If London is no longer welcoming to foreigners they should take it up with the Mayor, as I feel pretty confident he would strongly disagree with characterisation.
If the Tories depict Starmer in Sturgeon's pocket, Labour could depict Sunak in Modi's pocket.
I’d put Sunak in Klaus Schwab’s pocket personally, but would laugh to the moon if Labour tried to tie Sunak to India in the most racist way possible.
If Labour did that (Modi rather than Murthy), they'd have decided that was the best way to try to regain Red Wall seats. They would deserve to get thrashed in the election. But there is a reasonable alternative message that happens also to be true: the Tories promised your lives would improve after Brexit but all they've done is to allow the rich to pocket loads of money and if they're not stopped they will keep on doing it, allowing your living conditions and security to sink further into the muck.
Unfortunately this is likely to get drowned out by Tory "blame the immigrants" racism, because most voters are complete morons. But Labour can't realistically fight on being more racist than the Tories. That's a fight they would definitely lose.
What I'd love Labour to do is ditch Starmer at the right moment, ideally about 6 months before an election if they can manage it, and replace him very fast, in a "coronation", with Angela Rayner.
Angela hasn't got much upstairs but she's got guts and charm and most of all she uses witchcraft so she has my support.
Rayner as Labour leader would likely lead to a Sunak historic 5th Tory General election victory. Rayner scares middle England in a way that Starmer does not even if she is fractionally better than Corbyn.
It would be as suicidal as Labour replacing Blair with Prescott before the 1997 election
It's not so much about who the leader is in my view, more about the group of probable ministers. Starmer has done a really thorough job rooting out all the total nutters. Corbyn seemed to go out of his way to select the worst possible candidates for high office - could there be worse than Abbott as home secretary, Long-Bailey as chancellor, and Burgon (for anything)?
Starmer really hasn't got anyone of such total uselessness left. (Perhaps Dodds, but she did hm a great service as a temporary fill-in)
It is very much still who the leader is in large part, Blair probably would have beaten Major in 1992 as he did in 1997.
It was Middle England voting to keep Kinnock out in 1992 more than Major in.
Rayner would turn off Middle England like Corbyn and Kinnock did but Blair didn't and Starmer doesn't
I agree about Kinnock.
He deserves credit for rescuing Labour from the nadir. Welshness? Baldness? I don't know. Ultimately I suspect people could never quite trust someone who came from the left and had the temperament of a true socialist. The improvement under Smith was clear.
John Smith did much of that. Kinnock did the damage himself - the closer he came to victory the more awkward his stance. People came not to trust him.
Of all the Dan Hodges bad takes, this is surely contender for supreme leader. Oh Dan mate.
I think he‘s been spending some time in Matt Goodwin land. The land where everyone over the age of 35 listens to Vera Lynn and talks about the war. He’s not quite got the point that this track is 27 years old. Voters up to about the age of 60 will remember it with nostalgia, and will remember getting down on the Dancefloor to all those excellent 90s club anthems.
The 1990s is to Gen X what the 50s and 60s are to the boomers. This is actually a video most likely to appeal to middle aged voters. It says “she gets us”. It reminds us of early Blair and the optimism of the mid 90s. It’s a propaganda masterpiece.
His stance seems to be that seeing a politician enjoying themself will put off voters as showing they are not serious people.
Voters don't mind politicians who do more than make either glum predictions of the future or try to sell them magic bean solutions to problems if only you vote for them. They're allowed to smile and have fun sometimes.
There’s an awful lot of misguided foreigners here, if that is the case
Are you saying the article can only be considered valid if there were no foreigners in London?
Certainly, for me, London was at its peak 2000-2016. Probably that it just an age thing, I was lucky to arrive in my early 20s and see the city rise (which it definitely did) as moved from young to mid-adulthood.
However, the article has a ring of truth. I’m not sure where the sexy, hip, young are going instead, mind. Portugal?
Of all the Dan Hodges bad takes, this is surely contender for supreme leader. Oh Dan mate.
I think he‘s been spending some time in Matt Goodwin land. The land where everyone over the age of 35 listens to Vera Lynn and talks about the war. He’s not quite got the point that this track is 27 years old. Voters up to about the age of 60 will remember it with nostalgia, and will remember getting down on the Dancefloor to all those excellent 90s club anthems.
The 1990s is to Gen X what the 50s and 60s are to the boomers. This is actually a video most likely to appeal to middle aged voters. It says “she gets us”. It reminds us of early Blair and the optimism of the mid 90s. It’s a propaganda masterpiece.
His stance seems to be that seeing a politician enjoying themself will put off voters as showing they are not serious people.
Voters don't mind politicians who do more than make either glum predictions of the future or try to sell them magic bean solutions to problems if only you vote for them. They're allowed to smile and have fun sometimes.
In fact they could do worse for an election song in 2024. N-trance scans similarly to d:ream and “only Labour can set you free” might not be true but it kind of works.
There’s an awful lot of misguided foreigners here, if that is the case
Tourists are currently rather overwhelming the rather fragile post-covid London in my view. I'd give them a free pidgeon each and send them home. (Fresh out of owls)
There’s an awful lot of misguided foreigners here, if that is the case
Are you saying the article can only be considered valid if there were no foreigners in London?
Certainly, for me, London was at its peak 2000-2016. Probably that it just an age thing, I was lucky to arrive in my early 20s and see the city rise (which it definitely did) as moved from young to mid-adulthood.
However, the article has a ring of truth. I’m not sure where the sexy, hip, young are going instead, mind. Portugal?
See my later post. There is truth in what she says but this really isn’t confined to London. It’s worldwide. We’ve just had a plague and now there’s a war. The world is a much less cheerful place
London IS less attractive to young people than it was. But so is every big western city, esp since Covid, maybe every big city everywhere
They are nearly all sketchier, gloomier, nastier. I‘ve seen it everywhere in my travels. Paris to LA to New Orleans to Florence to Athens
The world is quite fucked and urbanism, in particular, is in a bad way. This is not a London thing, it’s a global thing
Probably true; New York is not what it was, either.
This has happened before, in the 1970s/80s, but in those days the rent was also very low, so you had artists in squats and proper bohemia. I believe you may have had first hand experience).
Now everything’s a bit crap AND the rent is high, so the erstwhile bohemians are reduced to citing “Jeanne Dieman” in their Sight and Sound submissions for reasons of woke.
There’s an awful lot of misguided foreigners here, if that is the case
Are you saying the article can only be considered valid if there were no foreigners in London?
Certainly, for me, London was at its peak 2000-2016. Probably that it just an age thing, I was lucky to arrive in my early 20s and see the city rise (which it definitely did) as moved from young to mid-adulthood.
However, the article has a ring of truth. I’m not sure where the sexy, hip, young are going instead, mind. Portugal?
See my later post. There is truth in what she says but this really isn’t confined to London. It’s worldwide. We’ve just had a plague and now there’s a war. The world is a much less cheerful place
True, though there's also a bonus British twist.
For a while, the dominant strand in the national conversation has been "there's not enough of anything (money, land, homes, public services) and the only answer is to close the stockade and bicker about who gets the meagre rations we still have. Not the only strand, but the dominant one. The plague made us even grumpier, but it was there beforehand.
And if that's what bright young things hear when they overhear Brits, why shouldn't they believe it?
There’s an awful lot of misguided foreigners here, if that is the case
Are you saying the article can only be considered valid if there were no foreigners in London?
Certainly, for me, London was at its peak 2000-2016. Probably that it just an age thing, I was lucky to arrive in my early 20s and see the city rise (which it definitely did) as moved from young to mid-adulthood.
However, the article has a ring of truth. I’m not sure where the sexy, hip, young are going instead, mind. Portugal?
See my later post. There is truth in what she says but this really isn’t confined to London. It’s worldwide. We’ve just had a plague and now there’s a war. The world is a much less cheerful place
True, though there's also a bonus British twist.
For a while, the dominant strand in the national conversation has been "there's not enough of anything (money, land, homes, public services) and the only answer is to close the stockade and bicker about who gets the meagre rations we still have. Not the only strand, but the dominant one. The plague made us even grumpier, but it was there beforehand.
And if that's what bright young things hear when they overhear Brits, why shouldn't they believe it?
The article quotes someone who says, “It’s expensive, nothing works, and they hate foreigners.”
That last one has certainly been absorbed by young Europeans (and others) since Brexit, whether it’s true or not (it’s mostly but not completely untrue).
So, basically, a whole bunch of UK people are now getting Freedom of Movement back, thanks to remote working. Portugal has also brought in a digital nomad visa. So has Greece
Who needs the Single Market? I could move to Seville tomorrow
An English colleague in my office works on UK campaigns while living in Portugal; another lives in Italy. They pop over now and then for meetings and it works pretty well. Less drastically, two of my key team members live in Scotland, which is still a long way from Surrey, and that's fine too.
It's possible that wfh will do more for levelling up, as people move to live in cheaper areas, than Government dictats to move a Department to South Shields ever would.
Of all the Dan Hodges bad takes, this is surely contender for supreme leader. Oh Dan mate.
I think he‘s been spending some time in Matt Goodwin land. The land where everyone over the age of 35 listens to Vera Lynn and talks about the war. He’s not quite got the point that this track is 27 years old. Voters up to about the age of 60 will remember it with nostalgia, and will remember getting down on the Dancefloor to all those excellent 90s club anthems.
The 1990s is to Gen X what the 50s and 60s are to the boomers. This is actually a video most likely to appeal to middle aged voters. It says “she gets us”. It reminds us of early Blair and the optimism of the mid 90s. It’s a propaganda masterpiece.
His stance seems to be that seeing a politician enjoying themself will put off voters as showing they are not serious people.
Voters don't mind politicians who do more than make either glum predictions of the future or try to sell them magic bean solutions to problems if only you vote for them. They're allowed to smile and have fun sometimes.
In the vague blur that is the current Labour front bench, I have her down as the distant echo of John Prescott. Capable in a lot of ways - but also 'the authentic sounding voice' of the North to counter the distant London-centric echo that Starmer is of Blair.
I also suspect she'd be more than able to deck me if I threw an egg at her.
There’s an awful lot of misguided foreigners here, if that is the case
Are you saying the article can only be considered valid if there were no foreigners in London?
Certainly, for me, London was at its peak 2000-2016. Probably that it just an age thing, I was lucky to arrive in my early 20s and see the city rise (which it definitely did) as moved from young to mid-adulthood.
However, the article has a ring of truth. I’m not sure where the sexy, hip, young are going instead, mind. Portugal?
See my later post. There is truth in what she says but this really isn’t confined to London. It’s worldwide. We’ve just had a plague and now there’s a war. The world is a much less cheerful place
True, though there's also a bonus British twist.
For a while, the dominant strand in the national conversation has been "there's not enough of anything (money, land, homes, public services) and the only answer is to close the stockade and bicker about who gets the meagre rations we still have. Not the only strand, but the dominant one. The plague made us even grumpier, but it was there beforehand.
And if that's what bright young things hear when they overhear Brits, why shouldn't they believe it?
The article quotes someone who says, “It’s expensive, nothing works, and they hate foreigners.”
That last one has certainly been absorbed by young Europeans (and others) since Brexit, whether it’s true or not (it’s mostly but not completely untrue).
The Remoaners have helped to trash the brand
Ironically London works better than most great cities, in my experience. And it’s considerably less expensive than it was
But it has definitely declined, as has NYC, LA, Paris, Hong Kong, Shanghai, Tokyo, Moscow
Often for apparently different reasons, Covid apart. Yet in sync
So, basically, a whole bunch of UK people are now getting Freedom of Movement back, thanks to remote working. Portugal has also brought in a digital nomad visa. So has Greece
Who needs the Single Market? I could move to Seville tomorrow
An English colleague in my office works on UK campaigns while living in Portugal; another lives in Italy. They pop over now and then for meetings and it works pretty well. Less drastically, two of my key team members live in Scotland, which is still a long way from Surrey, and that's fine too.
It's possible that wfh will do more for levelling up, as people move to live in cheaper areas, than Government dictats to move a Department to South Shields ever would.
The poison of SeanT and his ilk has trashed its appeal.
Probably quite the opposite - it's the rapid reappearance of the noisy class that has shaped how London is now. The quiet hubbub class has re-emerged slowly and found to its horror that the old haunts are closed or invaded.
Of all the Dan Hodges bad takes, this is surely contender for supreme leader. Oh Dan mate.
I think he‘s been spending some time in Matt Goodwin land. The land where everyone over the age of 35 listens to Vera Lynn and talks about the war. He’s not quite got the point that this track is 27 years old. Voters up to about the age of 60 will remember it with nostalgia, and will remember getting down on the Dancefloor to all those excellent 90s club anthems.
The 1990s is to Gen X what the 50s and 60s are to the boomers. This is actually a video most likely to appeal to middle aged voters. It says “she gets us”. It reminds us of early Blair and the optimism of the mid 90s. It’s a propaganda masterpiece.
His stance seems to be that seeing a politician enjoying themself will put off voters as showing they are not serious people.
Voters don't mind politicians who do more than make either glum predictions of the future or try to sell them magic bean solutions to problems if only you vote for them. They're allowed to smile and have fun sometimes.
In the vague blur that is the current Labour front bench, I have her down as the distant echo of John Prescott. Capable in a lot of ways - but also 'the authentic sounding voice' of the North to counter the distant London-centric echo that Starmer is of Blair.
I also suspect she'd be more than able to deck me if I threw an egg at her.
Prescott was also a dubious administrator, though. My vague feeling is that DCLGH was a shit-show.
So, basically, a whole bunch of UK people are now getting Freedom of Movement back, thanks to remote working. Portugal has also brought in a digital nomad visa. So has Greece
Who needs the Single Market? I could move to Seville tomorrow
An English colleague in my office works on UK campaigns while living in Portugal; another lives in Italy. They pop over now and then for meetings and it works pretty well. Less drastically, two of my key team members live in Scotland, which is still a long way from Surrey, and that's fine too.
It's possible that wfh will do more for levelling up, as people move to live in cheaper areas, than Government dictats to move a Department to South Shields ever would.
It's not proving terribly popular with the people from the poor areas who are priced out and have to move to even poorer areas.
There’s an awful lot of misguided foreigners here, if that is the case
Are you saying the article can only be considered valid if there were no foreigners in London?
Certainly, for me, London was at its peak 2000-2016. Probably that it just an age thing, I was lucky to arrive in my early 20s and see the city rise (which it definitely did) as moved from young to mid-adulthood.
However, the article has a ring of truth. I’m not sure where the sexy, hip, young are going instead, mind. Portugal?
See my later post. There is truth in what she says but this really isn’t confined to London. It’s worldwide. We’ve just had a plague and now there’s a war. The world is a much less cheerful place
True, though there's also a bonus British twist.
For a while, the dominant strand in the national conversation has been "there's not enough of anything (money, land, homes, public services) and the only answer is to close the stockade and bicker about who gets the meagre rations we still have. Not the only strand, but the dominant one. The plague made us even grumpier, but it was there beforehand.
And if that's what bright young things hear when they overhear Brits, why shouldn't they believe it?
But that's largely because our system is uniquely welcoming to the low-skilled migrant. Tens of thousands of boat people a year don't lie. If we had a great deal less immigration, we'd have a great deal less carping about it. The puzzle is this long after Brexit why no Government has had the wit to change the system to remove those incentives.
Of all the Dan Hodges bad takes, this is surely contender for supreme leader. Oh Dan mate.
I think he‘s been spending some time in Matt Goodwin land. The land where everyone over the age of 35 listens to Vera Lynn and talks about the war. He’s not quite got the point that this track is 27 years old. Voters up to about the age of 60 will remember it with nostalgia, and will remember getting down on the Dancefloor to all those excellent 90s club anthems.
The 1990s is to Gen X what the 50s and 60s are to the boomers. This is actually a video most likely to appeal to middle aged voters. It says “she gets us”. It reminds us of early Blair and the optimism of the mid 90s. It’s a propaganda masterpiece.
His stance seems to be that seeing a politician enjoying themself will put off voters as showing they are not serious people.
Voters don't mind politicians who do more than make either glum predictions of the future or try to sell them magic bean solutions to problems if only you vote for them. They're allowed to smile and have fun sometimes.
In the vague blur that is the current Labour front bench, I have her down as the distant echo of John Prescott. Capable in a lot of ways - but also 'the authentic sounding voice' of the North to counter the distant London-centric echo that Starmer is of Blair.
I also suspect she'd be more than able to deck me if I threw an egg at her.
Prescott was also a dubious administrator, though. My vague feeling is that DCLGH was a shit-show.
I honestly can't even remember what position(s) he held other than 'the minister with the northern working class voice'. But he could do that well.
Of all the Dan Hodges bad takes, this is surely contender for supreme leader. Oh Dan mate.
I think he‘s been spending some time in Matt Goodwin land. The land where everyone over the age of 35 listens to Vera Lynn and talks about the war. He’s not quite got the point that this track is 27 years old. Voters up to about the age of 60 will remember it with nostalgia, and will remember getting down on the Dancefloor to all those excellent 90s club anthems.
The 1990s is to Gen X what the 50s and 60s are to the boomers. This is actually a video most likely to appeal to middle aged voters. It says “she gets us”. It reminds us of early Blair and the optimism of the mid 90s. It’s a propaganda masterpiece.
Dan also misses that it was some sort of fundraising thing up north.
This is very good by Andrew Sullivan on the profound demographic changes in the UK, where there are now more foreign-born residents than in the United States.
I remember the story that Prescott had been a seaman and union man on Cunard Lines before going into politics. Handy with his hands at sorting out trouble, apparently.
Of all the Dan Hodges bad takes, this is surely contender for supreme leader. Oh Dan mate.
I think he‘s been spending some time in Matt Goodwin land. The land where everyone over the age of 35 listens to Vera Lynn and talks about the war. He’s not quite got the point that this track is 27 years old. Voters up to about the age of 60 will remember it with nostalgia, and will remember getting down on the Dancefloor to all those excellent 90s club anthems.
The 1990s is to Gen X what the 50s and 60s are to the boomers. This is actually a video most likely to appeal to middle aged voters. It says “she gets us”. It reminds us of early Blair and the optimism of the mid 90s. It’s a propaganda masterpiece.
When this apple fell from the tree it got caught in a blizzard
Of all the Dan Hodges bad takes, this is surely contender for supreme leader. Oh Dan mate.
I think he‘s been spending some time in Matt Goodwin land. The land where everyone over the age of 35 listens to Vera Lynn and talks about the war. He’s not quite got the point that this track is 27 years old. Voters up to about the age of 60 will remember it with nostalgia, and will remember getting down on the Dancefloor to all those excellent 90s club anthems.
The 1990s is to Gen X what the 50s and 60s are to the boomers. This is actually a video most likely to appeal to middle aged voters. It says “she gets us”. It reminds us of early Blair and the optimism of the mid 90s. It’s a propaganda masterpiece.
His stance seems to be that seeing a politician enjoying themself will put off voters as showing they are not serious people.
Voters don't mind politicians who do more than make either glum predictions of the future or try to sell them magic bean solutions to problems if only you vote for them. They're allowed to smile and have fun sometimes.
He also had a go at Rishi Sunak for dressing up for the Lord Mayor's Banquet, just like every other Prime Minister.
This is very good by Andrew Sullivan on the profound demographic changes in the UK, where there are now more foreign-born residents than in the United States.
On thread, I think Mike is overstating the SNP threat to Labour's prospects beyond Scotland:
1. Labour's problem in 2015 was that Miliband didn't face down Salmond through a clear, unequivocal position that there would be no deal with the SNP even if they threatened to take down a Labour minority government. Basically he tried to dodge the question, allowing it to fester and gain resonance. Starmer won't be so foolish as to repeat the mistake and indeed is already confronting the issue by ruling out a further referendum and making it clear that there will be no SNP deal.
2. Miliband was widely seen to be a weak leader, capable of being pushed around by Salmond, so the image of Miliband in Salmond's pocket was effective. Starmer is I think perceived to be made of much sterner stuff, the way he has taken on and routed the Corbyn die-hards will help him here.
3. The issue can be thrown back in the Tories face, because very few think the Tories could get a majority in 2024, in contrast to 2015. Mike states that "what happened in 2015 .... was all about how the SNP would be put in a powerful position if the Tories did not get a majority." In 2024, if it's in the balance as to whether Labour get a majority, and any Tory government would at best be expected to be a minority one beholden to minority parties (i.e. the SNP) then that's a case to vote Labour in England and Wales to give Starmer enough seats to avoid the SNP having any influence.
4. Finally, Labour is going to pick up some seats in Scotland, and if the trend in recent Scottish GE polling continues it could be quite a lot. In contrast to 2015, the narrative won't be about lots of Scottish Labour seats being under threat from the SNP, more the reverse. Again that would help to diffuse the issue.
Labour should be posing the question of the SNP "Are you really going to try and bring down a Labour government when you're not offered a referendum?" It's not an easy one for Sturgeon to answer. If the answer is "No", then effectively it'll be a "Vote SNP to cause chaos" platform, which will not appeal beyond her core. If the answer is "Yes", then that won't appeal to Scots who are tired of Conservative governments.
This is very good by Andrew Sullivan on the profound demographic changes in the UK, where there are now more foreign-born residents than in the United States.
There’s an awful lot of misguided foreigners here, if that is the case
Are you saying the article can only be considered valid if there were no foreigners in London?
Certainly, for me, London was at its peak 2000-2016. Probably that it just an age thing, I was lucky to arrive in my early 20s and see the city rise (which it definitely did) as moved from young to mid-adulthood.
However, the article has a ring of truth. I’m not sure where the sexy, hip, young are going instead, mind. Portugal?
See my later post. There is truth in what she says but this really isn’t confined to London. It’s worldwide. We’ve just had a plague and now there’s a war. The world is a much less cheerful place
True, though there's also a bonus British twist.
For a while, the dominant strand in the national conversation has been "there's not enough of anything (money, land, homes, public services) and the only answer is to close the stockade and bicker about who gets the meagre rations we still have. Not the only strand, but the dominant one. The plague made us even grumpier, but it was there beforehand.
And if that's what bright young things hear when they overhear Brits, why shouldn't they believe it?
But that's largely because our system is uniquely welcoming to the low-skilled migrant. Tens of thousands of boat people a year don't lie. If we had a great deal less immigration, we'd have a great deal less carping about it. The puzzle is this long after Brexit why no Government has had the wit to change the system to remove those incentives.
I was chatting last weekend to some friends of friends. A couple (Polish/Greek) who met in London. Both arrived as unskilled workers 15-20 years ago, and both now senior and valued in their firms. Neither are keen to move back to the old countries, but both also questioning their futures after Brexit, which to them was an explicit "you are not wanted" message from the British voters, and something borne out by some of the people posting here.
Unskilled immigrants do not stay unskilled, nor necessarily have obvious economic potential. In both Britain's and Americas heyday both were welcoming of the unskilled.
This is very good by Andrew Sullivan on the profound demographic changes in the UK, where there are now more foreign-born residents than in the United States.
This is very good by Andrew Sullivan on the profound demographic changes in the UK, where there are now more foreign-born residents than in the United States.
There’s an awful lot of misguided foreigners here, if that is the case
Are you saying the article can only be considered valid if there were no foreigners in London?
Certainly, for me, London was at its peak 2000-2016. Probably that it just an age thing, I was lucky to arrive in my early 20s and see the city rise (which it definitely did) as moved from young to mid-adulthood.
However, the article has a ring of truth. I’m not sure where the sexy, hip, young are going instead, mind. Portugal?
See my later post. There is truth in what she says but this really isn’t confined to London. It’s worldwide. We’ve just had a plague and now there’s a war. The world is a much less cheerful place
True, though there's also a bonus British twist.
For a while, the dominant strand in the national conversation has been "there's not enough of anything (money, land, homes, public services) and the only answer is to close the stockade and bicker about who gets the meagre rations we still have. Not the only strand, but the dominant one. The plague made us even grumpier, but it was there beforehand.
And if that's what bright young things hear when they overhear Brits, why shouldn't they believe it?
But that's largely because our system is uniquely welcoming to the low-skilled migrant. Tens of thousands of boat people a year don't lie. If we had a great deal less immigration, we'd have a great deal less carping about it. The puzzle is this long after Brexit why no Government has had the wit to change the system to remove those incentives.
I was chatting last weekend to some friends of friends. A couple (Polish/Greek) who met in London. Both arrived as unskilled workers 15-20 years ago, and both now senior and valued in their firms. Neither are keen to move back to the old countries, but both also questioning their futures after Brexit, which to them was an explicit "you are not wanted" message from the British voters, and something borne out by some of the people posting here.
Unskilled immigrants do not stay unskilled, nor necessarily have obvious economic potential. In both Britain's and Americas heyday both were welcoming of the unskilled.
We are already taking half a MILLION migrants a year. Net. The highest number in our history. An insane amount
Yet your relentless Wokery demands MORE. And hang the consequences
This is very good by Andrew Sullivan on the profound demographic changes in the UK, where there are now more foreign-born residents than in the United States.
This is very good by Andrew Sullivan on the profound demographic changes in the UK, where there are now more foreign-born residents than in the United States.
This is very good by Andrew Sullivan on the profound demographic changes in the UK, where there are now more foreign-born residents than in the United States.
Britain might be the first nation to voluntarily commit cultural, political and demographic suicide
The rest of the West ain’t far behind, tho
Maybe it'll mean PM Farage in a few years' time.
You’d think so, but the young are absolutely brainwashed into Wokeness. Whiteness is shameful and Britishness is a sin
I don’t see much hope. Sadly
Wrong on all statements, but that is Leonadamus for you.
Yep. Whenever I see he's on here, I vacate.
Ruins this site with his attention seeking combined with nastiness. Constantly tries to divert subjects to his own narcissistic agendas and frequently succeeds because people fall for it hook, line and sinker.
On thread, I think Mike is overstating the SNP threat to Labour's prospects beyond Scotland:
1. Labour's problem in 2015 was that Miliband didn't face down Salmond through a clear, unequivocal position that there would be no deal with the SNP even if they threatened to take down a Labour minority government. Basically he tried to dodge the question, allowing it to fester and gain resonance. Starmer won't be so foolish as to repeat the mistake and indeed is already confronting the issue by ruling out a further referendum and making it clear that there will be no SNP deal.
2. Miliband was widely seen to be a weak leader, capable of being pushed around by Salmond, so the image of Miliband in Salmond's pocket was effective. Starmer is I think perceived to be made of much sterner stuff, the way he has taken on and routed the Corbyn die-hards will help him here.
3. The issue can be thrown back in the Tories face, because very few think the Tories could get a majority in 2024, in contrast to 2015. Mike states that "what happened in 2015 .... was all about how the SNP would be put in a powerful position if the Tories did not get a majority." In 2024, if it's in the balance as to whether Labour get a majority, and any Tory government would at best be expected to be a minority one beholden to minority parties (i.e. the SNP) then that's a case to vote Labour in England and Wales to give Starmer enough seats to avoid the SNP having any influence.
4. Finally, Labour is going to pick up some seats in Scotland, and if the trend in recent Scottish GE polling continues it could be quite a lot. In contrast to 2015, the narrative won't be about lots of Scottish Labour seats being under threat from the SNP, more the reverse. Again that would help to diffuse the issue.
Labour should be posing the question of the SNP "Are you really going to try and bring down a Labour government when you're not offered a referendum?" It's not an easy one for Sturgeon to answer. If the answer is "No", then effectively it'll be a "Vote SNP to cause chaos" platform, which will not appeal beyond her core. If the answer is "Yes", then that won't appeal to Scots who are tired of Conservative governments.
The other factor is that on current polling and the recent by-election, Labour has a massive majority, even with the SNP holding most Scottish seats. While it is possible for there to be massive swingback to the Tories, there are no signs of it yet, and little cause for that swingback.
This is very good by Andrew Sullivan on the profound demographic changes in the UK, where there are now more foreign-born residents than in the United States.
Britain might be the first nation to voluntarily commit cultural, political and demographic suicide
The rest of the West ain’t far behind, tho
Maybe it'll mean PM Farage in a few years' time.
You’d think so, but the young are absolutely brainwashed into Wokeness. Whiteness is shameful and Britishness is a sin
I don’t see much hope. Sadly
Wrong on all statements, but that is Leonadamus for you.
Yep. Whenever I see he's on here, I vacate.
Ruins this site with his attention seeking combined with nastiness. Constantly tries to divert subjects to his own narcissistic agendas and frequently succeeds because people fall for it hook, line and sinker.
This is very good by Andrew Sullivan on the profound demographic changes in the UK, where there are now more foreign-born residents than in the United States.
This is very good by Andrew Sullivan on the profound demographic changes in the UK, where there are now more foreign-born residents than in the United States.
Britain might be the first nation to voluntarily commit cultural, political and demographic suicide
The rest of the West ain’t far behind, tho
Maybe it'll mean PM Farage in a few years' time.
I don’t see much hope. Sadly
Yay.
Then bog off from here and dribble into your own malcontent dotage.
The rest of us are turning with the world and she has left you behind.
If there’s one thing that might keep me posting, despite the decline in amusement value, it’s the chance to annoy a ludicrous, repetitive, prolapsed old heifer like you
The BBC just fast-played the two minutes before the first Netherlands goal, during which the US didn’t touch the ball at all and yet during which our Leondamus was typing about their dominance of the game….
There’s an awful lot of misguided foreigners here, if that is the case
Are you saying the article can only be considered valid if there were no foreigners in London?
Certainly, for me, London was at its peak 2000-2016. Probably that it just an age thing, I was lucky to arrive in my early 20s and see the city rise (which it definitely did) as moved from young to mid-adulthood.
However, the article has a ring of truth. I’m not sure where the sexy, hip, young are going instead, mind. Portugal?
See my later post. There is truth in what she says but this really isn’t confined to London. It’s worldwide. We’ve just had a plague and now there’s a war. The world is a much less cheerful place
True, though there's also a bonus British twist.
For a while, the dominant strand in the national conversation has been "there's not enough of anything (money, land, homes, public services) and the only answer is to close the stockade and bicker about who gets the meagre rations we still have. Not the only strand, but the dominant one. The plague made us even grumpier, but it was there beforehand.
And if that's what bright young things hear when they overhear Brits, why shouldn't they believe it?
But that's largely because our system is uniquely welcoming to the low-skilled migrant. Tens of thousands of boat people a year don't lie. If we had a great deal less immigration, we'd have a great deal less carping about it. The puzzle is this long after Brexit why no Government has had the wit to change the system to remove those incentives.
I was chatting last weekend to some friends of friends. A couple (Polish/Greek) who met in London. Both arrived as unskilled workers 15-20 years ago, and both now senior and valued in their firms. Neither are keen to move back to the old countries, but both also questioning their futures after Brexit, which to them was an explicit "you are not wanted" message from the British voters, and something borne out by some of the people posting here.
Unskilled immigrants do not stay unskilled, nor necessarily have obvious economic potential. In both Britain's and Americas heyday both were welcoming of the unskilled.
We are already taking half a MILLION migrants a year. Net. The highest number in our history. An insane amount
Yet your relentless Wokery demands MORE. And hang the consequences
Like I said, it’s a kind of suicide
Written Parliamentary Question by John Redwood (and answer).
The Home Office has provided the following answer to your written parliamentary question (92052):
Question: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if she will make an estimate of the average capital cost of providing (a) housing, (b) school places, (c) health services and (d) transport capacity for a new migrant family. (92052)
Tabled on: 21 November 2022
This question was grouped with the following question(s) for answer:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if she will make an estimate of the average cost to the public purse of providing (a) housing, (b) benefits and (c) public service capacity for a new migrant who takes a job below the average wage in their first year in the UK. (92051) Tabled on: 21 November 2022
Answer: Robert Jenrick:
The Home Office does not hold this information.
The best hope at the moment is Tory MP's give Rishi and Hunt the push.
This country is positioned extremely well to thrive in the 21st century. We have the security of being islands, the freedom of action given by Brexit, we grow a lot of food, we produce a lot of energy and can produce a lot more. The current crop of politicians and Civil servants are the ones pulling in the opposite direction.
This is very good by Andrew Sullivan on the profound demographic changes in the UK, where there are now more foreign-born residents than in the United States.
Britain might be the first nation to voluntarily commit cultural, political and demographic suicide
The rest of the West ain’t far behind, tho
Maybe it'll mean PM Farage in a few years' time.
You’d think so, but the young are absolutely brainwashed into Wokeness. Whiteness is shameful and Britishness is a sin
I don’t see much hope. Sadly
Wrong on all statements, but that is Leonadamus for you.
So you're predicting a revival in nationalism among the youth?
No, but national consciousness doesn't rest on the shoulders of creaking establishment traditions and memory of a war that no one will shortly remember firsthand.
British culture is far more interesting, ebullient and radical than that. It will be a new sort of national consciousness, and one not so prickly about the atrocities committed by our country in the past. A mature country comes to terms with these things, not denies them, or poo-poos them.
This is very good by Andrew Sullivan on the profound demographic changes in the UK, where there are now more foreign-born residents than in the United States.
"In 1971, the proportion of Londoners who were “White British” was 86.2 percent. Fifty years later, it’s 36.8 percent. That’s not a population change; it’s an entire paradigm shift."
The BBC just fast-played the two minutes before the first Netherlands goal, during which the US didn’t touch the ball at all and yet during which our Leondamus was typing about their dominance of the game….
That’ll be coz I’m watching on iPlayer
Not that I want to detract from the POWER OF THE MIGHTY LEONDAMUS. It was probably my best one yet
This is very good by Andrew Sullivan on the profound demographic changes in the UK, where there are now more foreign-born residents than in the United States.
"In 1971, the proportion of Londoners who were “White British” was 86.2 percent. Fifty years later, it’s 36.8 percent. That’s not a population change; it’s an entire paradigm shift."
It is indeed an entire paradigm shift.
Sullivan rightly notes that, but is ambivalent on what should be welcomed and what might be mourned.
Personally I was a migrant to London and indeed, by some definitions, mixed race.
So, basically, a whole bunch of UK people are now getting Freedom of Movement back, thanks to remote working. Portugal has also brought in a digital nomad visa. So has Greece
Who needs the Single Market? I could move to Seville tomorrow
An English colleague in my office works on UK campaigns while living in Portugal; another lives in Italy. They pop over now and then for meetings and it works pretty well. Less drastically, two of my key team members live in Scotland, which is still a long way from Surrey, and that's fine too.
It's possible that wfh will do more for levelling up, as people move to live in cheaper areas, than Government dictats to move a Department to South Shields ever would.
It's not proving terribly popular with the people from the poor areas who are priced out and have to move to even poorer areas.
But they are BrexitVotingGammonShitScumRacists - the fact that they refuse to embrace being priced out of their towns and sent over the hill to the estates (see Malmesbury in Wiltshire) proves it.
This is very good by Andrew Sullivan on the profound demographic changes in the UK, where there are now more foreign-born residents than in the United States.
"In 1971, the proportion of Londoners who were “White British” was 86.2 percent. Fifty years later, it’s 36.8 percent. That’s not a population change; it’s an entire paradigm shift."
See the thread earlier in the week. A number of those people not counted as "White British" people in London are actually white second or third-generation british citizens unsure whether or not they should put that because they're not the oldest white population. Add to that the confusion for non-whites of the dreadful "White British" category, which encourages ethnonationalists and ghettoisers alike, and shouldn't be listed to exclusively connect one with the other.
I remember the actual "white british" population in London was adjusted about 10-15% higher on the last survey anyway, so I suspect it's still around 50% ; which is also my anecdotal impression across the areas of London noawadays.
There’s an awful lot of misguided foreigners here, if that is the case
Are you saying the article can only be considered valid if there were no foreigners in London?
Certainly, for me, London was at its peak 2000-2016. Probably that it just an age thing, I was lucky to arrive in my early 20s and see the city rise (which it definitely did) as moved from young to mid-adulthood.
However, the article has a ring of truth. I’m not sure where the sexy, hip, young are going instead, mind. Portugal?
See my later post. There is truth in what she says but this really isn’t confined to London. It’s worldwide. We’ve just had a plague and now there’s a war. The world is a much less cheerful place
True, though there's also a bonus British twist.
For a while, the dominant strand in the national conversation has been "there's not enough of anything (money, land, homes, public services) and the only answer is to close the stockade and bicker about who gets the meagre rations we still have. Not the only strand, but the dominant one. The plague made us even grumpier, but it was there beforehand.
And if that's what bright young things hear when they overhear Brits, why shouldn't they believe it?
But that's largely because our system is uniquely welcoming to the low-skilled migrant. Tens of thousands of boat people a year don't lie. If we had a great deal less immigration, we'd have a great deal less carping about it. The puzzle is this long after Brexit why no Government has had the wit to change the system to remove those incentives.
I was chatting last weekend to some friends of friends. A couple (Polish/Greek) who met in London. Both arrived as unskilled workers 15-20 years ago, and both now senior and valued in their firms. Neither are keen to move back to the old countries, but both also questioning their futures after Brexit, which to them was an explicit "you are not wanted" message from the British voters, and something borne out by some of the people posting here.
Unskilled immigrants do not stay unskilled, nor necessarily have obvious economic potential. In both Britain's and Americas heyday both were welcoming of the unskilled.
An Ad made in the late 90's for UNHCR. Interesting and topical because Timothy Weah's father George is being shown as one of the refugee children
The BBC just fast-played the two minutes before the first Netherlands goal, during which the US didn’t touch the ball at all and yet during which our Leondamus was typing about their dominance of the game….
That’ll be coz I’m watching on iPlayer
Not that I want to detract from the POWER OF THE MIGHTY LEONDAMUS. It was probably my best one yet
Only in terms of the timing; in terms of idiocy it’s well down in the pack.
So, basically, a whole bunch of UK people are now getting Freedom of Movement back, thanks to remote working. Portugal has also brought in a digital nomad visa. So has Greece
Who needs the Single Market? I could move to Seville tomorrow
An English colleague in my office works on UK campaigns while living in Portugal; another lives in Italy. They pop over now and then for meetings and it works pretty well. Less drastically, two of my key team members live in Scotland, which is still a long way from Surrey, and that's fine too.
It's possible that wfh will do more for levelling up, as people move to live in cheaper areas, than Government dictats to move a Department to South Shields ever would.
It's not proving terribly popular with the people from the poor areas who are priced out and have to move to even poorer areas.
But they are BrexitVotingGammonShitScumRacists - the fact that they refuse to embrace being priced out of their towns and sent over the hill to the estates (see Malmesbury in Wiltshire) proves it.
Immigration made up only a relatively small component of house price inflation. By far the bigger (demand side) pushes were low inflation rates and the tendency to live in smaller households.
Faragist xenophobia was certainly part of the Brexit vote, whether or not that influenced your personal vote.
So, basically, a whole bunch of UK people are now getting Freedom of Movement back, thanks to remote working. Portugal has also brought in a digital nomad visa. So has Greece
Who needs the Single Market? I could move to Seville tomorrow
An English colleague in my office works on UK campaigns while living in Portugal; another lives in Italy. They pop over now and then for meetings and it works pretty well. Less drastically, two of my key team members live in Scotland, which is still a long way from Surrey, and that's fine too.
It's possible that wfh will do more for levelling up, as people move to live in cheaper areas, than Government dictats to move a Department to South Shields ever would.
It's not proving terribly popular with the people from the poor areas who are priced out and have to move to even poorer areas.
But they are BrexitVotingGammonShitScumRacists - the fact that they refuse to embrace being priced out of their towns and sent over the hill to the estates (see Malmesbury in Wiltshire) proves it.
Immigration made up only a relatively small component of house price inflation. By far the bigger (demand side) pushes were low inflation rates and the tendency to live in smaller households.
This just isn't plausible. The biggest driver in demand for housing is population growth, of which 75% is driven by immigration.
So, basically, a whole bunch of UK people are now getting Freedom of Movement back, thanks to remote working. Portugal has also brought in a digital nomad visa. So has Greece
Who needs the Single Market? I could move to Seville tomorrow
An English colleague in my office works on UK campaigns while living in Portugal; another lives in Italy. They pop over now and then for meetings and it works pretty well. Less drastically, two of my key team members live in Scotland, which is still a long way from Surrey, and that's fine too.
It's possible that wfh will do more for levelling up, as people move to live in cheaper areas, than Government dictats to move a Department to South Shields ever would.
It's not proving terribly popular with the people from the poor areas who are priced out and have to move to even poorer areas.
But they are BrexitVotingGammonShitScumRacists - the fact that they refuse to embrace being priced out of their towns and sent over the hill to the estates (see Malmesbury in Wiltshire) proves it.
Immigration made up only a relatively small component of house price inflation. By far the bigger (demand side) pushes were low inflation rates and the tendency to live in smaller households.
This just isn't plausible. The biggest driver in demand for housing is population growth, of which 75% is driven by immigration.
But not household formation. And add interest rates, which was the biggest factor.
And then you have supply side issues, although I leave those out because you might argue that we wouldn’t need supply without the extra demand.
This is very good by Andrew Sullivan on the profound demographic changes in the UK, where there are now more foreign-born residents than in the United States.
"In 1971, the proportion of Londoners who were “White British” was 86.2 percent. Fifty years later, it’s 36.8 percent. That’s not a population change; it’s an entire paradigm shift."
It's actually quite striking that, according to the graph shown, the decrease in that percentage during the last decade was smaller than during any other decade in the last 50 years.
So, basically, a whole bunch of UK people are now getting Freedom of Movement back, thanks to remote working. Portugal has also brought in a digital nomad visa. So has Greece
Who needs the Single Market? I could move to Seville tomorrow
An English colleague in my office works on UK campaigns while living in Portugal; another lives in Italy. They pop over now and then for meetings and it works pretty well. Less drastically, two of my key team members live in Scotland, which is still a long way from Surrey, and that's fine too.
It's possible that wfh will do more for levelling up, as people move to live in cheaper areas, than Government dictats to move a Department to South Shields ever would.
It's not proving terribly popular with the people from the poor areas who are priced out and have to move to even poorer areas.
But they are BrexitVotingGammonShitScumRacists - the fact that they refuse to embrace being priced out of their towns and sent over the hill to the estates (see Malmesbury in Wiltshire) proves it.
Immigration made up only a relatively small component of house price inflation. By far the bigger (demand side) pushes were low inflation rates and the tendency to live in smaller households.
Faragist xenophobia was certainly part of the Brexit vote, whether or not that influenced your personal vote.
If you increase the population by x hundred thousand per year and don’t build x hundred thousand bedrooms, there will be a shortage of bedrooms. That isn’t blaming anyone.
The fucked sociology of Malmesbury is caused by 100% U.K. incomers who want the world frozen at their convenience.
I’d love to go back and build Mordor on their doorsteps.
This is very good by Andrew Sullivan on the profound demographic changes in the UK, where there are now more foreign-born residents than in the United States.
This is very good by Andrew Sullivan on the profound demographic changes in the UK, where there are now more foreign-born residents than in the United States.
This is very good by Andrew Sullivan on the profound demographic changes in the UK, where there are now more foreign-born residents than in the United States.
Britain might be the first nation to voluntarily commit cultural, political and demographic suicide
The rest of the West ain’t far behind, tho
Maybe it'll mean PM Farage in a few years' time.
You’d think so, but the young are absolutely brainwashed into Wokeness. Whiteness is shameful and Britishness is a sin
I don’t see much hope. Sadly
You want Farage?
Not Farage, he’s a dick
But a smart, self confident right winger with the cojones to crush Wokeness and get a grip on migration? Yes
I see no sign of anyone remotely like that
Sometimes I think - if we’re going to have endless migration - then let’s just go for it. Maximise it. Let in 30 million smart people and build enormous towers along the Thames to house them. Lower taxes. Go for a boom
Become Hong Kong (as was). I’d prefer that to malaise and mild decline mixed with large scale migration anyway
So, basically, a whole bunch of UK people are now getting Freedom of Movement back, thanks to remote working. Portugal has also brought in a digital nomad visa. So has Greece
Who needs the Single Market? I could move to Seville tomorrow
An English colleague in my office works on UK campaigns while living in Portugal; another lives in Italy. They pop over now and then for meetings and it works pretty well. Less drastically, two of my key team members live in Scotland, which is still a long way from Surrey, and that's fine too.
It's possible that wfh will do more for levelling up, as people move to live in cheaper areas, than Government dictats to move a Department to South Shields ever would.
It's not proving terribly popular with the people from the poor areas who are priced out and have to move to even poorer areas.
But they are BrexitVotingGammonShitScumRacists - the fact that they refuse to embrace being priced out of their towns and sent over the hill to the estates (see Malmesbury in Wiltshire) proves it.
Immigration made up only a relatively small component of house price inflation. By far the bigger (demand side) pushes were low inflation rates and the tendency to live in smaller households.
This just isn't plausible. The biggest driver in demand for housing is population growth, of which 75% is driven by immigration.
But not household formation. And add interest rates, which was the biggest factor.
And then you have supply side issues, although I leave those out because you might argue that we wouldn’t need supply without the extra demand.
There hasn't been THAT much change in household sizes. And as for interest rates, that has also been caused by immigration. The mass migration from New Labour opening the flood gates caused complete stagnation of wage rates among the bottom half of the population. That kept inflation low and meant the Bank didn't have to increase interest rates much during the economic boom.
So, basically, a whole bunch of UK people are now getting Freedom of Movement back, thanks to remote working. Portugal has also brought in a digital nomad visa. So has Greece
Who needs the Single Market? I could move to Seville tomorrow
An English colleague in my office works on UK campaigns while living in Portugal; another lives in Italy. They pop over now and then for meetings and it works pretty well. Less drastically, two of my key team members live in Scotland, which is still a long way from Surrey, and that's fine too.
It's possible that wfh will do more for levelling up, as people move to live in cheaper areas, than Government dictats to move a Department to South Shields ever would.
It's not proving terribly popular with the people from the poor areas who are priced out and have to move to even poorer areas.
But they are BrexitVotingGammonShitScumRacists - the fact that they refuse to embrace being priced out of their towns and sent over the hill to the estates (see Malmesbury in Wiltshire) proves it.
Immigration made up only a relatively small component of house price inflation. By far the bigger (demand side) pushes were low inflation rates and the tendency to live in smaller households.
This just isn't plausible. The biggest driver in demand for housing is population growth, of which 75% is driven by immigration.
But not household formation. And add interest rates, which was the biggest factor.
And then you have supply side issues, although I leave those out because you might argue that we wouldn’t need supply without the extra demand.
There hasn't been THAT much change in household sizes. And as for interest rates, that has also been caused by immigration. The mass migration from New Labour opening the flood gates caused complete stagnation of wage rates among the bottom half of the population. That kept inflation low and meant the Bank didn't have to increase interest rates much during the economic boom.
You are leaving out the massive collapse in prices of consumer goods. See Chinese imports.
So life was brilliant in the professional classes. Especially if you already owned your house. The cleaner was cheap. Deliveroo and Uber served you. Add in some nice pay rises and it was a rosy outlook and a great time.
So, basically, a whole bunch of UK people are now getting Freedom of Movement back, thanks to remote working. Portugal has also brought in a digital nomad visa. So has Greece
Who needs the Single Market? I could move to Seville tomorrow
An English colleague in my office works on UK campaigns while living in Portugal; another lives in Italy. They pop over now and then for meetings and it works pretty well. Less drastically, two of my key team members live in Scotland, which is still a long way from Surrey, and that's fine too.
It's possible that wfh will do more for levelling up, as people move to live in cheaper areas, than Government dictats to move a Department to South Shields ever would.
It's not proving terribly popular with the people from the poor areas who are priced out and have to move to even poorer areas.
But they are BrexitVotingGammonShitScumRacists - the fact that they refuse to embrace being priced out of their towns and sent over the hill to the estates (see Malmesbury in Wiltshire) proves it.
Immigration made up only a relatively small component of house price inflation. By far the bigger (demand side) pushes were low inflation rates and the tendency to live in smaller households.
This just isn't plausible. The biggest driver in demand for housing is population growth, of which 75% is driven by immigration.
But not household formation. And add interest rates, which was the biggest factor.
And then you have supply side issues, although I leave those out because you might argue that we wouldn’t need supply without the extra demand.
There hasn't been THAT much change in household sizes. And as for interest rates, that has also been caused by immigration. The mass migration from New Labour opening the flood gates caused complete stagnation of wage rates among the bottom half of the population. That kept inflation low and meant the Bank didn't have to increase interest rates much during the economic boom.
Interest rates were low globally. You are 100% wrong.
A very easy £100 - available at 65/1 with only four fences to go as the leader.
Only stuck on £2 each way.
A fine front won hurdle winner. Bottom in weights. Silly price. Great call.
RP. Romeo Brown Three wins for this yard, latest two from the front; well held in October; tall order SL In excellent form during the spring, well ridden when adding to his tally at Haydock (3m) in May and matched that on back of 5 months off when third at Wetherby (2m) in October. Rare poor effort faced with testing ground at Carlisle since.
A great afternoon of racing to watch. Edwardstone now the stand out 2m chaser? We still have to see Energumene this season.
Domestic energy production is absolutely pivotal to avoid being at the mercy of international price fluctuations and global insecurity. Forget soft rhetoric about Putin - this sort of thing really *does* play into his hands.
So, basically, a whole bunch of UK people are now getting Freedom of Movement back, thanks to remote working. Portugal has also brought in a digital nomad visa. So has Greece
Who needs the Single Market? I could move to Seville tomorrow
An English colleague in my office works on UK campaigns while living in Portugal; another lives in Italy. They pop over now and then for meetings and it works pretty well. Less drastically, two of my key team members live in Scotland, which is still a long way from Surrey, and that's fine too.
It's possible that wfh will do more for levelling up, as people move to live in cheaper areas, than Government dictats to move a Department to South Shields ever would.
It's not proving terribly popular with the people from the poor areas who are priced out and have to move to even poorer areas.
But they are BrexitVotingGammonShitScumRacists - the fact that they refuse to embrace being priced out of their towns and sent over the hill to the estates (see Malmesbury in Wiltshire) proves it.
Immigration made up only a relatively small component of house price inflation. By far the bigger (demand side) pushes were low inflation rates and the tendency to live in smaller households.
This just isn't plausible. The biggest driver in demand for housing is population growth, of which 75% is driven by immigration.
But not household formation. And add interest rates, which was the biggest factor.
And then you have supply side issues, although I leave those out because you might argue that we wouldn’t need supply without the extra demand.
There hasn't been THAT much change in household sizes. And as for interest rates, that has also been caused by immigration. The mass migration from New Labour opening the flood gates caused complete stagnation of wage rates among the bottom half of the population. That kept inflation low and meant the Bank didn't have to increase interest rates much during the economic boom.
Interest rates were low globally. You are 100% wrong.
Because the US was doing the same policy. Mass immigration allowing central bank rates to be kept low, creating a glut of debt which flooded international markets.
So, basically, a whole bunch of UK people are now getting Freedom of Movement back, thanks to remote working. Portugal has also brought in a digital nomad visa. So has Greece
Who needs the Single Market? I could move to Seville tomorrow
An English colleague in my office works on UK campaigns while living in Portugal; another lives in Italy. They pop over now and then for meetings and it works pretty well. Less drastically, two of my key team members live in Scotland, which is still a long way from Surrey, and that's fine too.
It's possible that wfh will do more for levelling up, as people move to live in cheaper areas, than Government dictats to move a Department to South Shields ever would.
It's not proving terribly popular with the people from the poor areas who are priced out and have to move to even poorer areas.
But they are BrexitVotingGammonShitScumRacists - the fact that they refuse to embrace being priced out of their towns and sent over the hill to the estates (see Malmesbury in Wiltshire) proves it.
Immigration made up only a relatively small component of house price inflation. By far the bigger (demand side) pushes were low inflation rates and the tendency to live in smaller households.
This just isn't plausible. The biggest driver in demand for housing is population growth, of which 75% is driven by immigration.
But not household formation. And add interest rates, which was the biggest factor.
And then you have supply side issues, although I leave those out because you might argue that we wouldn’t need supply without the extra demand.
There hasn't been THAT much change in household sizes. And as for interest rates, that has also been caused by immigration. The mass migration from New Labour opening the flood gates caused complete stagnation of wage rates among the bottom half of the population. That kept inflation low and meant the Bank didn't have to increase interest rates much during the economic boom.
Interest rates were low globally. You are 100% wrong.
Was it housing supply could not meet demand is the question. Certainly the first part of the equation there can be no arguing over - years of excessive QE under Labour and other governments increased the amount of money in the economy, and banks could lend more cheaply, mortgages were cheaper, but this coupled with housing supply not easily expanded pushed cost of housing upward.
Why was housing supply not so easily expanded to meet demand? this is the question to argue over.
So, basically, a whole bunch of UK people are now getting Freedom of Movement back, thanks to remote working. Portugal has also brought in a digital nomad visa. So has Greece
Who needs the Single Market? I could move to Seville tomorrow
An English colleague in my office works on UK campaigns while living in Portugal; another lives in Italy. They pop over now and then for meetings and it works pretty well. Less drastically, two of my key team members live in Scotland, which is still a long way from Surrey, and that's fine too.
It's possible that wfh will do more for levelling up, as people move to live in cheaper areas, than Government dictats to move a Department to South Shields ever would.
It's not proving terribly popular with the people from the poor areas who are priced out and have to move to even poorer areas.
But they are BrexitVotingGammonShitScumRacists - the fact that they refuse to embrace being priced out of their towns and sent over the hill to the estates (see Malmesbury in Wiltshire) proves it.
Immigration made up only a relatively small component of house price inflation. By far the bigger (demand side) pushes were low inflation rates and the tendency to live in smaller households.
This just isn't plausible. The biggest driver in demand for housing is population growth, of which 75% is driven by immigration.
But not household formation. And add interest rates, which was the biggest factor.
And then you have supply side issues, although I leave those out because you might argue that we wouldn’t need supply without the extra demand.
There hasn't been THAT much change in household sizes. And as for interest rates, that has also been caused by immigration. The mass migration from New Labour opening the flood gates caused complete stagnation of wage rates among the bottom half of the population. That kept inflation low and meant the Bank didn't have to increase interest rates much during the economic boom.
Interest rates were low globally. You are 100% wrong.
Because the US was doing the same policy. Mass immigration allowing central bank rates to be kept low, creating a glut of debt which flooded international markets.
Is there a correlation between interest rates and immigration levels?
Like I said: cultural suicide. Everything is attacked from within and without. What the Woke can’t close they will give away
You can argue the Elgin Marbles are Sui generis. But of course the demands for repatriation won’t stop here. Once you establish the principle then everything becomes liable for “restitution”
Domestic energy production is absolutely pivotal to avoid being at the mercy of international price fluctuations and global insecurity. Forget soft rhetoric about Putin - this sort of thing really *does* play into his hands.
An idiotic policy with obvious and predictable harmful effects. Our priority is energy security and self sufficiency. Anything that does not assist that policy should really be binned.
Comments
A complete non-entity.
Voters don't mind politicians who do more than make either glum predictions of the future or try to sell them magic bean solutions to problems if only you vote for them. They're allowed to smile and have fun sometimes.
Certainly, for me, London was at its peak 2000-2016. Probably that it just an age thing, I was lucky to arrive in my early 20s and see the city rise (which it definitely did) as moved from young to mid-adulthood.
However, the article has a ring of truth.
I’m not sure where the sexy, hip, young are going instead, mind. Portugal?
They are nearly all sketchier, gloomier, nastier. I‘ve seen it everywhere in my travels. Paris to LA to New Orleans to Florence to Athens
The world is quite fucked and urbanism, in particular, is in a bad way. This is not a London thing, it’s a global thing
This has happened before, in the 1970s/80s, but in those days the rent was also very low, so you had artists in squats and proper bohemia. I believe you may have had first hand experience).
Now everything’s a bit crap AND the rent is high, so the erstwhile bohemians are reduced to citing “Jeanne Dieman” in their Sight and Sound submissions for reasons of woke.
For a while, the dominant strand in the national conversation has been "there's not enough of anything (money, land, homes, public services) and the only answer is to close the stockade and bicker about who gets the meagre rations we still have. Not the only strand, but the dominant one. The plague made us even grumpier, but it was there beforehand.
And if that's what bright young things hear when they overhear Brits, why shouldn't they believe it?
That last one has certainly been absorbed by young Europeans (and others) since Brexit, whether it’s true or not (it’s mostly but not completely untrue).
It's possible that wfh will do more for levelling up, as people move to live in cheaper areas, than Government dictats to move a Department to South Shields ever would.
Edit: Netherlands score.
I also suspect she'd be more than able to deck me if I threw an egg at her.
The Remoaners have helped to trash the brand
Ironically London works better than most great cities, in my experience. And it’s considerably less expensive than it was
But it has definitely declined, as has NYC, LA, Paris, Hong Kong, Shanghai, Tokyo, Moscow
Often for apparently different reasons, Covid apart. Yet in sync
South Shields not so much.
LEONDAMUS!!!
What a game!
https://andrewsullivan.substack.com/p/england-his-england-235
A very easy £100 - available at 65/1 with only four fences to go as the leader.
Only stuck on £2 each way.
Britain might be the first nation to voluntarily commit cultural, political and demographic suicide
The rest of the West ain’t far behind, tho
1. Labour's problem in 2015 was that Miliband didn't face down Salmond through a clear, unequivocal position that there would be no deal with the SNP even if they threatened to take down a Labour minority government. Basically he tried to dodge the question, allowing it to fester and gain resonance. Starmer won't be so foolish as to repeat the mistake and indeed is already confronting the issue by ruling out a further referendum and making it clear that there will be no SNP deal.
2. Miliband was widely seen to be a weak leader, capable of being pushed around by Salmond, so the image of Miliband in Salmond's pocket was effective. Starmer is I think perceived to be made of much sterner stuff, the way he has taken on and routed the Corbyn die-hards will help him here.
3. The issue can be thrown back in the Tories face, because very few think the Tories could get a majority in 2024, in contrast to 2015. Mike states that "what happened in 2015 .... was all about how the SNP would be put in a powerful position if the Tories did not get a majority." In 2024, if it's in the balance as to whether Labour get a majority, and any Tory government would at best be expected to be a minority one beholden to minority parties (i.e. the SNP) then that's a case to vote Labour in England and Wales to give Starmer enough seats to avoid the SNP having any influence.
4. Finally, Labour is going to pick up some seats in Scotland, and if the trend in recent Scottish GE polling continues it could be quite a lot. In contrast to 2015, the narrative won't be about lots of Scottish Labour seats being under threat from the SNP, more the reverse. Again that would help to diffuse the issue.
Labour should be posing the question of the SNP "Are you really going to try and bring down a Labour government when you're not offered a referendum?" It's not an easy one for Sturgeon to answer. If the answer is "No", then effectively it'll be a "Vote SNP to cause chaos" platform, which will not appeal beyond her core. If the answer is "Yes", then that won't appeal to Scots who are tired of Conservative governments.
Unskilled immigrants do not stay unskilled, nor necessarily have obvious economic potential. In both Britain's and Americas heyday both were welcoming of the unskilled.
I don’t see much hope. Sadly
Yet your relentless Wokery demands MORE. And hang the consequences
Like I said, it’s a kind of suicide
Ruins this site with his attention seeking combined with nastiness. Constantly tries to divert subjects to his own narcissistic agendas and frequently succeeds because people fall for it hook, line and sinker.
*chuffed*
Then bog off from here and dribble into your own malcontent dotage.
The rest of us are turning with the world and she has left you behind.
Cold out there, innit?
The Home Office has provided the following answer to your written parliamentary question (92052):
Question:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if she will make an estimate of the average capital cost of providing (a) housing, (b) school places, (c) health services and (d) transport capacity for a new migrant family. (92052)
Tabled on: 21 November 2022
This question was grouped with the following question(s) for answer:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if she will make an estimate of the average cost to the public purse of providing (a) housing, (b) benefits and (c) public service capacity for a new migrant who takes a job below the average wage in their first year in the UK. (92051)
Tabled on: 21 November 2022
Answer:
Robert Jenrick:
The Home Office does not hold this information.
The best hope at the moment is Tory MP's give Rishi and Hunt the push.
This country is positioned extremely well to thrive in the 21st century. We have the security of being islands, the freedom of action given by Brexit, we grow a lot of food, we produce a lot of energy and can produce a lot more. The current crop of politicians and Civil servants are the ones pulling in the opposite direction.
British culture is far more interesting, ebullient and radical than that. It will be a new sort of national consciousness, and one not so prickly about the atrocities committed by our country in the past. A mature country comes to terms with these things, not denies them, or poo-poos them.
On this display this is surely great VALUE
Not that I want to detract from the POWER OF THE MIGHTY LEONDAMUS. It was probably my best one yet
Sullivan rightly notes that, but is ambivalent on what should be welcomed and what might be mourned.
Personally I was a migrant to London and indeed, by some definitions, mixed race.
Complicated thing, modernity.
I remember the actual "white british" population in London was adjusted about 10-15% higher on the last survey anyway, so I suspect it's still around 50% ; which is also my anecdotal impression across the areas of London noawadays.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5n0DLYbYqc
Faragist xenophobia was certainly part of the Brexit vote, whether or not that influenced your personal vote.
(This just shows there is no “easy” side of the draw)
Can they do that? Probably not. But on this display I’d give them more than a 6% chance. 10-15%? 20%?
That does make 18/1 look VALUE
And add interest rates, which was the biggest factor.
And then you have supply side issues, although I leave those out because you might argue that we wouldn’t need supply without the extra demand.
The fucked sociology of Malmesbury is caused by 100% U.K. incomers who want the world frozen at their convenience.
I’d love to go back and build Mordor on their doorsteps.
Unfortunately, a lot of people in authority feel the need to apologise for things done by people long dead to people long dead.
But a smart, self confident right winger with the cojones to crush Wokeness and get a grip on migration? Yes
I see no sign of anyone remotely like that
Sometimes I think - if we’re going to have endless migration - then let’s just go for it. Maximise it. Let in 30 million smart people and build enormous towers along the Thames to house them. Lower taxes. Go for a boom
Become Hong Kong (as was). I’d prefer that to malaise and mild decline mixed with large scale migration anyway
So life was brilliant in the professional classes. Especially if you already owned your house. The cleaner was cheap. Deliveroo and Uber served you. Add in some nice pay rises and it was a rosy outlook and a great time.
You are 100% wrong.
Subjective data point of one, of course.
RP. Romeo Brown Three wins for this yard, latest two from the front; well held in October; tall order
SL In excellent form during the spring, well ridden when adding to his tally at Haydock (3m) in May and matched that on back of 5 months off when third at Wetherby (2m) in October. Rare poor effort faced with testing ground at Carlisle since.
A great afternoon of racing to watch. Edwardstone now the stand out 2m chaser? We still have to see Energumene this season.
https://order-order.com/2022/12/02/total-pulls-100-million-north-sea-drilling-investment-after-windfall-tax/#comments
Domestic energy production is absolutely pivotal to avoid being at the mercy of international price fluctuations and global insecurity. Forget soft rhetoric about Putin - this sort of thing really *does* play into his hands.
Why was housing supply not so easily expanded to meet demand? this is the question to argue over.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-63846449
You can argue the Elgin Marbles are Sui generis. But of course the demands for repatriation won’t stop here. Once you establish the principle then everything becomes liable for “restitution”