There is hardly a sector that isn’t being adversely affected by the poor deal that Boris Johnson concluded in January 2021. Last week Lord Wolfson of Aspley Guise, the chief executive of Next and himself a Brexiteer, pleaded for a relaxation in immigration rules to address worker shortages that were causing severe headaches for the retailer and the wider economy. “This is not the Brexit I wanted,” he said.
Tom Kerridge, the restaurateur, similarly has pleaded for the return of young European workers upon whom the hospitality industry used to rely. Farmers have demanded an easing of restrictions on agricultural workers to avoid crops being left unpicked and animals being culled. Other sectors that used to rely on European Union workers now facing shortages include construction and social care.
None of this should surprise. In 2017, Adam Posen, another former MPC member, warned that Brexit would be stagflationary; that, by weakening the supply side of the economy through increased costs and new barriers to trade, it would boost inflation while constraining growth. Even some Brexiteer economists were honest enough to admit that Brexit would not be pain-free. Patrick Minford memorably said that over time Brexit would likely lead to the elimination of British manufacturing, but that this would be no bad thing as it would allow Britain to specialise in services.
Ah, Lord Wolfson again. Maybe if he were to pay his staff the same rates as his retail competitors, he might find it easier to hire people.
For unskilled and semi-skilled people, who were used to seeing the minimum wage be the maximum wage across whole industries, this is exactly what they voted for in 2016.
Brexit is dying on its arse. Imagine the swing against it by next GE.
I don't expect a major party in England to campaign on Rejoin at GE 2024, but I can see a strong backlash against the party that gave us the shit sandwich in the first place.
Revenge will be a dish served cold when umpteen Brexity Tories get their P45.
The shit sandwich of full employment and the highest pay rises for decades ?
Now perhaps the libertarian, globalist variety of Leaver is disappointed but then its up to them to make those aspects work. And that involves hard work not babbling about 'lucrative trade deals'.
But from Boston to Barnsley the working class Leavers got what they were promised, even the extra spending on the NHS.
Highest pay rises for decades? We currently have the biggest pay falls for decades in real terms.
Of course "wrong to leave" doesn't necessarily mean "lets rejoin"
Yeah, but polling for Rejoin isn't far behind...
As soon as the debate becomes about immigration that will change. The public despise the fact that it's forced on them and whenever the political conversation goes that way, the more immigration side loses. That will be even more the case as one in five of the population becomes foreign born.
It could go either way but if Brexit fails to deliver the reduction in immigration that the voters expected when they voted for it, it's not obvious that this will make them want to keep Brexit.
Real life is complex. Cause and effect are usual hidden and multifaceted.
But humans like to see simple stories, and draw easy lines of causation.
One of the principal characteristics of Brexit, IMO, is that it is largely orthogonal to many of the problems it was supposed to address.
Yet managing the process has been such a massive distraction to government (and the electorate), for the best part of a decade, that it has exacerbated every one of those problems.
And this is why pushing to rejoin would be such a bad idea. We'd spend at least another decade wrangling over the decision and doing nothing to address more immediate problems.
I'd tend to agree with that, though it's not a complete given - and it would be unrealistic even to contemplate the idea for the next few years.
In any event we're going to spend the rest of this decade trying to sort out the mess we've created with our external relations, even if the entire nation agreed never to mention Brexit again.
New Zealand’s Ministry of Health has quietly abandoned its public claim that puberty blocker drugs are a “safe and fully reversible” medicine for children who declare a transgender identity and want to interrupt their normal sexual development.
Is anyone else noticing a widespread lack of interest in the football world cup ?
I don't know if its because of its location or because its the wrong time of year to be holding it but nobody I know seems bothered.
Perhaps things will change when the matches begin.
Still at least its exposed Gary Neville as a money grabbing hypocrite.
Lots of sports bars boycotting it around here. No public viewings, unlike previous world cups. Supermarkets noticeably empty of flags and other fan tat (might be because they are so full of Christmas tat already), and not running world cup promotions. Football fans boycotting it. I haven't seen a single flag of any description so far. Seems very different to the last 2 world cups. Sponsors don't seem to be really pushing their connection. But Hummel got some good publicity by making their logo invisible on the Danish team kit.
David Beckham has managed to completely trash his reputation.
All that queueing kudos (for those that gave a toss about that sort of thing) down the plughole. Though tbf the Windsors should approve of bumming up middle eastern autocrats.
Rather says it all that many Europeans want to boycott this World Cup but had no issues whatever with Putin’s World Cup mere weeks after he had used chemical weapons in England.
What do you think it says?
Plenty of good reasons to boycott the 2018 World Cup in Russia, but Britain only decided not to send officials, or the royal family, after the Skripal poisoning on British soil, rather than for any other of Putin's crimes (obviously because *that* happened in Britain...). So far as I know, no country apart from Britain made any meaningful World Cup response to the Skripal poisoning. Even then Britain didn't do anything really meaningful like not allowing the England team to play.
The difference this time is that fans, people in general, feel that it is absurd that the World Cup is being held in the desert, in winter, in a country with little footballing tradition. And that the ONLY reason is because of corruption.
note also the "lack of interest" reported above by another_richard
also false to say that no "Europeans" had any issues with the world cup being held in Russia last time.
There's surely nothing wrong with playing the WC in winter. Every other WC should be played in the Northern hemisphere in winter. It's a winter sport. Why do we cede the advantage to hot countries?
Is anyone else noticing a widespread lack of interest in the football world cup ?
I don't know if its because of its location or because its the wrong time of year to be holding it but nobody I know seems bothered.
Perhaps things will change when the matches begin.
Still at least its exposed Gary Neville as a money grabbing hypocrite.
Lots of sports bars boycotting it around here. No public viewings, unlike previous world cups. Supermarkets noticeably empty of flags and other fan tat (might be because they are so full of Christmas tat already), and not running world cup promotions. Football fans boycotting it. I haven't seen a single flag of any description so far. Seems very different to the last 2 world cups. Sponsors don't seem to be really pushing their connection. But Hummel got some good publicity by making their logo invisible on the Danish team kit.
David Beckham has managed to completely trash his reputation.
All that queueing kudos (for those that gave a toss about that sort of thing) down the plughole. Though tbf the Windsors should approve of bumming up middle eastern autocrats.
Rather says it all that many Europeans want to boycott this World Cup but had no issues whatever with Putin’s World Cup mere weeks after he had used chemical weapons in England.
It is called the World Cup. Over half the world live in countries with some pretty malign governments. We are lucky to live here, but not sure that should mean we boycott sporting events in places that are worse. If we want worldwide sporting events, and we should do, they can't just be held in nice liberal democracies.
Beyond that Qatar should not be the host because they bribed to win it and are clearly too small to host it on their own.
There is hardly a sector that isn’t being adversely affected by the poor deal that Boris Johnson concluded in January 2021. Last week Lord Wolfson of Aspley Guise, the chief executive of Next and himself a Brexiteer, pleaded for a relaxation in immigration rules to address worker shortages that were causing severe headaches for the retailer and the wider economy. “This is not the Brexit I wanted,” he said.
Tom Kerridge, the restaurateur, similarly has pleaded for the return of young European workers upon whom the hospitality industry used to rely. Farmers have demanded an easing of restrictions on agricultural workers to avoid crops being left unpicked and animals being culled. Other sectors that used to rely on European Union workers now facing shortages include construction and social care.
None of this should surprise. In 2017, Adam Posen, another former MPC member, warned that Brexit would be stagflationary; that, by weakening the supply side of the economy through increased costs and new barriers to trade, it would boost inflation while constraining growth. Even some Brexiteer economists were honest enough to admit that Brexit would not be pain-free. Patrick Minford memorably said that over time Brexit would likely lead to the elimination of British manufacturing, but that this would be no bad thing as it would allow Britain to specialise in services.
Ah, Lord Wolfson again. Maybe if he were to pay his staff the same rates as his retail competitors, he might find it easier to hire people.
For unskilled and semi-skilled people, who were used to seeing the minimum wage be the maximum wage across whole industries, this is exactly what they voted for in 2016.
Sub inflation pay rises ? Sure.
As far as Wolfson is concerned, his substantive proposal was that companies should be free to recruit overseas where there are recruitment shortages, subject to a 10% payroll tax on those for whom immigration rules are relaxed. Which deals with your rhetorical point.
Trump’s announcement was exactly what it looked like: a desperate, low-energy attempt to head off 2024 GOP primary challengers; possibly ward off ongoing investigations into his seizure of classified documents, January 6th, and attempts to overturn 2020 vote results in Georgia; and consolidate his wavering support. He is too weak not to run; his dwindling political assets are still worth too much to abandon.
I think Trump will eventually do a deal with De Santis where he'll withdraw and give him an endorsement in place of a Presidential pardon for all "crimes and misdemeanors".
Yes, it will be a complete stitch up and it'll stink to high heaven but at least everyone will be able to move on...
Neither Trump nor DeSantis would agree that deal.
Ah, but after the Democrats' resurgence in the mid-terms, might DeSantis think this is a good nomination to lose? DeSantis likely has one lifetime shot at the presidency. 2024 no longer looks like the slam dunk it did just a fortnight ago. It would not surprise me if DeSantis announces his dedication to the state of Florida which has just re-elected him Governor, with an eye to the White House next time round when he would be up against a new, untried Democrat challenger, most likely the nationally unpopular Kamala Harris.
DeSantis isn't a particularly exceptional candidate or anything; He's just in a rare position in the venn diagram of being fairly well-thought-of by the Trumpists but also being a normal, capable politician.
The first of those two probably won't be a requirement come 2028, so he'd be unwise to miss his moment IMHO.
“Normal” is a flattering description to use. He only appears normal in comparison to Trump. He’s an anti-democratic populist who would’ve been entirely implausible as a candidate before Trump.
There is hardly a sector that isn’t being adversely affected by the poor deal that Boris Johnson concluded in January 2021. Last week Lord Wolfson of Aspley Guise, the chief executive of Next and himself a Brexiteer, pleaded for a relaxation in immigration rules to address worker shortages that were causing severe headaches for the retailer and the wider economy. “This is not the Brexit I wanted,” he said.
Tom Kerridge, the restaurateur, similarly has pleaded for the return of young European workers upon whom the hospitality industry used to rely. Farmers have demanded an easing of restrictions on agricultural workers to avoid crops being left unpicked and animals being culled. Other sectors that used to rely on European Union workers now facing shortages include construction and social care.
None of this should surprise. In 2017, Adam Posen, another former MPC member, warned that Brexit would be stagflationary; that, by weakening the supply side of the economy through increased costs and new barriers to trade, it would boost inflation while constraining growth. Even some Brexiteer economists were honest enough to admit that Brexit would not be pain-free. Patrick Minford memorably said that over time Brexit would likely lead to the elimination of British manufacturing, but that this would be no bad thing as it would allow Britain to specialise in services.
Starmer will eventually not be able to resist calls for a referendum on SM membership, as is right. The economic pressure from various sectors, followed by political pressure, will just be too great.
There is hardly a sector that isn’t being adversely affected by the poor deal that Boris Johnson concluded in January 2021. Last week Lord Wolfson of Aspley Guise, the chief executive of Next and himself a Brexiteer, pleaded for a relaxation in immigration rules to address worker shortages that were causing severe headaches for the retailer and the wider economy. “This is not the Brexit I wanted,” he said.
Tom Kerridge, the restaurateur, similarly has pleaded for the return of young European workers upon whom the hospitality industry used to rely. Farmers have demanded an easing of restrictions on agricultural workers to avoid crops being left unpicked and animals being culled. Other sectors that used to rely on European Union workers now facing shortages include construction and social care.
None of this should surprise. In 2017, Adam Posen, another former MPC member, warned that Brexit would be stagflationary; that, by weakening the supply side of the economy through increased costs and new barriers to trade, it would boost inflation while constraining growth. Even some Brexiteer economists were honest enough to admit that Brexit would not be pain-free. Patrick Minford memorably said that over time Brexit would likely lead to the elimination of British manufacturing, but that this would be no bad thing as it would allow Britain to specialise in services.
Ah, Lord Wolfson again. Maybe if he were to pay his staff the same rates as his retail competitors, he might find it easier to hire people.
For unskilled and semi-skilled people, who were used to seeing the minimum wage be the maximum wage across whole industries, this is exactly what they voted for in 2016.
Sub inflation pay rises ? Sure.
As far as Wolfson is concerned, his substantive proposal was that companies should be free to recruit overseas where there are recruitment shortages, subject to a 10% payroll tax on those for whom immigration rules are relaxed. Which deals with your rhetorical point.
Yes, he wants to pay the Lithuanians and Romanians minimum wage, rather than pay Brits £2 or £3 more. Probably some deal around company accommodation too, ‘bed space’ at £100 a week which makes him a bit more.
The government should tell him where to get off. There’s a £25k minimum salary for immigrants and shitty employers have to deal with it.
It's somewhat ironic and perhaps unfair that the economic costs of Brexit are falling on those that tended to vote against it.
Although actually, that's not that ironic. Because the ones who voted against it would more likely have been the ones getting an economic advantage from it. Similarly, the ones who disliked the EU would have been more likely to be among the ones who were losing out.
Yes, he wants to pay the Lithuanians and Romanians minimum wage, rather than pay Brits £2 or £3 more.
Nope
What’s more, with unemployment at a 40-year low of 3.4 per cent, it is ridiculous for ministers to insist that businesses can fill the 1.3 million vacancies by training domestic workers. All they can do is poach from other sectors, particularly the public sector, driving up wages and inflation and adding to the strain on public services.
It's somewhat ironic and perhaps unfair that the economic costs of Brexit are falling on those that tended to vote against it.
Although actually, that's not that ironic. Because the ones who voted against it would more likely have been the ones getting an economic advantage from it. Similarly, the ones who disliked the EU would have been more likely to be among the ones who were losing out.
Remainers footing the bill for Brexit feels ironic to me. Somehow I doubt the brexiteers grateful for fulfilling their dreams.
It's somewhat ironic and perhaps unfair that the economic costs of Brexit are falling on those that tended to vote against it.
Although actually, that's not that ironic. Because the ones who voted against it would more likely have been the ones getting an economic advantage from it. Similarly, the ones who disliked the EU would have been more likely to be among the ones who were losing out.
Remainers footing the bill for Brexit feels ironic to me. Somehow I doubt the brexiteers grateful for fulfilling their dreams.
The point being, that might be why they voted against it. While if the Brexiteers are gaining, having previously footed the bill for our membership of the EU, that's not irony, that's economics and self-interest in action.
Yes, he wants to pay the Lithuanians and Romanians minimum wage, rather than pay Brits £2 or £3 more.
Nope
What’s more, with unemployment at a 40-year low of 3.4 per cent, it is ridiculous for ministers to insist that businesses can fill the 1.3 million vacancies by training domestic workers. All they can do is poach from other sectors, particularly the public sector, driving up wages and inflation and adding to the strain on public services.
LOL, if his solution is to throw modern slaves at the problem, rather than invest in automation and productivity improvements, then perhaps he’s in the wrong industry.
Of course "wrong to leave" doesn't necessarily mean "lets rejoin"
Yeah, but polling for Rejoin isn't far behind...
A lot of people would think "rejoin" means on the previous arrangements... but of course that's not the case... There would need to be yet another extensive negotiation followed by another referendum which is why SKS won't go anywhere near this when he becomes Prime Minister.
But the question is what will Labour (and indeed Tory and Lib-Dem) rejoiners do when PM Starmer refuses to reopen Brexit? I don't think Labour are in the same position they were in 1997 when Blair made it clear he wouldn't reverse Thatchers economic reforms from the 1980s...
There will be an absolute meltdown between SKS and his party in 2025/2026 when he refuses to reopen Brexit (just one of several contradictions that means Labour and SKS will be a one term government from 2024 to 2029 followed by a swift return of the Tories IMO...)
Nah, Tories are dead for a political generation.
No government since 1970 has been a single term, and most get 3 terms.
Usually that is because the party goes crazy in opposition and they have to learn not to do that before they moderate again. The Tories already learned that lesson with Truss.
And because they tend to lose by a landslide and it takes time to claw the way back. But Labour would have to chalk up an extraordinarily large swing next time to put the Tories into such a position, even if that feels possible right now.
It's somewhat ironic and perhaps unfair that the economic costs of Brexit are falling on those that tended to vote against it.
Although actually, that's not that ironic. Because the ones who voted against it would more likely have been the ones getting an economic advantage from it. Similarly, the ones who disliked the EU would have been more likely to be among the ones who were losing out.
Remainers footing the bill for Brexit feels ironic to me. Somehow I doubt the brexiteers grateful for fulfilling their dreams.
The point being, that might be why they voted against it. While if the Brexiteers are gaining, having previously footed the bill for our membership of the EU, that's not irony, that's economics and self-interest in action.
What is ironic is that some Brexit supporters expect the rest of the country to be grateful for what they have done and that it will stick once they're not around.
To repeat an analogy I've used before, Brexit is like a dubious heirloom that has to stay on the mantelpiece for now, because it's not worth the argument that would happen when the relatives visit.
It's somewhat ironic and perhaps unfair that the economic costs of Brexit are falling on those that tended to vote against it.
Although actually, that's not that ironic. Because the ones who voted against it would more likely have been the ones getting an economic advantage from it. Similarly, the ones who disliked the EU would have been more likely to be among the ones who were losing out.
What would be ironic is the Conservatives grasping the nettle of a GE24 manifesto pledge for an EURef to align via EEA/EFTA/rejoin. So the Cons win a decade of power on the ticket of "Leave" and another five (at least) on "Leave" was an error.
It's somewhat ironic and perhaps unfair that the economic costs of Brexit are falling on those that tended to vote against it.
Although actually, that's not that ironic. Because the ones who voted against it would more likely have been the ones getting an economic advantage from it. Similarly, the ones who disliked the EU would have been more likely to be among the ones who were losing out.
Remainers footing the bill for Brexit feels ironic to me. Somehow I doubt the brexiteers grateful for fulfilling their dreams.
The point being, that might be why they voted against it. While if the Brexiteers are gaining, having previously footed the bill for our membership of the EU, that's not irony, that's economics and self-interest in action.
What is ironic is that some Brexit supporters expect the rest of the country to be grateful for what they have done and that it will stick once they're not around.
To repeat an analogy I've used before, Brexit is like a dubious heirloom that has to stay on the mantelpiece for now, because it's not worth the argument that would happen when the relatives visit.
Although again, you could make the same comment of Remainers. 'The rest of the country should be grateful we've signed up to an organisation that makes us richer at their expense.'
Incidentally I'm not saying that this is necessarily the case, just that that's the way many people who voted for Brexit clearly felt. I think the country as a whole will be poorer due to leaving the EU, but for people who are earning more money in the short term, and there a number of them, it may not feel that way.
Edit - a particularly egregious example of this was the bankers urging people to vote to stay in because otherwise the impact on the City would be disastrous. Yes, it was true, and yes, that's bad news for the country on a macroeconomic level. But it really wasn't smart for a bunch of people who had steered the country to near-bankruptcy by their cupidity and stupidity and then made us pick up the tab so they could escape the consequences telling us all we had to act in their economic interests not those of people on minimum wage in Stoke.
The problem for the pro-investment and pro-high wages Brexit argument is, that most of the key Brexiters have historically had no interest in these largely Continental things ; quite the opposite, in fact. It's difficult to get away from the fact that the core Brexit economic ideology, the one which originated the movement at Lord Leach's house in 2013-14, was most represented by the Truss government.
I'm starting to get polling vibes that Trump might havr the shine comong off hum.
His Republican favourability is down to 71%. That's down to Jan 6th levels.
If it keeps going down then he starts to get a smell of death around him.
Of course he has bounced back in the past so I am not writing him off and am still green on him for the Nom.
Put him in a field of any five politicians in the states and he will win as he has a stubborn dedicated and loyal hardcore following, and the other four will split the rest of the vote.
Put him in a field of two and he would lose to 80% of politicians as he is a horrible egomaniac toddler.
The challenge for the Republican party and De Santis will be to keep the field down to two or three, and I doubt they can do that.
The problem for the pro-investment and pro-high wages Brexit argument is, that most of the key Brexiters have historically had no interest in these largely Continental things ; quite the opposite, in fact. It's difficult to get away from the fact that the core Brexit economic ideology, the one which originated the movement at Lord Leach's house in 2013-14, was most represented by the Truss government.
"Brexit facilitated Truss" is an argument the Tories are going to struggle with
Worth remembering the last time a government tried that framing was Gordon Brown’s from 2008-10 (arguably with greater legitimacy). The then Conservative opposition had none of it and crafted a successful political strategy to nullify it. Same challenge now faces Labour.
It's somewhat ironic and perhaps unfair that the economic costs of Brexit are falling on those that tended to vote against it.
Although actually, that's not that ironic. Because the ones who voted against it would more likely have been the ones getting an economic advantage from it. Similarly, the ones who disliked the EU would have been more likely to be among the ones who were losing out.
Remainers footing the bill for Brexit feels ironic to me. Somehow I doubt the brexiteers grateful for fulfilling their dreams.
The point being, that might be why they voted against it. While if the Brexiteers are gaining, having previously footed the bill for our membership of the EU, that's not irony, that's economics and self-interest in action.
What is ironic is that some Brexit supporters expect the rest of the country to be grateful for what they have done and that it will stick once they're not around.
To repeat an analogy I've used before, Brexit is like a dubious heirloom that has to stay on the mantelpiece for now, because it's not worth the argument that would happen when the relatives visit.
And to think we were told it would just be like leaving the golf club.
More broadly voters could be forgiven for being confused. We’ve gone from a £50bn or so “essential” tax giveaway to a £50bn or so equally “essential” tightening in less than two months. A swing of £100bn. Economically, politically, philosophically, as a journey it’s a wild one. https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1593157720672448512
Brexit
a £50bn or so “essential” tax giveaway was "the benefit of Brexit"
a £50bn or so equally “essential” tightening is because Brexit was a shit fairy tale
It's somewhat ironic and perhaps unfair that the economic costs of Brexit are falling on those that tended to vote against it.
Although actually, that's not that ironic. Because the ones who voted against it would more likely have been the ones getting an economic advantage from it. Similarly, the ones who disliked the EU would have been more likely to be among the ones who were losing out.
Remainers footing the bill for Brexit feels ironic to me. Somehow I doubt the brexiteers grateful for fulfilling their dreams.
The point being, that might be why they voted against it. While if the Brexiteers are gaining, having previously footed the bill for our membership of the EU, that's not irony, that's economics and self-interest in action.
What is ironic is that some Brexit supporters expect the rest of the country to be grateful for what they have done and that it will stick once they're not around.
To repeat an analogy I've used before, Brexit is like a dubious heirloom that has to stay on the mantelpiece for now, because it's not worth the argument that would happen when the relatives visit.
And to think we were told it would just be like leaving the golf club.
Well, it was, actually.
It's just that most people who said that had never tried to leave one and didn't know how very difficult it can be.
Sorting out the handicaps is a right bloody pain. (No, that's not a pun although it could be.)
It's somewhat ironic and perhaps unfair that the economic costs of Brexit are falling on those that tended to vote against it.
Although actually, that's not that ironic. Because the ones who voted against it would more likely have been the ones getting an economic advantage from it. Similarly, the ones who disliked the EU would have been more likely to be among the ones who were losing out.
Remainers footing the bill for Brexit feels ironic to me. Somehow I doubt the brexiteers grateful for fulfilling their dreams.
The point being, that might be why they voted against it. While if the Brexiteers are gaining, having previously footed the bill for our membership of the EU, that's not irony, that's economics and self-interest in action.
The irony with post-referendum Remainers belittling Leave voters as “thick” is delicious. The “Polish Plumber” beloved of middle class dinner parties meant very different things to different people.
There are many reasons for younger generations being dissatisfied with their lot - Brexit being a minor one among them - but it acts as a lightning rod for other, bigger issues.
How would you distinguish a division full of cocks from the rest of the Wagner group?
Cock is not a good translation for петух in my opinion because it's loaded with alternate meaning in English. Chicken or maybe cockerel would have been better. The Russian word with equivalent pejorative heft to cock is хуй. You can hear it regularly in SMO videos from both sides.
I'm starting to get polling vibes that Trump might havr the shine comong off hum.
His Republican favourability is down to 71%. That's down to Jan 6th levels.
If it keeps going down then he starts to get a smell of death around him.
Of course he has bounced back in the past so I am not writing him off and am still green on him for the Nom.
I agree it’s possible. I am not counting him out, because his ability to generate media attention and create dog whistles and attack lines is second to none. He will be the one setting the narrative, for good and ill.
I have also seen and heard many scoffing commentators in recent days telling us that he’s done and has no hope of winning. It all sounds eerily similar to what they were saying in 2016.
He certainly doesn’t look as invincible as he did a few weeks ago, and I do think the party is starting to cast round for an alternative. But I’m cautious.
Yes, he wants to pay the Lithuanians and Romanians minimum wage, rather than pay Brits £2 or £3 more.
Nope
What’s more, with unemployment at a 40-year low of 3.4 per cent, it is ridiculous for ministers to insist that businesses can fill the 1.3 million vacancies by training domestic workers. All they can do is poach from other sectors, particularly the public sector, driving up wages and inflation and adding to the strain on public services.
LOL, if his solution is to throw modern slaves at the problem, rather than invest in automation and productivity improvements, then perhaps he’s in the wrong industry.
Your obsession with a single individual is, as Scott suggests, besides the point.
You're effectively arguing for a 20% rise across the entire economy for low paid individuals - which is at least an arguable point - but which, obviously, would do nothing to solve recruitment shortages.
If you'd said "perhaps he's in the wrong country", you might be nearer the mark.
How would you distinguish a division full of cocks from the rest of the Wagner group?
Cock is not a good translation for петух in my opinion because it's loaded with alternate meaning in English. Chicken or maybe cockerel would have been better. The Russian word with equivalent pejorative heft to cock is хуй. You can hear it regularly in SMO videos from both sides.
So the Wagner group recruits a load of men who are chicken?
It's somewhat ironic and perhaps unfair that the economic costs of Brexit are falling on those that tended to vote against it.
Although actually, that's not that ironic. Because the ones who voted against it would more likely have been the ones getting an economic advantage from it. Similarly, the ones who disliked the EU would have been more likely to be among the ones who were losing out.
Remainers footing the bill for Brexit feels ironic to me. Somehow I doubt the brexiteers grateful for fulfilling their dreams.
The point being, that might be why they voted against it. While if the Brexiteers are gaining, having previously footed the bill for our membership of the EU, that's not irony, that's economics and self-interest in action.
What is ironic is that some Brexit supporters expect the rest of the country to be grateful for what they have done and that it will stick once they're not around.
To repeat an analogy I've used before, Brexit is like a dubious heirloom that has to stay on the mantelpiece for now, because it's not worth the argument that would happen when the relatives visit.
And to think we were told it would just be like leaving the golf club.
Well, it was, actually.
It's just that most people who said that had never tried to leave one and didn't know how very difficult it can be.
Sorting out the handicaps is a right bloody pain. (No, that's not a pun although it could be.)
THinking more that it was a family membership and most of the family members are pissed at no longer being allowed in.
How would you distinguish a division full of cocks from the rest of the Wagner group?
Cock is not a good translation for петух in my opinion because it's loaded with alternate meaning in English. Chicken or maybe cockerel would have been better. The Russian word with equivalent pejorative heft to cock is хуй. You can hear it regularly in SMO videos from both sides.
The real point is that Russia is importing criminal culture wholesale into both the military, and society at large.
Yes, he wants to pay the Lithuanians and Romanians minimum wage, rather than pay Brits £2 or £3 more.
Nope
What’s more, with unemployment at a 40-year low of 3.4 per cent, it is ridiculous for ministers to insist that businesses can fill the 1.3 million vacancies by training domestic workers. All they can do is poach from other sectors, particularly the public sector, driving up wages and inflation and adding to the strain on public services.
LOL, if his solution is to throw modern slaves at the problem, rather than invest in automation and productivity improvements, then perhaps he’s in the wrong industry.
You're effectively arguing for a 20% rise across the entire economy for low paid individuals - which is at least an arguable point - but which, obviously, would do nothing to solve recruitment shortages.
But might incentivise capital investment to improve productivity. Employers should not be relying on the tax payer funded in-work benefits to run their businesses.
I'm starting to get polling vibes that Trump might havr the shine comong off hum.
His Republican favourability is down to 71%. That's down to Jan 6th levels.
If it keeps going down then he starts to get a smell of death around him.
Of course he has bounced back in the past so I am not writing him off and am still green on him for the Nom.
I agree it’s possible. I am not counting him out, because his ability to generate media attention and create dog whistles and attack lines is second to none. He will be the one setting the narrative, for good and ill.
I have also seen and heard many scoffing commentators in recent days telling us that he’s done and has no hope of winning. It all sounds eerily similar to what they were saying in 2016.
He certainly doesn’t look as invincible as he did a few weeks ago, and I do think the party is starting to cast round for an alternative. But I’m cautious.
He'll probably run as an independent if he loses the primary (while claiming it was rigged) so the GOP's choice is maybe 50% chance of a win with DJT or 100% lose with somebody else.
It's somewhat ironic and perhaps unfair that the economic costs of Brexit are falling on those that tended to vote against it.
Although actually, that's not that ironic. Because the ones who voted against it would more likely have been the ones getting an economic advantage from it. Similarly, the ones who disliked the EU would have been more likely to be among the ones who were losing out.
Remainers footing the bill for Brexit feels ironic to me. Somehow I doubt the brexiteers grateful for fulfilling their dreams.
The point being, that might be why they voted against it. While if the Brexiteers are gaining, having previously footed the bill for our membership of the EU, that's not irony, that's economics and self-interest in action.
What is ironic is that some Brexit supporters expect the rest of the country to be grateful for what they have done and that it will stick once they're not around.
To repeat an analogy I've used before, Brexit is like a dubious heirloom that has to stay on the mantelpiece for now, because it's not worth the argument that would happen when the relatives visit.
Although again, you could make the same comment of Remainers. 'The rest of the country should be grateful we've signed up to an organisation that makes us richer at their expense.'
Incidentally I'm not saying that this is necessarily the case, just that that's the way many people who voted for Brexit clearly felt. I think the country as a whole will be poorer due to leaving the EU, but for people who are earning more money in the short term, and there a number of them, it may not feel that way.
Edit - a particularly egregious example of this was the bankers urging people to vote to stay in because otherwise the impact on the City would be disastrous. Yes, it was true, and yes, that's bad news for the country on a macroeconomic level. But it really wasn't smart for a bunch of people who had steered the country to near-bankruptcy by their cupidity and stupidity and then made us pick up the tab so they could escape the consequences telling us all we had to act in their economic interests not those of people on minimum wage in Stoke.
True, as far as it goes. A chunk of the Brexit vote was from the forgotten and despairing, though it's not obvious that the last few years have made things better for them.
But an awful lot of the impetus for Brexit was from the very comfortable indeed. Often those whose interest in wages is now the extent to which other people's taxes support their pensions.
If Brexit is just one part of a programme to encourage much higher investment levels and skills, where is the rest of the government's political programme ? You're not going to achieve a social democratic paradise with an American economic libertarian front of house.
How would you distinguish a division full of cocks from the rest of the Wagner group?
Cock is not a good translation for петух in my opinion because it's loaded with alternate meaning in English. Chicken or maybe cockerel would have been better. The Russian word with equivalent pejorative heft to cock is хуй. You can hear it regularly in SMO videos from both sides.
So the Wagner group recruits a load of men who are chicken?
Well, who are we to dispute that?
The point of the thread is that W don't recruit петухами as the prison caste system means other zeks won't serve with them.
Yes, he wants to pay the Lithuanians and Romanians minimum wage, rather than pay Brits £2 or £3 more.
Nope
What’s more, with unemployment at a 40-year low of 3.4 per cent, it is ridiculous for ministers to insist that businesses can fill the 1.3 million vacancies by training domestic workers. All they can do is poach from other sectors, particularly the public sector, driving up wages and inflation and adding to the strain on public services.
LOL, if his solution is to throw modern slaves at the problem, rather than invest in automation and productivity improvements, then perhaps he’s in the wrong industry.
You're effectively arguing for a 20% rise across the entire economy for low paid individuals - which is at least an arguable point - but which, obviously, would do nothing to solve recruitment shortages.
But might incentivise capital investment to improve productivity. Employers should not be relying on the tax payer funded in-work benefits to run their businesses.
It might. Good luck with (for instance) keeping social care open in the meantime.
Long term solutions to immediate problems aren't effective policy. What Wolfson was suggesting (and you might decide that his 10% premium ought to be 20%, etc) is a short term solution to an immediate problem, and provides a similar incentive without the massive disruption.
More broadly voters could be forgiven for being confused. We’ve gone from a £50bn or so “essential” tax giveaway to a £50bn or so equally “essential” tightening in less than two months. A swing of £100bn. Economically, politically, philosophically, as a journey it’s a wild one. https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1593157720672448512
Brexit
a £50bn or so “essential” tax giveaway was "the benefit of Brexit"
a £50bn or so equally “essential” tightening is because Brexit was a shit fairy tale
If nothing else, it demonstrates the complete and utter incoherence of the current Conservative party as a policy making institution.
The problem for the pro-investment and pro-high wages Brexit argument is, that most of the key Brexiters have historically had no interest in these largely Continental things ; quite the opposite, in fact. It's difficult to get away from the fact that the core Brexit economic ideology, the one which originated the movement at Lord Leach's house in 2013-14, was most represented by the Truss government.
This is overdone. Everyone knew and knows that the Brexit choice was only about the UK's constitutional relationship with the EU - are we a member or not.
On both sides the arguments ranged widely - that's politics and PR. But neither Remain nor Leave represented a political party or parties.
The consequences were and are a matter for Parliament and government.
There is no such thing a a 'core Brexit economic ideology'. For a parallel think SNP. They want independence. Once they have it, how it is handled is a matter for the new Scottish government, not the by then defunct campaigns.
It will soon be a matter for a Labour government, who on the Brexit decision basis are perfectly entitled to take us into the SM etc if they (and the EU) wish.
How would you distinguish a division full of cocks from the rest of the Wagner group?
Cock is not a good translation for петух in my opinion because it's loaded with alternate meaning in English. Chicken or maybe cockerel would have been better. The Russian word with equivalent pejorative heft to cock is хуй. You can hear it regularly in SMO videos from both sides.
The real point is that Russia is importing criminal culture wholesale into both the military, and society at large.
The extra-judicial execution by sledgehammer of one of their own members the other day, which attracted no interest at all from the Russian authorities, is a stark demonstration of that.
I'm starting to get polling vibes that Trump might havr the shine comong off hum.
His Republican favourability is down to 71%. That's down to Jan 6th levels.
If it keeps going down then he starts to get a smell of death around him.
Of course he has bounced back in the past so I am not writing him off and am still green on him for the Nom.
Put him in a field of any five politicians in the states and he will win as he has a stubborn dedicated and loyal hardcore following, and the other four will split the rest of the vote.
Put him in a field of two and he would lose to 80% of politicians as he is a horrible egomaniac toddler.
The challenge for the Republican party and De Santis will be to keep the field down to two or three, and I doubt they can do that.
That's how I would see it too, except I think there is a quite high chance that DeSantis (or possibly someone else if he doesn't run or crashes for some reason) will be able to emerge as the main alternative to Trump - in a way, he already has. We've had a few head to head Republican primary polls where DeSantis beats Trump, and now we are starting to get polls showing DeSantis ahead of Trump in polls that include a whole load of other candidates. DeSantis is way ahead of the field, he should probably indicate he will definitely run sooner rather than later, to try and fix the narrative that it is a 2 horse race.
Yes, he wants to pay the Lithuanians and Romanians minimum wage, rather than pay Brits £2 or £3 more.
Nope
What’s more, with unemployment at a 40-year low of 3.4 per cent, it is ridiculous for ministers to insist that businesses can fill the 1.3 million vacancies by training domestic workers. All they can do is poach from other sectors, particularly the public sector, driving up wages and inflation and adding to the strain on public services.
LOL, if his solution is to throw modern slaves at the problem, rather than invest in automation and productivity improvements, then perhaps he’s in the wrong industry.
Your obsession with a single individual is, as Scott suggests, besides the point.
You're effectively arguing for a 20% rise across the entire economy for low paid individuals - which is at least an arguable point - but which, obviously, would do nothing to solve recruitment shortages.
If you'd said "perhaps he's in the wrong country", you might be nearer the mark.
No, I’m arguing that, if companies can’t find staff, then they’re not offering enough money.
Way too many business leaders have spent the last couple of decades throwing the unlimited cheap EU labour at any problem they encounter, and so the UK is one of the least productive major economies. That needs to be unwound, which means companies investing in capital rather than labour.
Not sure the EU would even want the UK back and so the question of re-joining isn’t just up to the UK .
Many think it’s an unmitigated disaster but wouldn’t vote to re-join as they don’t want another few years of yet more division and think it’s really best to future generations to make that decision .
There would have to be a huge majority for re-joining . The majority of over 65s continue to cling to the delusion that Brexit is going well and don’t have the humility to accept they screwed their grand children’s hopes .
Yes, he wants to pay the Lithuanians and Romanians minimum wage, rather than pay Brits £2 or £3 more.
Nope
What’s more, with unemployment at a 40-year low of 3.4 per cent, it is ridiculous for ministers to insist that businesses can fill the 1.3 million vacancies by training domestic workers. All they can do is poach from other sectors, particularly the public sector, driving up wages and inflation and adding to the strain on public services.
LOL, if his solution is to throw modern slaves at the problem, rather than invest in automation and productivity improvements, then perhaps he’s in the wrong industry.
Your obsession with a single individual is, as Scott suggests, besides the point.
You're effectively arguing for a 20% rise across the entire economy for low paid individuals - which is at least an arguable point - but which, obviously, would do nothing to solve recruitment shortages.
If you'd said "perhaps he's in the wrong country", you might be nearer the mark.
No, I’m arguing that, if companies can’t find staff, then they’re not offering enough money.
Way too many business leaders have spent the last couple of decades throwing the unlimited cheap EU labour at any problem they encounter, and so the UK is one of the least productive major economies. That needs to be unwound, which means companies investing in capital rather than labour.
See my comment above.
"Long term solutions to immediate problems aren't effective policy. What Wolfson was suggesting (and you might decide that his 10% premium ought to be 20%, etc) is a short term solution to an immediate problem, and provides a similar incentive without the massive disruption."
Yes, he wants to pay the Lithuanians and Romanians minimum wage, rather than pay Brits £2 or £3 more.
Nope
What’s more, with unemployment at a 40-year low of 3.4 per cent, it is ridiculous for ministers to insist that businesses can fill the 1.3 million vacancies by training domestic workers. All they can do is poach from other sectors, particularly the public sector, driving up wages and inflation and adding to the strain on public services.
LOL, if his solution is to throw modern slaves at the problem, rather than invest in automation and productivity improvements, then perhaps he’s in the wrong industry.
You're effectively arguing for a 20% rise across the entire economy for low paid individuals - which is at least an arguable point - but which, obviously, would do nothing to solve recruitment shortages.
But might incentivise capital investment to improve productivity. Employers should not be relying on the tax payer funded in-work benefits to run their businesses.
It might. Good luck with (for instance) keeping social care open in the meantime.
Long term solutions to immediate problems aren't effective policy. What Wolfson was suggesting (and you might decide that his 10% premium ought to be 20%, etc) is a short term solution to an immediate problem, and provides a similar incentive without the massive disruption.
He’s gone up from 7% then?
same pay as their UK colleagues and secondly, businesses must pay a percentage (say seven per cent) of overseas workers’ wages to the Government as a visa tax.
Not sure the EU would even want the UK back and so the question of re-joining isn’t just up to the UK .
Many think it’s an unmitigated disaster but wouldn’t vote to re-join as they don’t want another few years of yet more division and think it’s really best to future generations to make that decision .
There would have to be a huge majority for re-joining . The majority of over 65s continue to cling to the delusion that Brexit is going well and don’t have the humility to accept they screwed their grand children’s hopes .
Isn't that a subset of Conservative policy on pandering to the over-65 voters on tax, housing policy ....
The point is that the EU is a superpower. Not militarily but in all other ways and we were at the very centre of this superpower. We walked away and replaced it with nothing because our position was irreplaceable. Like New York walking away from the United States.
If we do nothing we'll just go downhill watching the EU prosper. Whichever Party we have in power this is going to become apparent. The old people who voted Leave because they yearned for the Empire will be gone and they'll be replaced by those who remembered we were once at the very centre of this thriving economic and cutural Union. Far and away the best and most diverse in the world
In the words of Marlon Brando in On The Waterfront "You don’t understand! I coulda had class. I coulda been a contender, I could’ve been somebody, instead of a bum, which is what I am with a one way ticket to palookaville”
The problem for the pro-investment and pro-high wages Brexit argument is, that most of the key Brexiters have historically had no interest in these largely Continental things ; quite the opposite, in fact. It's difficult to get away from the fact that the core Brexit economic ideology, the one which originated the movement at Lord Leach's house in 2013-14, was most represented by the Truss government.
This is overdone. Everyone knew and knows that the Brexit choice was only about the UK's constitutional relationship with the EU - are we a member or not.
On both sides the arguments ranged widely - that's politics and PR. But neither Remain nor Leave represented a political party or parties.
The consequences were and are a matter for Parliament and government.
There is no such thing a a 'core Brexit economic ideology'. For a parallel think SNP. They want independence. Once they have it, how it is handled is a matter for the new Scottish government, not the by then defunct campaigns.
I can't agree here ; I would say Truss's government represents the core ideology in a number of ways ; trade deals with the Pacific and Australasia which she trumpeted over Europe ; a cavalier attitude to our near neighbours that they ultimately needed us and so diplomatically should not be taken at face value ; and a clear determination to deregulate and de-tax wherever possible, as Truss and Kwarteng were also planning with what they said with their further supply-side reforms.
I don't think it's possible that the animating, historical ideology wasn't this ; that goes back before Lord Leach to James Goldsmith and the Referendum Party in the 1990's. It's certainly possible to argue that Brexit could be turned into something else ; but I would say that it's very difficult to argue against the fact that that is where, ideologically, it starts from, and was originally intended to achieve.
Not sure the EU would even want the UK back and so the question of re-joining isn’t just up to the UK .
Many think it’s an unmitigated disaster but wouldn’t vote to re-join as they don’t want another few years of yet more division and think it’s really best to future generations to make that decision .
There would have to be a huge majority for re-joining . The majority of over 65s continue to cling to the delusion that Brexit is going well and don’t have the humility to accept they screwed their grand children’s hopes .
The EU would have us back in a heartbeat. What better way of demonstrating the folly of trying to be outside than having an ex-member come crawling back begging for readmission?
But they would only have us back on their terms - Schengen and Euro being foremost among them - which would almost certainly be still totally unacceptable to the British electorate. Heck, those would be controversial enough in Scotland if it ever became independent, never mind England.
Curious essay in the Guardian. Which identifies a certain strand of thought, in that some folk want proper binmen humping bins on their backs* rather than modern wheelie bins.
Yes, he wants to pay the Lithuanians and Romanians minimum wage, rather than pay Brits £2 or £3 more.
Nope
What’s more, with unemployment at a 40-year low of 3.4 per cent, it is ridiculous for ministers to insist that businesses can fill the 1.3 million vacancies by training domestic workers. All they can do is poach from other sectors, particularly the public sector, driving up wages and inflation and adding to the strain on public services.
LOL, if his solution is to throw modern slaves at the problem, rather than invest in automation and productivity improvements, then perhaps he’s in the wrong industry.
You're effectively arguing for a 20% rise across the entire economy for low paid individuals - which is at least an arguable point - but which, obviously, would do nothing to solve recruitment shortages.
But might incentivise capital investment to improve productivity. Employers should not be relying on the tax payer funded in-work benefits to run their businesses.
Or employers might just not bother, and move the business somewhere else.
More broadly voters could be forgiven for being confused. We’ve gone from a £50bn or so “essential” tax giveaway to a £50bn or so equally “essential” tightening in less than two months. A swing of £100bn. Economically, politically, philosophically, as a journey it’s a wild one. https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1593157720672448512
Brexit
a £50bn or so “essential” tax giveaway was "the benefit of Brexit"
a £50bn or so equally “essential” tightening is because Brexit was a shit fairy tale
If nothing else, it demonstrates the complete and utter incoherence of the current Conservative party as a policy making institution.
It certainly shows that Truss and KK were way out on a limb and, of course, the membership voted for that despite Rishi explaining that it would be disastrous.
But that was an anomaly, swiftly corrected. We are back to policies that have been followed since 2010 for good or ill today. The broadest shoulders carrying the heaviest load (unless they are retired, natch). A general increase in the tax burden as we try to squeeze out the deficit in a low growth economy struggling against difficult international headwinds and without the capacity for much internal stimulus because of the horrendous trade deficit. Constant pressure on public sector budgets augmented by the fact we seem to spend more and more on public services for less and less.
Is there a better alternative? I am really not sure. Truss economics certainly didn't work but vividly showed us how little room for maneuver we have got. Labour, after the next election, will find the same.
I'm starting to get polling vibes that Trump might havr the shine comong off hum.
His Republican favourability is down to 71%. That's down to Jan 6th levels.
If it keeps going down then he starts to get a smell of death around him.
Of course he has bounced back in the past so I am not writing him off and am still green on him for the Nom.
I agree it’s possible. I am not counting him out, because his ability to generate media attention and create dog whistles and attack lines is second to none. He will be the one setting the narrative, for good and ill.
I have also seen and heard many scoffing commentators in recent days telling us that he’s done and has no hope of winning. It all sounds eerily similar to what they were saying in 2016.
He certainly doesn’t look as invincible as he did a few weeks ago, and I do think the party is starting to cast round for an alternative. But I’m cautious.
On the other hand let's not make the mistake of thinking: because people said he wouldn't win in 2016 were wrong, that is evidence that people saying he won't win next time are also wrong. This time they are probably right.
I would say Truss's government represents the core ideology in a number of ways ; trade deals with the Pacific and Australasia which she trumpeted over Europe ; a cavalier attitude to our near neighbours that they ultimately needed us and so diplomatically should not be taken at face value ; and a clear determination to deregulate and de-tax wherever possible, as Truss and Kwarteng were also planning with what they said with their further supply-side reforms.
And as we always knew, but they now admit, those trade deals were really, really bad for us
Not sure the EU would even want the UK back and so the question of re-joining isn’t just up to the UK .
Many think it’s an unmitigated disaster but wouldn’t vote to re-join as they don’t want another few years of yet more division and think it’s really best to future generations to make that decision .
There would have to be a huge majority for re-joining . The majority of over 65s continue to cling to the delusion that Brexit is going well and don’t have the humility to accept they screwed their grand children’s hopes .
Most of our problems have been consistent since the GFC of 2008, and were somewhat buried beneath a growth bubble before that.
Neither being inside nor outside the EU has made much of a difference to them.
Dominic Raab presided over a “perverse culture of fear” at the Ministry of Justice, with civil servants forced to see their doctors for stress, a formal complaint alleges
Officials said the DPM was "abrupt" and "rude" and left many in tears
Curious essay in the Guardian. Which identifies a certain strand of thought, in that some folk want proper binmen humping bins on their backs* rather than modern wheelie bins.
Wheelie bins seem an utterly brilliant improvement on what came before, for both binmen and residents. Except for hilly areas, perhaps? (don't have many of those around these parts...)
Not sure the EU would even want the UK back and so the question of re-joining isn’t just up to the UK .
Many think it’s an unmitigated disaster but wouldn’t vote to re-join as they don’t want another few years of yet more division and think it’s really best to future generations to make that decision .
There would have to be a huge majority for re-joining . The majority of over 65s continue to cling to the delusion that Brexit is going well and don’t have the humility to accept they screwed their grand children’s hopes .
The EU would have us back in a heartbeat. What better way of demonstrating the folly of trying to be outside than having an ex-member come crawling back begging for readmission?
But they would only have us back on their terms - Schengen and Euro being foremost among them - which would almost certainly be still totally unacceptable to the British electorate. Heck, those would be controversial enough in Scotland if it ever became independent, never mind England.
In the event of independence the window would by definition have already shifted massively in Scotland, so that doesn't work very well: but in any case, even now EEA would win hands down, no doubt at all. (Not the same as the EU, though.)
Curious essay in the Guardian. Which identifies a certain strand of thought, in that some folk want proper binmen humping bins on their backs* rather than modern wheelie bins.
Wheelie bins seem an utterly brilliant improvement on what came before, for both binmen and residents. Except for hilly areas, perhaps? (don't have many of those around these parts...)
Especially as one can get small ones for small families/one person households.* But Binmenism is, as the article points out, more a political variant of Four Yorkshiremenism than any rational analysis.
Edit: And giant ones for giant families. At least round here.
Yes, he wants to pay the Lithuanians and Romanians minimum wage, rather than pay Brits £2 or £3 more.
Nope
What’s more, with unemployment at a 40-year low of 3.4 per cent, it is ridiculous for ministers to insist that businesses can fill the 1.3 million vacancies by training domestic workers. All they can do is poach from other sectors, particularly the public sector, driving up wages and inflation and adding to the strain on public services.
LOL, if his solution is to throw modern slaves at the problem, rather than invest in automation and productivity improvements, then perhaps he’s in the wrong industry.
You're effectively arguing for a 20% rise across the entire economy for low paid individuals - which is at least an arguable point - but which, obviously, would do nothing to solve recruitment shortages.
But might incentivise capital investment to improve productivity. Employers should not be relying on the tax payer funded in-work benefits to run their businesses.
It might. Good luck with (for instance) keeping social care open in the meantime.
Long term solutions to immediate problems aren't effective policy. What Wolfson was suggesting (and you might decide that his 10% premium ought to be 20%, etc) is a short term solution to an immediate problem, and provides a similar incentive without the massive disruption.
He’s gone up from 7% then?
same pay as their UK colleagues and secondly, businesses must pay a percentage (say seven per cent) of overseas workers’ wages to the Government as a visa tax.
He has - that article is over a month old. But that's irrelevant, as it's government that would set any such rate, not Wolfson. The principle of the idea is sensible, and ought to be considered.
Again, the obsession with making rhetorical points about a given individual or company is a distraction.
Not sure the EU would even want the UK back and so the question of re-joining isn’t just up to the UK .
Many think it’s an unmitigated disaster but wouldn’t vote to re-join as they don’t want another few years of yet more division and think it’s really best to future generations to make that decision .
There would have to be a huge majority for re-joining . The majority of over 65s continue to cling to the delusion that Brexit is going well and don’t have the humility to accept they screwed their grand children’s hopes .
Labour are firmly in the "lets move on" camp because the EU won't countenance discussions about rejoining. So why make false promises which would be politically tricky, knowing you can't deliver on them?
Brexit is a political event which forces us to reassess our place in the world as smaller and less important than we thought - this generation's Suez. We will have to change what we are doing and how we work with other nations following its after-effects, but there is no magic wand that can be waved to go status quo ante.
Not sure the EU would even want the UK back and so the question of re-joining isn’t just up to the UK .
Many think it’s an unmitigated disaster but wouldn’t vote to re-join as they don’t want another few years of yet more division and think it’s really best to future generations to make that decision .
There would have to be a huge majority for re-joining . The majority of over 65s continue to cling to the delusion that Brexit is going well and don’t have the humility to accept they screwed their grand children’s hopes .
So why make false promises which would be politically tricky, knowing you can't deliver on them?
How would you distinguish a division full of cocks from the rest of the Wagner group?
Cock is not a good translation for петух in my opinion because it's loaded with alternate meaning in English. Chicken or maybe cockerel would have been better. The Russian word with equivalent pejorative heft to cock is хуй. You can hear it regularly in SMO videos from both sides.
The real point is that Russia is importing criminal culture wholesale into both the military, and society at large.
That thread brought to mind the drone video a month or so ago on Telegram, where the drone dropped a grenade on a Russian that was playing his mate’s trombone behind a crumbling wall in a ruined building.
Not sure the EU would even want the UK back and so the question of re-joining isn’t just up to the UK .
Many think it’s an unmitigated disaster but wouldn’t vote to re-join as they don’t want another few years of yet more division and think it’s really best to future generations to make that decision .
There would have to be a huge majority for re-joining . The majority of over 65s continue to cling to the delusion that Brexit is going well and don’t have the humility to accept they screwed their grand children’s hopes .
Most of our problems have been consistent since the GFC of 2008, and were somewhat buried beneath a growth bubble before that.
Neither being inside nor outside the EU has made much of a difference to them.
But making the change from one to the other has.
Reposting from upthread...
One of the principal characteristics of Brexit, IMO, is that it is largely orthogonal to many of the problems it was supposed to address.
Yet managing the process has been such a massive distraction to government (and the electorate), for the best part of a decade, that it has exacerbated every one of those problems. That we have chosen a particularly costly and disruptive form of Brexit, out of a misguided desire to "respect the decision" of an electorate which now largely regards that decision as a mistake, would be hilarious.
If it did not have such malign consequences for the country.
Yes, he wants to pay the Lithuanians and Romanians minimum wage, rather than pay Brits £2 or £3 more.
Nope
What’s more, with unemployment at a 40-year low of 3.4 per cent, it is ridiculous for ministers to insist that businesses can fill the 1.3 million vacancies by training domestic workers. All they can do is poach from other sectors, particularly the public sector, driving up wages and inflation and adding to the strain on public services.
LOL, if his solution is to throw modern slaves at the problem, rather than invest in automation and productivity improvements, then perhaps he’s in the wrong industry.
You're effectively arguing for a 20% rise across the entire economy for low paid individuals - which is at least an arguable point - but which, obviously, would do nothing to solve recruitment shortages.
But might incentivise capital investment to improve productivity. Employers should not be relying on the tax payer funded in-work benefits to run their businesses.
Or employers might just not bother, and move the business somewhere else.
Wolfson is in retail and pays less than his competitors.
The EU would have us back in a heartbeat. What better way of demonstrating the folly of trying to be outside than having an ex-member come crawling back begging for readmission?
But they would only have us back on their terms - Schengen and Euro being foremost among them - which would almost certainly be still totally unacceptable to the British electorate. Heck, those would be controversial enough in Scotland if it ever became independent, never mind England.
People should read this. The current polling may show people are unhappy with Brexit, but when people are asked what they do want it's not the EU. It's really worth having a look at, what people want is incompatible with EU and Single Market membership, and it's very unlikely to ever be offered. Cakeism is one way of describing it, we'd like all of the good bits and none of the bad. Hell if the EU offered that I'd bite their hand off, but that's not going to happen.
Brexit is dying on its arse. Imagine the swing against it by next GE.
I don't expect a major party in England to campaign on Rejoin at GE 2024, but I can see a strong backlash against the party that gave us the shit sandwich in the first place.
Revenge will be a dish served cold when umpteen Brexity Tories get their P45.
The shit sandwich of full employment and the highest pay rises for decades ?
Now perhaps the libertarian, globalist variety of Leaver is disappointed but then its up to them to make those aspects work. And that involves hard work not babbling about 'lucrative trade deals'.
But from Boston to Barnsley the working class Leavers got what they were promised, even the extra spending on the NHS.
Highest pay rises for decades? We currently have the biggest pay falls for decades in real terms.
Which would be even bigger real terms pay falls had it not been for the pay rises due to market conditions for employment.
Across the whole EU they have about the same inflation as us, but much lower wage growth than us, so real terms they are far worse off than we are.
The problem for the pro-investment and pro-high wages Brexit argument is, that most of the key Brexiters have historically had no interest in these largely Continental things ; quite the opposite, in fact. It's difficult to get away from the fact that the core Brexit economic ideology, the one which originated the movement at Lord Leach's house in 2013-14, was most represented by the Truss government.
This is overdone. Everyone knew and knows that the Brexit choice was only about the UK's constitutional relationship with the EU - are we a member or not.
On both sides the arguments ranged widely - that's politics and PR. But neither Remain nor Leave represented a political party or parties.
The consequences were and are a matter for Parliament and government.
There is no such thing a a 'core Brexit economic ideology'. For a parallel think SNP. They want independence. Once they have it, how it is handled is a matter for the new Scottish government, not the by then defunct campaigns.
I can't agree here ; I would say Truss's government represents the core ideology in a number of ways ; trade deals with the Pacific and Australasia which she trumpeted over Europe ; a cavalier attitude to our near neighbours that they ultimately needed us and so diplomatically should not be taken at face value ; and a clear determination to deregulate and de-tax wherever possible, as Truss and Kwarteng were also planning with what they said with their further supply-side reforms.
I don't think it's possible that the animating, historical ideology wasn't this ; that goes back before Lord Leach to James Goldsmith and the Referendum Party in the 1990's. It's certainly possible to argue that Brexit could be turned into something else ; but I would say that it's very difficult to argue against the fact that that's where, ideologically, it starts from, and was meant to achieve.
Thanks - much agreement of course in the sense that some very self important people had self important agendas about being infallible. But that doesn't, I think, represent the Brexit majority vote. There aren't enough Austrian school economists in Grimsby to achieve this, nor (despite the massive efforts of the critics) are there enough extremists of any sort to make up 17 million votes. This isn't Trump's America.
Most Brexit voters wanted an end to how FoM worked at the time and for parliament to have back such sovereignty that it had delegated to others. For other issues, it was a pretty mixed bag of opinions for parliament, newly freed to do so, to sort.
Off topic, but on the lack of excitement about the forthcoming World Cup. My extensive research among the younger football-mad generation attributes this definitively to:
1. They are devastated that they will be without Premier League football (including the Fantasy League) for six weeks. Utterly bereft.
2. They are both baffled and irritated that it is being held in Qatar, having googled details about this country. They can only assume it's about money, and nothing to do with football.
No. 1 carries more weight than No. 2. I'm sure they'll all start watching it when it actually starts.
How would you distinguish a division full of cocks from the rest of the Wagner group?
Cock is not a good translation for петух in my opinion because it's loaded with alternate meaning in English. Chicken or maybe cockerel would have been better. The Russian word with equivalent pejorative heft to cock is хуй. You can hear it regularly in SMO videos from both sides.
So the Wagner group recruits a load of men who are chicken?
Well, who are we to dispute that?
The point of the thread is that W don't recruit петухами as the prison caste system means other zeks won't serve with them.
If Wagner won’t recruit them, the social hierarchy demands that new ones be created to fulfil the same function
If the economic outlook stays significantly worse than that of mainland Europe, and people's living standards continue to decline relative to it, I don't think higher economic growth in return for more European migrants will be that hard a sell. As mentioned earlier in the week, parts of Eastern Europe surpassing us in affluence a couple of years into Starmer's reign could be a key milestone. It will be single market rather than the EU.
Not sure the EU would even want the UK back and so the question of re-joining isn’t just up to the UK .
Many think it’s an unmitigated disaster but wouldn’t vote to re-join as they don’t want another few years of yet more division and think it’s really best to future generations to make that decision .
There would have to be a huge majority for re-joining . The majority of over 65s continue to cling to the delusion that Brexit is going well and don’t have the humility to accept they screwed their grand children’s hopes .
The EU would have us back in a heartbeat. What better way of demonstrating the folly of trying to be outside than having an ex-member come crawling back begging for readmission?
But they would only have us back on their terms - Schengen and Euro being foremost among them - which would almost certainly be still totally unacceptable to the British electorate. Heck, those would be controversial enough in Scotland if it ever became independent, never mind England.
In a heartbeat is surely an exaggeration. It would also demonstrate the folly of leaving if the UK tried to get back in and was refused! And when you say "the EU", every individual member state would have to support Britain's application.
On the other hand, opt-outs from (or indefinite delays to) both Schengen and the UK joining the Euro seem plausible to me, if things ever got that far - which they won't any time soon.
Yes, he wants to pay the Lithuanians and Romanians minimum wage, rather than pay Brits £2 or £3 more.
Nope
What’s more, with unemployment at a 40-year low of 3.4 per cent, it is ridiculous for ministers to insist that businesses can fill the 1.3 million vacancies by training domestic workers. All they can do is poach from other sectors, particularly the public sector, driving up wages and inflation and adding to the strain on public services.
LOL, if his solution is to throw modern slaves at the problem, rather than invest in automation and productivity improvements, then perhaps he’s in the wrong industry.
You're effectively arguing for a 20% rise across the entire economy for low paid individuals - which is at least an arguable point - but which, obviously, would do nothing to solve recruitment shortages.
But might incentivise capital investment to improve productivity. Employers should not be relying on the tax payer funded in-work benefits to run their businesses.
It might. Good luck with (for instance) keeping social care open in the meantime.
Long term solutions to immediate problems aren't effective policy. What Wolfson was suggesting (and you might decide that his 10% premium ought to be 20%, etc) is a short term solution to an immediate problem, and provides a similar incentive without the massive disruption.
He’s gone up from 7% then?
same pay as their UK colleagues and secondly, businesses must pay a percentage (say seven per cent) of overseas workers’ wages to the Government as a visa tax.
He has - that article is over a month old. But that's irrelevant, as it's government that would set any such rate, not Wolfson. The principle of the idea is sensible, and ought to be considered.
Again, the obsession with making rhetorical points about a given individual or company is a distraction.
A distraction from the point that an employer who pays less than his competitors has difficulty recruiting staff but it’s “because of Brexit”?
The point is that the EU is a superpower. Not militarily but in all other ways and we were at the very centre of this superpower. We walked away and replaced it with nothing because our position was irreplaceable. Like New York walking away from the United States.
If we do nothing we'll just go downhill watching the EU prosper. Whichever Party we have in power this is going to become apparent. The old people who voted Leave because they yearned for the Empire will be gone and they'll be replaced by those who remembered we were once at the very centre of this thriving economic and cutural Union. Far and away the best and most diverse in the world
In the words of Marlon Brando in On The Waterfront "You don’t understand! I coulda had class. I coulda been a contender, I could’ve been somebody, instead of a bum, which is what I am with a one way ticket to palookaville”
Yes. We lived under the pretence that we are Britain, a mega-power. We were, but haven't been for a while. And even the remaining genuine mega-powers know that today's world requires co-operation not a bulldog standing alone approach.
Spitting Image nailed it decades ago with their "Last Night of the Yobs" sketch, which included this:
Rule Britannia Britannia rules not much Less than the Spanish and the Belgians and the Dutch Rule Britannia Britannia's not so great Why can't we come out and admit it We're Tenth Rate
OK that is exaggerated satire. But there is a point there. We have worse infrastructure than most of our neighbours. Worst public services. Rampant inequality where so many of Europe's most deprived regions were in the UK. We can fix all that if we want to. But instead of people being horrified about a 2 year old boy dying from breathing in the mould in his Rochdale council house, the instinct of many is to question why his parents were here at all.
Yes, he wants to pay the Lithuanians and Romanians minimum wage, rather than pay Brits £2 or £3 more.
Nope
What’s more, with unemployment at a 40-year low of 3.4 per cent, it is ridiculous for ministers to insist that businesses can fill the 1.3 million vacancies by training domestic workers. All they can do is poach from other sectors, particularly the public sector, driving up wages and inflation and adding to the strain on public services.
LOL, if his solution is to throw modern slaves at the problem, rather than invest in automation and productivity improvements, then perhaps he’s in the wrong industry.
You're effectively arguing for a 20% rise across the entire economy for low paid individuals - which is at least an arguable point - but which, obviously, would do nothing to solve recruitment shortages.
But might incentivise capital investment to improve productivity. Employers should not be relying on the tax payer funded in-work benefits to run their businesses.
It might. Good luck with (for instance) keeping social care open in the meantime.
Long term solutions to immediate problems aren't effective policy. What Wolfson was suggesting (and you might decide that his 10% premium ought to be 20%, etc) is a short term solution to an immediate problem, and provides a similar incentive without the massive disruption.
He’s gone up from 7% then?
same pay as their UK colleagues and secondly, businesses must pay a percentage (say seven per cent) of overseas workers’ wages to the Government as a visa tax.
He has - that article is over a month old. But that's irrelevant, as it's government that would set any such rate, not Wolfson. The principle of the idea is sensible, and ought to be considered.
Again, the obsession with making rhetorical points about a given individual or company is a distraction.
The principle is not sensible, remotely. We don't need people coming over for minimum wage and getting welfare, so that firms can pay a small premium above minimum wage rather than a substantial wage people can live on and support their families with.
Many of Wolfson's competitors are now paying £12+ per hour, he wants to pay minimum wage (£9.50) with a 10% surcharge and you consider that sensible? Maybe for his bottom line its sensible, but for the country?
Skilled migration paying good taxes and not getting welfare absolutely we should welcome as much of as possible, but unskilled minimum wage? No, there's no need for that.
I'm starting to get polling vibes that Trump might havr the shine comong off hum.
His Republican favourability is down to 71%. That's down to Jan 6th levels.
If it keeps going down then he starts to get a smell of death around him.
Of course he has bounced back in the past so I am not writing him off and am still green on him for the Nom.
I agree it’s possible. I am not counting him out, because his ability to generate media attention and create dog whistles and attack lines is second to none. He will be the one setting the narrative, for good and ill.
I have also seen and heard many scoffing commentators in recent days telling us that he’s done and has no hope of winning. It all sounds eerily similar to what they were saying in 2016.
He certainly doesn’t look as invincible as he did a few weeks ago, and I do think the party is starting to cast round for an alternative. But I’m cautious.
Main thing in his favour is that he still has a chokehold on small denomination donations.
This actually works in DeSantis's favour as all the big money has already lined up behind him. So it is hard for extra candidates to get going and split the anti-Trump vote.
If the economic outlook stays significantly worse than that of mainland Europe, and people's living standards continue to decline relative to it, I don't think higher economic growth in return for more European migrants will be that hard a sell. As mentioned earlier in the week, parts of Eastern Europe surpassing us in affluence a couple of years into Starmer's reign could be a key milestone. It will be single market rather than the EU.
The flaw in your theory is that people's living standards are doing better in the UK than mainland Europe.
Mainland Europe has inflation, just like us, but much lower wage growth, so is seeing even bigger real terms falls in wages.
From last night, on my lay of Kier Starmer at 1.5, I have no special insights or information.
My assessment is that Rishi will sour rapidly following this budget, particularly his polling, and the Right of the Conservative Party will go into revolt. Because that's what they do.
There was clearly a stronger constituency of support for Boris (100MPs+) than I'd thought before and it might only take another 70 or so MPs to become really desperate that they'll switch, VONC Rishi, and roll the dice on him again in 2024. Try him out again just before an election campaign. He can deliver some goodies in a giveaway/pre-election budget.
That means Kier would not be the next PM. I don't think his chances of being the next PM are as high as 66%. And there's probably some value in Boris because once all real alternatives to him have been tried I think they'll come back to him.
The point is that the EU is a superpower. Not militarily but in all other ways and we were at the very centre of this superpower. We walked away and replaced it with nothing because our position was irreplaceable. Like New York walking away from the United States.
If we do nothing we'll just go downhill watching the EU prosper. Whichever Party we have in power this is going to become apparent. The old people who voted Leave because they yearned for the Empire will be gone and they'll be replaced by those who remembered we were once at the very centre of this thriving economic and cutural Union. Far and away the best and most diverse in the world
In the words of Marlon Brando in On The Waterfront "You don’t understand! I coulda had class. I coulda been a contender, I could’ve been somebody, instead of a bum, which is what I am with a one way ticket to palookaville”
We are still in the top 10 economies in the world, a G7 and G20 and UN Security Council permanent member, hardly Burkino Faso.
Plus even EFTA is not full EU and Eurozone membership, in which case we would not really be an independent nation anyway but just a region of what is becoming an EU Federal Superstate with its own President, Parliament, Court and soon its own army
The EU would have us back in a heartbeat. What better way of demonstrating the folly of trying to be outside than having an ex-member come crawling back begging for readmission?
But they would only have us back on their terms - Schengen and Euro being foremost among them - which would almost certainly be still totally unacceptable to the British electorate. Heck, those would be controversial enough in Scotland if it ever became independent, never mind England.
People should read this. The current polling may show people are unhappy with Brexit, but when people are asked what they do want it's not the EU. It's really worth having a look at, what people want is incompatible with EU and Single Market membership, and it's very unlikely to ever be offered. Cakeism is one way of describing it, we'd like all of the good bits and none of the bad. Hell if the EU offered that I'd bite their hand off, but that's not going to happen.
If that's how people really think I genuinely see no medium term prospect of us even rejoining the Single Market nevermind the whole EU.
Cakeism is pretty universal. I am perfectly happy if someone comes along and manages to double the NHS budget and also abolish all the taxes I pay. Over tax and spend however the Thatcher years drilled a lesson about their relation which generally didn't cross people's mind before.
When I went to university in 1973 it never crossed my mind who paid the tuition fees. It just happened. No-one ever thought about it. That was fairly true across the board. Things have changed.
But the EU/UK relation is complex and dull. We are only now learning that cakeism is false across the board. But it's not alone. For example, to this day the BBC never report a demand for above inflation pay rise for group X as in fact impoverishing all those in groups A-Z excluding X who do with 2%. Floreat cakeism.
"Selfish nurses want to bankrupt low paid workers" (The Guardian). Not yet.
Yes, he wants to pay the Lithuanians and Romanians minimum wage, rather than pay Brits £2 or £3 more.
Nope
What’s more, with unemployment at a 40-year low of 3.4 per cent, it is ridiculous for ministers to insist that businesses can fill the 1.3 million vacancies by training domestic workers. All they can do is poach from other sectors, particularly the public sector, driving up wages and inflation and adding to the strain on public services.
The labour participation rate has gone up and overall employment is falling. The unemployment rate only tells part of the story.
OKC signing on, still from his hospital bed. Dictation is not easy on iPad! Delighted to see the poll; I don’t think it’ll be easy getting back, but I still hope we do so.
Comments
https://mobile.twitter.com/ChristopherJM/status/1593135793174110209
For unskilled and semi-skilled people, who were used to seeing the minimum wage be the maximum wage across whole industries, this is exactly what they voted for in 2016.
In hindsight, do you think Britain was right or wrong to vote to leave the European Union?
Right to Leave: 19%
Wrong to Leave: 66%
https://twitter.com/Samfr/status/1592928730527285250
In any event we're going to spend the rest of this decade trying to sort out the mess we've created with our external relations, even if the entire nation agreed never to mention Brexit again.
https://genderclinicnews.substack.com/p/on-the-defensive
Beyond that Qatar should not be the host because they bribed to win it and are clearly too small to host it on their own.
As far as Wolfson is concerned, his substantive proposal was that companies should be free to recruit overseas where there are recruitment shortages, subject to a 10% payroll tax on those for whom immigration rules are relaxed.
Which deals with your rhetorical point.
1) I don't make political predictions.
2) AND ALSO, it is really really hard to imagine how the current Pence "split the difference" rehab campaign is going to attract people in either the MAGA or the anti-MAGA camps.
https://mobile.twitter.com/JamesFallows/status/1593139137875300355
The government should tell him where to get off. There’s a £25k minimum salary for immigrants and shitty employers have to deal with it.
What’s more, with unemployment at a 40-year low of 3.4 per cent, it is ridiculous for ministers to insist that businesses can fill the 1.3 million vacancies by training domestic workers. All they can do is poach from other sectors, particularly the public sector, driving up wages and inflation and adding to the strain on public services.
His Republican favourability is down to 71%. That's down to Jan 6th levels.
If it keeps going down then he starts to get a smell of death around him.
Of course he has bounced back in the past so I am not writing him off and am still green on him for the Nom.
Without Malan England wouldn't even have been in the match.
To repeat an analogy I've used before, Brexit is like a dubious heirloom that has to stay on the mantelpiece for now, because it's not worth the argument that would happen when the relatives visit.
Incidentally I'm not saying that this is necessarily the case, just that that's the way many people who voted for Brexit clearly felt. I think the country as a whole will be poorer due to leaving the EU, but for people who are earning more money in the short term, and there a number of them, it may not feel that way.
Edit - a particularly egregious example of this was the bankers urging people to vote to stay in because otherwise the impact on the City would be disastrous. Yes, it was true, and yes, that's bad news for the country on a macroeconomic level. But it really wasn't smart for a bunch of people who had steered the country to near-bankruptcy by their cupidity and stupidity and then made us pick up the tab so they could escape the consequences telling us all we had to act in their economic interests not those of people on minimum wage in Stoke.
Put him in a field of two and he would lose to 80% of politicians as he is a horrible egomaniac toddler.
The challenge for the Republican party and De Santis will be to keep the field down to two or three, and I doubt they can do that.
https://twitter.com/TorstenBell/status/1593156316243296256
Worth remembering the last time a government tried that framing was Gordon Brown’s from 2008-10 (arguably with greater legitimacy). The then Conservative opposition had none of it and crafted a successful political strategy to nullify it. Same challenge now faces Labour.
https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1593155892199165953
https://mobile.twitter.com/ChrisO_wiki/status/1593042478235807744
https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1593157720672448512
Brexit
a £50bn or so “essential” tax giveaway was "the benefit of Brexit"
a £50bn or so equally “essential” tightening is because Brexit was a shit fairy tale
It's just that most people who said that had never tried to leave one and didn't know how very difficult it can be.
Sorting out the handicaps is a right bloody pain. (No, that's not a pun although it could be.)
There are many reasons for younger generations being dissatisfied with their lot - Brexit being a minor one among them - but it acts as a lightning rod for other, bigger issues.
I have also seen and heard many scoffing commentators in recent days telling us that he’s done and has no hope of winning. It all sounds eerily similar to what they were saying in 2016.
He certainly doesn’t look as invincible as he did a few weeks ago, and I do think the party is starting to cast round for an alternative. But I’m cautious.
You're effectively arguing for a 20% rise across the entire economy for low paid individuals - which is at least an arguable point - but which, obviously, would do nothing to solve recruitment shortages.
If you'd said "perhaps he's in the wrong country", you might be nearer the mark.
Well, who are we to dispute that?
But an awful lot of the impetus for Brexit was from the very comfortable indeed. Often those whose interest in wages is now the extent to which other people's taxes support their pensions.
Good luck with (for instance) keeping social care open in the meantime.
Long term solutions to immediate problems aren't effective policy.
What Wolfson was suggesting (and you might decide that his 10% premium ought to be 20%, etc) is a short term solution to an immediate problem, and provides a similar incentive without the massive disruption.
https://whatukthinks.org/eu/questions/in-highsight-do-you-think-britain-was-right-or-wrong-to-vote-to-leave-the-eu/?removed https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1593161645911859200/photo/1
I wonder if the meaning of the Q has changed for some people who take it as: Has the govt made a mess of it?
Yes, there are still some people who think Brexit would have been great except, and this is not the Brexit I voted for.
They are wrong, as they always were.
On both sides the arguments ranged widely - that's politics and PR. But neither Remain nor Leave represented a political party or parties.
The consequences were and are a matter for Parliament and government.
There is no such thing a a 'core Brexit economic ideology'. For a parallel think SNP. They want independence. Once they have it, how it is handled is a matter for the new Scottish government, not the by then defunct campaigns.
It will soon be a matter for a Labour government, who on the Brexit decision basis are perfectly entitled to take us into the SM etc if they (and the EU) wish.
Way too many business leaders have spent the last couple of decades throwing the unlimited cheap EU labour at any problem they encounter, and so the UK is one of the least productive major economies. That needs to be unwound, which means companies investing in capital rather than labour.
Many think it’s an unmitigated disaster but wouldn’t vote to re-join as they don’t want another few years of yet more division and think it’s really best to future generations to make that decision .
There would have to be a huge majority for re-joining . The majority of over 65s continue to cling to the delusion that Brexit is going well and don’t have the humility to accept they screwed their grand children’s hopes .
"Long term solutions to immediate problems aren't effective policy.
What Wolfson was suggesting (and you might decide that his 10% premium ought to be 20%, etc) is a short term solution to an immediate problem, and provides a similar incentive without the massive disruption."
same pay as their UK colleagues and secondly, businesses must pay a percentage (say seven per cent) of overseas workers’ wages to the Government as a visa tax.
https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/lord-wolfson-brexit-next-immigration-government-visas-hgv-tory-b958610.html?amp
Probably cheaper for him than matching the wages of his competitors.
If we do nothing we'll just go downhill watching the EU prosper. Whichever Party we have in power this is going to become apparent. The old people who voted Leave because they yearned for the Empire will be gone and they'll be replaced by those who remembered we were once at the very centre of this thriving economic and cutural Union. Far and away the best and most diverse in the world
In the words of Marlon Brando in On The Waterfront "You don’t understand! I coulda had class. I coulda been a contender, I could’ve been somebody, instead of a bum, which is what I am with a one way ticket to palookaville”
I don't think it's possible that the animating, historical ideology wasn't this ; that goes back before Lord Leach to James Goldsmith and the Referendum Party in the 1990's. It's certainly possible to argue that Brexit could be turned into something else ; but I would say that it's very difficult to argue against the fact that that is where, ideologically, it starts from, and was originally intended to achieve.
But they would only have us back on their terms - Schengen and Euro being foremost among them - which would almost certainly be still totally unacceptable to the British electorate. Heck, those would be controversial enough in Scotland if it ever became independent, never mind England.
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2022/nov/15/who-remembers-proper-binmen-facebook-nostalgia-memes-help-explain-britain-today
*Never mind if it knackers the poor sods' backs.
But that was an anomaly, swiftly corrected. We are back to policies that have been followed since 2010 for good or ill today. The broadest shoulders carrying the heaviest load (unless they are retired, natch). A general increase in the tax burden as we try to squeeze out the deficit in a low growth economy struggling against difficult international headwinds and without the capacity for much internal stimulus because of the horrendous trade deficit. Constant pressure on public sector budgets augmented by the fact we seem to spend more and more on public services for less and less.
Is there a better alternative? I am really not sure. Truss economics certainly didn't work but vividly showed us how little room for maneuver we have got. Labour, after the next election, will find the same.
Neither being inside nor outside the EU has made much of a difference to them.
Dominic Raab presided over a “perverse culture of fear” at the Ministry of Justice, with civil servants forced to see their doctors for stress, a formal complaint alleges
Officials said the DPM was "abrupt" and "rude" and left many in tears
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/dominic-raabs-culture-of-fear-left-staff-in-tears-complaint-claims-bptrk8t9v
Edit: And giant ones for giant families. At least round here.
But that's irrelevant, as it's government that would set any such rate, not Wolfson. The principle of the idea is sensible, and ought to be considered.
Again, the obsession with making rhetorical points about a given individual or company is a distraction.
Brexit is a political event which forces us to reassess our place in the world as smaller and less important than we thought - this generation's Suez. We will have to change what we are doing and how we work with other nations following its after-effects, but there is no magic wand that can be waved to go status quo ante.
Reposting from upthread...
One of the principal characteristics of Brexit, IMO, is that it is largely orthogonal to many of the problems it was supposed to address.
Yet managing the process has been such a massive distraction to government (and the electorate), for the best part of a decade, that it has exacerbated every one of those problems.
That we have chosen a particularly costly and disruptive form of Brexit, out of a misguided desire to "respect the decision" of an electorate which now largely regards that decision as a mistake, would be hilarious.
If it did not have such malign consequences for the country.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/pro-brexit-next-boss-lord-wolfson-pays-less-than-rivals-ljcqgms3t
Moving On: How the British Public Views Brexit and What It Wants From the Future Relationship With the European Union
If that's how people really think I genuinely see no medium term prospect of us even rejoining the Single Market nevermind the whole EU.
Across the whole EU they have about the same inflation as us, but much lower wage growth than us, so real terms they are far worse off than we are.
Most Brexit voters wanted an end to how FoM worked at the time and for parliament to have back such sovereignty that it had delegated to others. For other issues, it was a pretty mixed bag of opinions for parliament, newly freed to do so, to sort.
1. They are devastated that they will be without Premier League football (including the Fantasy League) for six weeks. Utterly bereft.
2. They are both baffled and irritated that it is being held in Qatar, having googled details about this country. They can only assume it's about money, and nothing to do with football.
No. 1 carries more weight than No. 2. I'm sure they'll all start watching it when it actually starts.
On the other hand, opt-outs from (or indefinite delays to) both Schengen and the UK joining the Euro seem plausible to me, if things ever got that far - which they won't any time soon.
Spitting Image nailed it decades ago with their "Last Night of the Yobs" sketch, which included this:
Rule Britannia
Britannia rules not much
Less than the Spanish and the Belgians and the Dutch
Rule Britannia
Britannia's not so great
Why can't we come out and admit it
We're Tenth Rate
https://spittingimage.fandom.com/wiki/Last_Night_At_The_Yobs
OK that is exaggerated satire. But there is a point there. We have worse infrastructure than most of our neighbours. Worst public services. Rampant inequality where so many of Europe's most deprived regions were in the UK. We can fix all that if we want to. But instead of people being horrified about a 2 year old boy dying from breathing in the mould in his Rochdale council house, the instinct of many is to question why his parents were here at all.
Many of Wolfson's competitors are now paying £12+ per hour, he wants to pay minimum wage (£9.50) with a 10% surcharge and you consider that sensible? Maybe for his bottom line its sensible, but for the country?
Skilled migration paying good taxes and not getting welfare absolutely we should welcome as much of as possible, but unskilled minimum wage? No, there's no need for that.
This actually works in DeSantis's favour as all the big money has already lined up behind him. So it is hard for extra candidates to get going and split the anti-Trump vote.
Mainland Europe has inflation, just like us, but much lower wage growth, so is seeing even bigger real terms falls in wages.
My assessment is that Rishi will sour rapidly following this budget, particularly his polling,
and the Right of the Conservative Party will go into revolt. Because that's what they do.
There was clearly a stronger constituency of support for Boris (100MPs+) than I'd thought before and it might only take another 70 or so MPs to become really desperate that they'll switch, VONC Rishi, and roll the dice on him again in 2024. Try him out again just before an election campaign. He can deliver some goodies in a giveaway/pre-election budget.
That means Kier would not be the next PM. I don't think his chances of being the next PM
are as high as 66%. And there's probably some value in Boris because once all real alternatives to him have been tried I think they'll come back to him.
Plus even EFTA is not full EU and Eurozone membership, in which case we would not really be an independent nation anyway but just a region of what is becoming an EU Federal Superstate with its own President, Parliament, Court and soon its own army
When I went to university in 1973 it never crossed my mind who paid the tuition fees. It just happened. No-one ever thought about it. That was fairly true across the board. Things have changed.
But the EU/UK relation is complex and dull. We are only now learning that cakeism is false across the board. But it's not alone. For example, to this day the BBC never report a demand for above inflation pay rise for group X as in fact impoverishing all those in groups A-Z excluding X who do with 2%. Floreat cakeism.
"Selfish nurses want to bankrupt low paid workers" (The Guardian). Not yet.
Delighted to see the poll; I don’t think it’ll be easy getting back, but I still hope we do so.