpolitik of the situation won’t allow this to spill over into tit-for-tat. Yet.
This discussion has been closed.