Regardless of her crazy politics/strategic ineptitude, the thing that really grated with me was her personality.
It was almost child-like, the way she turned on her parents/teachers and interpreted the behaviour of that air hostess, in her anecdotes during the leadership campaign.
You can’t expect to be taken seriously as a grown up politician if you try to weaponise your irrational teenage angst.
She’s barely mature enough to be an MP, let alone hold serious political power.
What were the Tory members thinking?
Everyone must seem a teenager from their ancient point of view. So Ms Truss wouldn't stand out.
Well if its age then the alternative candidate was even less mature to them.
Truss had 12 years as an MP and 8 years in senior posts. She wasnt widely hated. On paper she looked ok.
Even her pandering in the leadership campaign is what you'd expect. Her problem wasnt lack of experience it was that she didn't prepare her MPs for her plans, and had zero answers for the press or public either when there was a bad reaction. Her problem was laziness.
In some ways, she was the Conservative echo of Corbyn. Both of them decided what they thought about everything at the age of about fourteen and saw it as a strength that they never deviated from that.
Except Corbyn was actually a socialist. Truss wasn't even a conservative really but a libertarian
Let's not be too politically polite about her. Thatcher was not a conservative really but a libertarian and I don't want to associate Liz Truss with Margaret Thatcher.
The best adjective for Truss is that she was an incompetent.
No Thatcher was genuinely a Conservative. A social conservative PM who brought in section 28 and a monarchist despite occasional disagreements with the Queen.
A Methodist by upbringing too. Maybe not a traditional Tory but a conservative nonetheless with elements of Gladstone Liberalism.
Truss however was a genuine libertarian, a social as well as economic liberal and also at one time wanted a republic
Well if its age then the alternative candidate was even less mature to them.
Truss had 12 years as an MP and 8 years in senior posts. She wasnt widely hated. On paper she looked ok.
Lavrov. It was obvious after the Lavrov incident that she was too lackwitted and unstable for high office.
My late mother couldn't read maps.
But there's not reading maps and not reading maps.
The first duty of a foreign secretary is to have some idea of where the borders of the country in question are.
Doesn't detract from the fact Lavrov's a lightweight dick who makes Acland-Hood look competent and Cummings look honest, but it was just extraordinary Truss hadn't even read a briefing note.
Not knowing is one thing but she didn't have the wit to realise she didn't know and deflect the question. Instead she just doubled down.
Like when Carswell (ha, remember him?) got into that mad argument about the moon on Twitter.
Mr. HYUFD, I may vote for the Conservatives with Sunak as leader. If they bring back Boris Johnson as PM, I will not be.
Maybe but that is not the norm. Before Boris was ousted the Conservatives were polling about 30 to 35%, under Truss they were polling about 20 to 25%, now under Sunak they are polling about 25 to 30%. So overall still worse than Boris was.
The whole Truss episode still seems like a surreal dream. People obviously point to the KamiKwasi budget but she really did nothing in her brief period of power to suggest that she was even close to being up to the job.
Which raises very serious question marks about the fitness of the Conservative party membership to be involved in determining who is our PM. The same membership, of course, who thought IDS was a good idea for, well, anything really. It's not as if Labour's membership is any better. Repeatedly voting for Corbyn when almost the entire Parliamentary party were fully aware that he was totally unsuited to the role was equally eccentric.
I think both parties need to have a serious think and discussion about this. Democracy only works when the electorate is both informed and sane. The membership of our major parties are neither. So how do we choose?
It's not hard. Members can choose their local MP. MPs can choose their leader. They are the only electorate that has a chance of being meaningfully informed, and we've seen what happens when revolutionary radicals like Corbyn or Jscob Rees-Mogg then cause chaos by claiming MPs should have no say because members have spoken
It is the MPs fault. The members can only vote for whomever is put forward by the MPs.
To a degree that is true, but this is more a general position that member involvement adds nothing to the process. It certainly doesn't eliminate complaints about a small group choosing the next PM, and it only adds potential tensions when a leader is deemed unsuitable by MPs.
Well if its age then the alternative candidate was even less mature to them.
Truss had 12 years as an MP and 8 years in senior posts. She wasnt widely hated. On paper she looked ok.
Lavrov. It was obvious after the Lavrov incident that she was too lackwitted and unstable for high office.
My late mother couldn't read maps.
But there's not reading maps and not reading maps.
The first duty of a foreign secretary is to have some idea of where the borders of the country in question are.
Doesn't detract from the fact Lavrov's a lightweight dick who makes Acland-Hood look competent and Cummings look honest, but it was just extraordinary Truss hadn't even read a briefing note.
Not knowing is one thing but she didn't have the wit to realise she didn't know and deflect the question. Instead she just doubled down.
Trying to reverse the Russian annexation of Crimea in 2014 is going to be hard enough (I know you think it will be impossible).
Trying to annex the southern Don Basin which has been ethnically Russian for around 100 years would be very hard going!
Mr. HYUFD, I may vote for the Conservatives with Sunak as leader. If they bring back Boris Johnson as PM, I will not be.
Maybe but that is not the norm. Before Boris was ousted the Conservatives were polling about 30 to 35%, under Truss they were polling about 20 to 25%, now under Sunak they are polling about 25 to 30%. So overall still worse than Boris was.
Mr. HYUFD, I may vote for the Conservatives with Sunak as leader. If they bring back Boris Johnson as PM, I will not be.
Maybe but that is not the norm. Before Boris was ousted the Conservatives were polling about 30 to 35%, under Truss they were polling about 20 to 25%, now under Sunak they are polling about 25 to 30%. So overall still worse than Boris was.
You are about the only PBer on here not voting Tory under Boris and telling the Tories to get rid of Boris now voting Tory under Sunak
I'm in Morris's camp too.
I suppose I am, in the sense I can just about imagine myself voting for a party led by Sunak, although I think it unlikely I will in practice.
If Johnson returns I'd vote Labour even if they were led by Richard Burgon or Zarah Sultana.
Despite HYUFD's assertions there are quite a few people who either regularly voted Tory or have voted Tory in the past, who would find the Tories going from 'Boris is so toxic we have no choice but to get rid of him' to 'We need Boris back despite all that stuff we said before', to just be ridiculous.
Is it worth deciding to say no to the possibility of those voters, on a gamble that if you believe hard enough time will reverse to 2019?
Even now Leon is trying to jemmy this thread off its rollers
You will have to point me to the PB rule which says “commenters can only discuss things that @Heathener wants to discuss, until she chucks a mental and flounces out again”
In defence of Truss, she did save us from Boris at HM funeral. For that at least we must be grateful.
Johnson will be sick as a parrot for the rest of his life about that.
The look on Boris's face as he was forced to stand to one side and wait until Theresa May had arrived as PMs were seated in chronological order was one of the highlight of my year.
ChatGPT just gave me “In morte tua, vita mea” - which is also brilliantly chilling. It means “in your death, my life” and was supposedly recited by gladiators before entering the arena. Never heard of it
Regardless of her crazy politics/strategic ineptitude, the thing that really grated with me was her personality.
It was almost child-like, the way she turned on her parents/teachers and interpreted the behaviour of that air hostess, in her anecdotes during the leadership campaign.
You can’t expect to be taken seriously as a grown up politician if you try to weaponise your irrational teenage angst.
She’s barely mature enough to be an MP, let alone hold serious political power.
What were the Tory members thinking?
Everyone must seem a teenager from their ancient point of view. So Ms Truss wouldn't stand out.
Well if its age then the alternative candidate was even less mature to them.
Truss had 12 years as an MP and 8 years in senior posts. She wasnt widely hated. On paper she looked ok.
Even her pandering in the leadership campaign is what you'd expect. Her problem wasnt lack of experience it was that she didn't prepare her MPs for her plans, and had zero answers for the press or public either when there was a bad reaction. Her problem was laziness.
In some ways, she was the Conservative echo of Corbyn. Both of them decided what they thought about everything at the age of about fourteen and saw it as a strength that they never deviated from that.
Except Corbyn was actually a socialist. Truss wasn't even a conservative really but a libertarian
Let's not be too politically polite about her. Thatcher was not a conservative really but a libertarian and I don't want to associate Liz Truss with Margaret Thatcher.
The best adjective for Truss is that she was an incompetent.
No Thatcher was genuinely a Conservative. A social conservative PM who brought in section 28 and a monarchist despite occasional disagreements with the Queen.
A Methodist by upbringing too. Maybe not a traditional Tory but a conservative nonetheless with elements of Gladstone Liberalism.
You're right about her moral rigidity and conservatism on social, religious, and personal behaviour.
But in most other ways she was far from a conservative. She was a massive advocate of libertarian economics: Martin Friedman and all that. She took a cudgel to institutions in a way that no C conservative would ever do.
And I really don't think calling her a monarchist washes. She had respect HMQ but she held the commonwealth in contempt, and much of the institutions of the royal family and aristocracy with it.
She loathed the kind of the institutional feudalism, entitlement, and noblesse oblige that surrounded her, including in her own party. She was utterly destructive and disdainful of institutions that had been in place for decades. A massive wrecking ball on the fabric of this country. Her fans thank her for that, but that isn't the point.
Many around her thought she was anything but a C conservative. They were right.
Even now Leon is trying to jemmy this thread off its rollers
Fortunately almost everyone has tumbled his game and are ignoring his posts.
What are you talking about?! PB is a long meandering conversation, 24/7. Themes ebb and flow. New subjects come and go. It’s not a seminar with a topic
The protean and multiple nature of the conversation on here is one of its joys
Even now Leon is trying to jemmy this thread off its rollers
Fortunately almost everyone has tumbled his game and are ignoring his posts.
What are you talking about?! PB is a long meandering conversation, 24/7. Themes ebb and flow. New subjects come and go. It’s not a seminar with a topic
The protean and multiple nature of the conversation on here is one of its joys
I don't think he or I, or others, are referring to that.
We're speaking about your constant desire to tangentialise threads so that people can focus on you and your ego. You do it the whole time because you love to be the centre of attention.
Well if its age then the alternative candidate was even less mature to them.
Truss had 12 years as an MP and 8 years in senior posts. She wasnt widely hated. On paper she looked ok.
Lavrov. It was obvious after the Lavrov incident that she was too lackwitted and unstable for high office.
My late mother couldn't read maps.
But there's not reading maps and not reading maps.
The first duty of a foreign secretary is to have some idea of where the borders of the country in question are.
Doesn't detract from the fact Lavrov's a lightweight dick who makes Acland-Hood look competent and Cummings look honest, but it was just extraordinary Truss hadn't even read a briefing note.
Surely the first duty of a foreign secretary is to plot against the PM? The second duty is to play dress up as a soldier or other armed forces. The third is to get good press coverage for one and two.
Even now Leon is trying to jemmy this thread off its rollers
Fortunately almost everyone has tumbled his game and are ignoring his posts.
What are you talking about?! PB is a long meandering conversation, 24/7. Themes ebb and flow. New subjects come and go. It’s not a seminar with a topic
The protean and multiple nature of the conversation on here is one of its joys
I don't think he or I, or others, are referring to that.
We're speaking about your constant desire to tangentialise threads so that people can focus on you and your ego. You do it the whole time because you love to be the centre of attention.
Aha! I have successfully made the thread about me. That was my fiendish plan, as you spotted
In me omnia sunt posita. Tenebrae factae sunt. Non sunt loquelae neque sermones. Ad me ipsum pectus habeo. In morte tua, vita mea.
Even now Leon is trying to jemmy this thread off its rollers
Fortunately almost everyone has tumbled his game and are ignoring his posts.
What are you talking about?! PB is a long meandering conversation, 24/7. Themes ebb and flow. New subjects come and go. It’s not a seminar with a topic
The protean and multiple nature of the conversation on here is one of its joys
I don't think he or I, or others, are referring to that.
We're speaking about your constant desire to tangentialise threads so that people can focus on you and your ego. You do it the whole time because you love to be the centre of attention.
Even now Leon is trying to jemmy this thread off its rollers
Fortunately almost everyone has tumbled his game and are ignoring his posts.
What are you talking about?! PB is a long meandering conversation, 24/7. Themes ebb and flow. New subjects come and go. It’s not a seminar with a topic
The protean and multiple nature of the conversation on here is one of its joys
I don't think he or I, or others, are referring to that.
We're speaking about your constant desire to tangentialise threads so that people can focus on you and your ego. You do it the whole time because you love to be the centre of attention.
If this is your theory, you aren't doing much to stop it happening. AFAICS, Leon was chatting tangentially and harmlessly and largely to himelself to himself about AI. He really wasn't the centre of attention until you decided to launch a pittle sub-thread about him. And now he is.
Even now Leon is trying to jemmy this thread off its rollers
Fortunately almost everyone has tumbled his game and are ignoring his posts.
What are you talking about?! PB is a long meandering conversation, 24/7. Themes ebb and flow. New subjects come and go. It’s not a seminar with a topic
The protean and multiple nature of the conversation on here is one of its joys
I don't think he or I, or others, are referring to that.
We're speaking about your constant desire to tangentialise threads so that people can focus on you and your ego. You do it the whole time because you love to be the centre of attention.
If this is your theory, you aren't doing much to stop it happening. AFAICS, Leon was chatting tangentially and harmlessly and largely to himelself to himself about AI. He really wasn't the centre of attention until you decided to launch a pittle sub-thread about him. And now he is.
I know. Lol. And I really was quite happy muttering to myself in Latin
Mr. Eagles, Die Hard is obviously a Christmas film.
It was released in July 1988.
The public agree with me.
Release date is no guide to whether it is a Christmas film or not.
Holiday Inn - the film that launched White Christmas as THE Christmas song was released August 1942 Miracle on 34th Street - One of the greatest Christmas films of all time was released June 1947 Trading Places - which revolves entirely around the Christmas Holidays was released June 1983 Gremlins - another 80s Christmas classic was released June 1984
Oh and as an aside the Christmas Song (Chestnuts roasting on an open fire) was written in California in July 1945
Tesla driver blames full-self-driving software for eight-car Thanksgiving Day pile up ... Police are investigating if the controversial so-called "full-self-driving" software was enabled and possibly the cause of the crash. Tesla will have full records of course, although its CEO seemingly has his mind on other things at the moment. https://www.theregister.com/2022/12/23/tesla_driver_software_crash/
They asked it to write a formal essay exploring the relative merits of wheels bins and normal bins, which then formed the basis of an intergalactic space epic written in the style of George Lucas. I was absolutely pissing myself by this point.
Regardless of her crazy politics/strategic ineptitude, the thing that really grated with me was her personality.
It was almost child-like, the way she turned on her parents/teachers and interpreted the behaviour of that air hostess, in her anecdotes during the leadership campaign.
You can’t expect to be taken seriously as a grown up politician if you try to weaponise your irrational teenage angst.
She’s barely mature enough to be an MP, let alone hold serious political power.
What were the Tory members thinking?
Everyone must seem a teenager from their ancient point of view. So Ms Truss wouldn't stand out.
Well if its age then the alternative candidate was even less mature to them.
Truss had 12 years as an MP and 8 years in senior posts. She wasnt widely hated. On paper she looked ok.
Even her pandering in the leadership campaign is what you'd expect. Her problem wasnt lack of experience it was that she didn't prepare her MPs for her plans, and had zero answers for the press or public either when there was a bad reaction. Her problem was laziness.
In some ways, she was the Conservative echo of Corbyn. Both of them decided what they thought about everything at the age of about fourteen and saw it as a strength that they never deviated from that.
Except Corbyn was actually a socialist. Truss wasn't even a conservative really but a libertarian
Except she was elected by MPs and members of the "Conservative" Party.
So what, she was still an ex LD libertarian who managed to fool some Tories for a few months before they forced her out anyway
She coauthored (or edited?) a whole book on the stuff, so you can't pretend the Party didn't know.
Regardless of her crazy politics/strategic ineptitude, the thing that really grated with me was her personality.
It was almost child-like, the way she turned on her parents/teachers and interpreted the behaviour of that air hostess, in her anecdotes during the leadership campaign.
You can’t expect to be taken seriously as a grown up politician if you try to weaponise your irrational teenage angst.
She’s barely mature enough to be an MP, let alone hold serious political power.
What were the Tory members thinking?
Everyone must seem a teenager from their ancient point of view. So Ms Truss wouldn't stand out.
Well if its age then the alternative candidate was even less mature to them.
Truss had 12 years as an MP and 8 years in senior posts. She wasnt widely hated. On paper she looked ok.
Even her pandering in the leadership campaign is what you'd expect. Her problem wasnt lack of experience it was that she didn't prepare her MPs for her plans, and had zero answers for the press or public either when there was a bad reaction. Her problem was laziness.
In some ways, she was the Conservative echo of Corbyn. Both of them decided what they thought about everything at the age of about fourteen and saw it as a strength that they never deviated from that.
Except Corbyn was actually a socialist. Truss wasn't even a conservative really but a libertarian
Let's not be too politically polite about her. Thatcher was not a conservative really but a libertarian and I don't want to associate Liz Truss with Margaret Thatcher.
The best adjective for Truss is that she was an incompetent.
No Thatcher was genuinely a Conservative. A social conservative PM who brought in section 28 and a monarchist despite occasional disagreements with the Queen.
A Methodist by upbringing too. Maybe not a traditional Tory but a conservative nonetheless with elements of Gladstone Liberalism.
You're right about her moral rigidity and conservatism on social, religious, and personal behaviour.
But in most other ways she was far from a conservative. She was a massive advocate of libertarian economics: Martin Friedman and all that. She took a cudgel to institutions in a way that no C conservative would ever do.
And I really don't think calling her a monarchist washes. She had respect HMQ but she held the commonwealth in contempt, and much of the institutions of the royal family and aristocracy with it.
She loathed the kind of the institutional feudalism, entitlement, and noblesse oblige that surrounded her, including in her own party. She was utterly destructive and disdainful of institutions that had been in place for decades. A massive wrecking ball on the fabric of this country. Her fans thank her for that, but that isn't the point.
Many around her thought she was anything but a C conservative. They were right.
She was as I said rightwing on economics, more Gladstone Liberal than One Nation Disraelian Tory on that. Gladstone was also less imperialist than Disraeli.
However she was no libertarian, if she was she would never have brought in Section 28. Truss however genuinely was a libertarian, a social and economic liberal while also having even more contempt for hierarchy and tradition than Thatcher
It's only unfair personally but she should never have self-promoted for a job that was far beyond her capabilities.
She managed Foreign Secretary fine and got lots of trade deals post Brexit before that.
It was her mad policies that did for her and crashed the markets, not that she was thick or incompetent
You mean those trade deals that have been thoroughly discredited as being useless and one sided (against ourselves).
Plenty of opportunities for British exporters to Australia and New Zealand and Singapore for example with whom we did not have trade deals in the EU
You do realise that having a trade deal is not necessarily a good thing if it is a bad deal and according to many, including Conservatives (eg George Eustice) our trade deal with Australia is useless. No worse than useless as it is worse than no deal at all.
Regardless of her crazy politics/strategic ineptitude, the thing that really grated with me was her personality.
It was almost child-like, the way she turned on her parents/teachers and interpreted the behaviour of that air hostess, in her anecdotes during the leadership campaign.
You can’t expect to be taken seriously as a grown up politician if you try to weaponise your irrational teenage angst.
She’s barely mature enough to be an MP, let alone hold serious political power.
What were the Tory members thinking?
Everyone must seem a teenager from their ancient point of view. So Ms Truss wouldn't stand out.
Well if its age then the alternative candidate was even less mature to them.
Truss had 12 years as an MP and 8 years in senior posts. She wasnt widely hated. On paper she looked ok.
Even her pandering in the leadership campaign is what you'd expect. Her problem wasnt lack of experience it was that she didn't prepare her MPs for her plans, and had zero answers for the press or public either when there was a bad reaction. Her problem was laziness.
In some ways, she was the Conservative echo of Corbyn. Both of them decided what they thought about everything at the age of about fourteen and saw it as a strength that they never deviated from that.
Except Corbyn was actually a socialist. Truss wasn't even a conservative really but a libertarian
Let's not be too politically polite about her. Thatcher was not a conservative really but a libertarian and I don't want to associate Liz Truss with Margaret Thatcher.
The best adjective for Truss is that she was an incompetent.
No Thatcher was genuinely a Conservative. A social conservative PM who brought in section 28 and a monarchist despite occasional disagreements with the Queen.
A Methodist by upbringing too. Maybe not a traditional Tory but a conservative nonetheless with elements of Gladstone Liberalism.
Truss however was a genuine libertarian, a social as well as economic liberal and also at one time wanted a republic
I actually think there was something quite reactionary about her. Whether you can be both a libertarian and a reactionary is open to debate.
Anyway I shall be away over the next week and probably not commenting on here. I may however dip in to see how things are but I'll only have my phone on me. Merry Christmas everyone.
It's only unfair personally but she should never have self-promoted for a job that was far beyond her capabilities.
She managed Foreign Secretary fine and got lots of trade deals post Brexit before that.
It was her mad policies that did for her and crashed the markets, not that she was thick or incompetent
You mean those trade deals that have been thoroughly discredited as being useless and one sided (against ourselves).
Plenty of opportunities for British exporters to Australia and New Zealand and Singapore for example with whom we did not have trade deals in the EU
You do realise that having a trade deal is not necessarily a good thing if it is a bad deal and according to many, including Conservatives (eg George Eustice) our trade deal with Australia is useless. No worse than useless as it is worse than no deal at all.
So fine to be in the single market and a customs union with the EU but not fine to have a trade deal with Australia, who culturally we probably have more in common with than any other nation on earth except New Zealand? Even when we now have a trade deal with the EU too anyway
Behind a paywall so have health officials said that, or journalists inferred that from what health officials have actually said to create a catchy headline?
Behind a paywall so have health officials said that, or journalists inferred that from what health officials have actually said to create a catchy headline?
If it’s not in quotation marks it’s highly unlikely they actually said it.
It's only unfair personally but she should never have self-promoted for a job that was far beyond her capabilities.
She managed Foreign Secretary fine and got lots of trade deals post Brexit before that.
It was her mad policies that did for her and crashed the markets, not that she was thick or incompetent
You mean those trade deals that have been thoroughly discredited as being useless and one sided (against ourselves).
Plenty of opportunities for British exporters to Australia and New Zealand and Singapore for example with whom we did not have trade deals in the EU
We did. As part of the EU.
Not Australia and New Zealand, the Singapore deal that's being tabled now is far, far deeper than the barebones one the EU has.
The EU was negotiating one with NZ even before the referendum, now done. And Australia coming on a slightly later timescale. I wonder who got the better deal?
Behind a paywall so have health officials said that, or journalists inferred that from what health officials have actually said to create a catchy headline?
If it’s not in quotation marks it’s highly unlikely they actually said it.
Behind a paywall so have health officials said that, or journalists inferred that from what health officials have actually said to create a catchy headline?
If it’s not in quotation marks it’s highly unlikely they actually said it.
"The UK Health Security Agency has urged anyone with symptoms to stay at home over Christmas, advising them to wear a mask in enclosed spaces, such as trains or supermarkets. “It is important to avoid contact with other people if you are unwell to help stop infections spreading over the Christmas and new year period,’’ the agency said."
Behind a paywall so have health officials said that, or journalists inferred that from what health officials have actually said to create a catchy headline?
If it’s not in quotation marks it’s highly unlikely they actually said it.
"The UK Health Security Agency has urged anyone with symptoms to stay at home over Christmas, advising them to wear a mask in enclosed spaces, such as trains or supermarkets. “It is important to avoid contact with other people if you are unwell to help stop infections spreading over the Christmas and new year period,’’ the agency said."
That seems like common sense good advice to me - symptoms are covid/flu not cold/cough (of course there is an overlap). The media interpretation not helpful as always.
If Johnson had still been PM, it must be quite likely that Zelensky would have stopped off in the UK as part of his first overseas trip since the beginning of the war.
More importantly, to adapt Father Ted, Singapore, Australia and New Zealand are both small and far away.
Quite. Remember the argument on PB - one of us argued it was more efficient to import turnips or whatever it was from Australia than to grow our own or get then from the EU.
The constant harping on "cultural" identity is also suspicious.
On topic I could conceivably vote for a Sunak-led Tory party, where I’d never in a million years vote for either Johnson or Truss. However, I’ll probably vote LD as I did in 2019, on the grounds that their influence in government is our best bet for addressing and ameliorating the damage done to the country by Brexit.
It's only unfair personally but she should never have self-promoted for a job that was far beyond her capabilities.
She managed Foreign Secretary fine and got lots of trade deals post Brexit before that.
It was her mad policies that did for her and crashed the markets, not that she was thick or incompetent
You mean those trade deals that have been thoroughly discredited as being useless and one sided (against ourselves).
Plenty of opportunities for British exporters to Australia and New Zealand and Singapore for example with whom we did not have trade deals in the EU
You do realise that having a trade deal is not necessarily a good thing if it is a bad deal and according to many, including Conservatives (eg George Eustice) our trade deal with Australia is useless. No worse than useless as it is worse than no deal at all.
So fine to be in the single market and a customs union with the EU but not fine to have a trade deal with Australia, who culturally we probably have more in common with than any other nation on earth except New Zealand? Even when we now have a trade deal with the EU too anyway
It is absolutely fine to have a trade deal with anyone. What is not fine is to have a crap one as per most people who understand this stuff including many Tories.
On topic I could conceivably vote for a Sunak-led Tory party, where I’d never in a million years vote for either Johnson or Truss. However, I’ll probably vote LD as I did in 2019, on the grounds that their influence in government is our best bet for addressing and ameliorating the damage done to the country by Brexit.
Fair enough, but will the LDs want to sacrifice themselves again? The LDs have been very badly damaged electorally by being in government with the Tories (UKG) and Labour (SG), as well as their anti-indy alliance with both in 2013-14.
It's only unfair personally but she should never have self-promoted for a job that was far beyond her capabilities.
She managed Foreign Secretary fine and got lots of trade deals post Brexit before that.
It was her mad policies that did for her and crashed the markets, not that she was thick or incompetent
You mean those trade deals that have been thoroughly discredited as being useless and one sided (against ourselves).
Plenty of opportunities for British exporters to Australia and New Zealand and Singapore for example with whom we did not have trade deals in the EU
You do realise that having a trade deal is not necessarily a good thing if it is a bad deal and according to many, including Conservatives (eg George Eustice) our trade deal with Australia is useless. No worse than useless as it is worse than no deal at all.
So fine to be in the single market and a customs union with the EU but not fine to have a trade deal with Australia, who culturally we probably have more in common with than any other nation on earth except New Zealand? Even when we now have a trade deal with the EU too anyway
It is absolutely fine to have a trade deal with anyone. What is not fine is to have a crap one as per most people who understand this stuff including many Tories.
Ah, but so long as they are 'culturally' correct, it's OK. Not those furriners next door, with a land border or only 33 km of sea or a train ride away.
If Johnson had still been PM, it must be quite likely that Zelensky would have stopped off in the UK as part of his first overseas trip since the beginning of the war.
More importantly, to adapt Father Ted, Singapore, Australia and New Zealand are both small and far away.
Quite. Remember the argument on PB - one of us argued it was more efficient to import turnips or whatever it was from Australia than to grow our own or get then from the EU.
The constant harping on "cultural" identity is also suspicious.
So fine to flood UK markets with CAP funded EU agricultural products and EU cars competing with UK producers but not a few Australian products?
Fine to allow UK exporters easier access to the EU but not Australian market?
Most Australians are still of British Isles origin and Australia remains the top destination for emigration for emigrants from the UK
More importantly, to adapt Father Ted, Singapore, Australia and New Zealand are both small and far away.
Quite. Remember the argument on PB - one of us argued it was more efficient to import turnips or whatever it was from Australia than to grow our own or get then from the EU.
The constant harping on "cultural" identity is also suspicious.
So fine to flood UK markets with CAP funded EU agricultural products and EU cars competing with UK producers but not a few Australian products?
Fine to allow UK exporters easier access to the EU but not Australian market?
Most Australians are still of British Isles origin and Australia remains the top destination for emigration for emigrants from the UK
Doesn't matter - flooding the UK market with Australian produce thanks to a crap deal is just as stupid, and far worse from a food security point of view.
Behind a paywall so have health officials said that, or journalists inferred that from what health officials have actually said to create a catchy headline?
More importantly, to adapt Father Ted, Singapore, Australia and New Zealand are both small and far away.
Quite. Remember the argument on PB - one of us argued it was more efficient to import turnips or whatever it was from Australia than to grow our own or get then from the EU.
The constant harping on "cultural" identity is also suspicious.
So fine to flood UK markets with CAP funded EU agricultural products and EU cars competing with UK producers but not a few Australian products?
Fine to allow UK exporters easier access to the EU but not Australian market?
Most Australians are still of British Isles origin and Australia remains the top destination for emigration for emigrants from the UK
Doesn't matter - flooding the UK market with Australian produce thanks to a crap deal is just as stupid, and far worse from a food security point of view.
The percentage of CAP subsidised EU food and fish we flooded our markets with and British farmers had to compete with was far more in the single market than there will ever be from Australian farm produce imported on the same terms as the trade deal we now have with the EU.
Plus of course British exporters now get easier access to the Australian market as they have to the EU market
More importantly, to adapt Father Ted, Singapore, Australia and New Zealand are both small and far away.
Quite. Remember the argument on PB - one of us argued it was more efficient to import turnips or whatever it was from Australia than to grow our own or get then from the EU.
The constant harping on "cultural" identity is also suspicious.
So fine to flood UK markets with CAP funded EU agricultural products and EU cars competing with UK producers but not a few Australian products?
Fine to allow UK exporters easier access to the EU but not Australian market?
Most Australians are still of British Isles origin and Australia remains the top destination for emigration for emigrants from the UK
You really don't get trade deals do you?
There is no one sided flooding the market unless you do a bad deal. The point of a good trade deal is to improve trade for both sides for mutual benefit.
So in idiot language:
Good trade deals are good Bad trade deals are bad
We had a very, very very good trade deal with the EU when we were in the EU, we now have a much worse trade deal
We had no trade deal with Australia. We now have a trade deal that is worse than no trade deal according to many people who understand these things, including many Tories.
More importantly, to adapt Father Ted, Singapore, Australia and New Zealand are both small and far away.
Quite. Remember the argument on PB - one of us argued it was more efficient to import turnips or whatever it was from Australia than to grow our own or get then from the EU.
The constant harping on "cultural" identity is also suspicious.
So fine to flood UK markets with CAP funded EU agricultural products and EU cars competing with UK producers but not a few Australian products?
Fine to allow UK exporters easier access to the EU but not Australian market?
Most Australians are still of British Isles origin and Australia remains the top destination for emigration for emigrants from the UK
You really don't get trade deals do you?
There is no one sided flooding the market unless you do a bad deal. The point of a good trade deal is to improve trade for both sides for mutual benefit.
So in idiot language:
Good trade deals are good Bad trade deals are bad
We had a very, very very good trade deal with the EU when we were in the EU, we now have a much worse trade deal
We had no trade deal with Australia. We now have a trade deal that is worse than no trade deal according to many people who understand these things, including many Tories.
How do you not get this?
We now have trade deals with the EU and Australia on similar terms. Before we just had an open access deal with the EU effectively but no deal at all with Australia.
If you want protectionism at least be consistent. That means backing tariffs, customs checks and trade barriers on EU imports to the UK as well as Australian imports to the UK
Behind a paywall so have health officials said that, or journalists inferred that from what health officials have actually said to create a catchy headline?
It includes warnings against visiting babies as well as grandparents, and urges wearing masks if those feeling unwell must venture out.
The use of the word grandparents is especially lazy. The UK has seen grandparents as young as 26 and there will be plenty in their forties who are not even eligible for a booster. And plenty of very elderly who are not grandparents.
If they mean age, use a word directly related to age, not offspring.
More importantly, to adapt Father Ted, Singapore, Australia and New Zealand are both small and far away.
Quite. Remember the argument on PB - one of us argued it was more efficient to import turnips or whatever it was from Australia than to grow our own or get then from the EU.
The constant harping on "cultural" identity is also suspicious.
So fine to flood UK markets with CAP funded EU agricultural products and EU cars competing with UK producers but not a few Australian products?
Fine to allow UK exporters easier access to the EU but not Australian market?
Most Australians are still of British Isles origin and Australia remains the top destination for emigration for emigrants from the UK
More importantly, to adapt Father Ted, Singapore, Australia and New Zealand are both small and far away.
Quite. Remember the argument on PB - one of us argued it was more efficient to import turnips or whatever it was from Australia than to grow our own or get then from the EU.
The constant harping on "cultural" identity is also suspicious.
So fine to flood UK markets with CAP funded EU agricultural products and EU cars competing with UK producers but not a few Australian products?
Fine to allow UK exporters easier access to the EU but not Australian market?
Most Australians are still of British Isles origin and Australia remains the top destination for emigration for emigrants from the UK
You really don't get trade deals do you?
There is no one sided flooding the market unless you do a bad deal. The point of a good trade deal is to improve trade for both sides for mutual benefit.
So in idiot language:
Good trade deals are good Bad trade deals are bad
We had a very, very very good trade deal with the EU when we were in the EU, we now have a much worse trade deal
We had no trade deal with Australia. We now have a trade deal that is worse than no trade deal according to many people who understand these things, including many Tories.
How do you not get this?
Any trade has two sides: a purchaser and a supplier, so it's not as simple as that.
Indeed if you want to argue that a deal is bad if there is an imbalance, then you would have to argue that our EU membership was a bad deal from a trade perspective because it led to a massive trade deficit.
More importantly, to adapt Father Ted, Singapore, Australia and New Zealand are both small and far away.
Quite. Remember the argument on PB - one of us argued it was more efficient to import turnips or whatever it was from Australia than to grow our own or get then from the EU.
The constant harping on "cultural" identity is also suspicious.
So fine to flood UK markets with CAP funded EU agricultural products and EU cars competing with UK producers but not a few Australian products?
Fine to allow UK exporters easier access to the EU but not Australian market?
Most Australians are still of British Isles origin and Australia remains the top destination for emigration for emigrants from the UK
Doesn't matter - flooding the UK market with Australian produce thanks to a crap deal is just as stupid, and far worse from a food security point of view.
The percentage of CAP subsidised EU food and fish we flooded our markets with and British farmers had to compete with was far more in the single market than there will ever be from Australian farm produce imported on the same terms as the trade deal we now have with the EU.
Plus of course British exporters now get easier access to the Australian market as they have to the EU market
Head, wall. As has been pointed out Australia is far, far away and very very small (market not country) compared to the EU and anyway as I keep saying and you keep ignoring Truss negotiated a very poor deal (for us) according to those who know about this stuff, which was the original point.
On topic I could conceivably vote for a Sunak-led Tory party, where I’d never in a million years vote for either Johnson or Truss. However, I’ll probably vote LD as I did in 2019, on the grounds that their influence in government is our best bet for addressing and ameliorating the damage done to the country by Brexit.
Fair enough, but will the LDs want to sacrifice themselves again? The LDs have been very badly damaged electorally by being in government with the Tories (UKG) and Labour (SG), as well as their anti-indy alliance with both in 2013-14.
Hopefully, they’ll have learnt from the tuition fees fiasco, but if they’re not prepared to enter government, then they may as well disband and go home.
More importantly, to adapt Father Ted, Singapore, Australia and New Zealand are both small and far away.
Quite. Remember the argument on PB - one of us argued it was more efficient to import turnips or whatever it was from Australia than to grow our own or get then from the EU.
The constant harping on "cultural" identity is also suspicious.
So fine to flood UK markets with CAP funded EU agricultural products and EU cars competing with UK producers but not a few Australian products?
Fine to allow UK exporters easier access to the EU but not Australian market?
Most Australians are still of British Isles origin and Australia remains the top destination for emigration for emigrants from the UK
Doesn't matter - flooding the UK market with Australian produce thanks to a crap deal is just as stupid, and far worse from a food security point of view.
The percentage of CAP subsidised EU food and fish we flooded our markets with and British farmers had to compete with was far more in the single market than there will ever be from Australian farm produce imported on the same terms as the trade deal we now have with the EU.
Plus of course British exporters now get easier access to the Australian market as they have to the EU market
But short of digging a tunnel through the centre of the Earth (travel time: 42 minutes), there's a limit to how much fresh food it is sensible to send between the UK and Australia.
If you want to make an argument that Brexit leaves Britain poorer but prouder and happier, fair enough.
But the idea that swapping a single market including our immediate neighbours for tariff reductions across the globe is for the birds.
More importantly, to adapt Father Ted, Singapore, Australia and New Zealand are both small and far away.
Quite. Remember the argument on PB - one of us argued it was more efficient to import turnips or whatever it was from Australia than to grow our own or get then from the EU.
The constant harping on "cultural" identity is also suspicious.
So fine to flood UK markets with CAP funded EU agricultural products and EU cars competing with UK producers but not a few Australian products?
Fine to allow UK exporters easier access to the EU but not Australian market?
Most Australians are still of British Isles origin and Australia remains the top destination for emigration for emigrants from the UK
Doesn't matter - flooding the UK market with Australian produce thanks to a crap deal is just as stupid, and far worse from a food security point of view.
The percentage of CAP subsidised EU food and fish we flooded our markets with and British farmers had to compete with was far more in the single market than there will ever be from Australian farm produce imported on the same terms as the trade deal we now have with the EU.
Plus of course British exporters now get easier access to the Australian market as they have to the EU market
But short of digging a tunnel through the centre of the Earth (travel time: 42 minutes), there's a limit to how much fresh food it is sensible to send between the UK and Australia.
If you want to make an argument that Brexit leaves Britain poorer but prouder and happier, fair enough.
But the idea that swapping a single market including our immediate neighbours for tariff reductions across the globe is for the birds.
As we're gradually seeing.
Point of pedantry, you can't travel through the centre of the earth due to gravitational issues.
More importantly, to adapt Father Ted, Singapore, Australia and New Zealand are both small and far away.
Quite. Remember the argument on PB - one of us argued it was more efficient to import turnips or whatever it was from Australia than to grow our own or get then from the EU.
The constant harping on "cultural" identity is also suspicious.
So fine to flood UK markets with CAP funded EU agricultural products and EU cars competing with UK producers but not a few Australian products?
Fine to allow UK exporters easier access to the EU but not Australian market?
Most Australians are still of British Isles origin and Australia remains the top destination for emigration for emigrants from the UK
You really don't get trade deals do you?
There is no one sided flooding the market unless you do a bad deal. The point of a good trade deal is to improve trade for both sides for mutual benefit.
So in idiot language:
Good trade deals are good Bad trade deals are bad
We had a very, very very good trade deal with the EU when we were in the EU, we now have a much worse trade deal
We had no trade deal with Australia. We now have a trade deal that is worse than no trade deal according to many people who understand these things, including many Tories.
How do you not get this?
Any trade has two sides: a purchaser and a supplier, so it's not as simple as that.
Indeed if you want to argue that a deal is bad if there is an imbalance, then you would have to argue that our EU membership was a bad deal from a trade perspective because it led to a massive trade deficit.
Of course there is a supplier and purchaser and there will inevitably be an imbalance. I was trying to make it simple for hyufd. But key is the 'mutual benefit for both parties' element. That is key to any deal or contract and it is as simple as that.
Either party in a negotiation gives away what has a higher value to the other side compared to themselves and negotiates for what has a higher value to themselves than the other side. That is the key to good negotiations as it will always result in mutual benefit to both sides. It then doesn't matter if there is an imbalance as long as both sides benefit.
Screwing the other side always eventually results in bad agreements.
Behind a paywall so have health officials said that, or journalists inferred that from what health officials have actually said to create a catchy headline?
It includes warnings against visiting babies as well as grandparents, and urges wearing masks if those feeling unwell must venture out.
The use of the word grandparents is especially lazy. The UK has seen grandparents as young as 26 and there will be plenty in their forties who are not even eligible for a booster. And plenty of very elderly who are not grandparents.
If they mean age, use a word directly related to age, not offspring.
The non-grandparental elderly are probably under visited anyway. Average age of becoming grandparent 63 apparently
Mr. Eagles, and yet the setting is Christmas. Hence the Christmas party, Christmas songs, Santa hat, and the famous line "Now I have a machine gun. Ho ho ho."
Just back in the UK for a few days. Driving North on the M6 was pretty interesting. Basically the infrastructure constructed in the 1960s/70s is trying to cope with the traffic levels of 50 years later, and despite band-aid fixes like the so-called "smart Motorways", it is failing badly.
Small fixes in the rail system only upgrade things from a Victorian level and the strikes make the system unusable anyway- last Wednesday I was quoted over £300 for a single ticket on trainline from London to the Cotswolds. In any event it should not take nearly three hours to complete a 90 mile journey.
It left me reflecting that the NHS strikes in England are just another stunning failure of leadership. Everywhere you look the whole country looks dreary and run down. It takes longer to drive to Scotland from the South than it did 30 years ago.
Schools in Scotland are in complete crisis, and previous Scottish excellence in, for example, STEM subjects has just evaporated. At every level political intervention and incompetence is evident, and all the Scottish Parliament can point to is legislation, which- whatever its merits- is addressing the concerns and rights of an stunningly small minority. The point is that everyone has an opinion on Trans rights, whereas few understand the scale of the economic mess that both Scotland and England now face. Several members of my family have had to up sticks and leave Scotland because the systems they rely on do not deliver what they are supposed to do.
Although the party of government is clearly bereft of ideas and talent, the entire political system is sclerotic and creaking. The national conversation is mean and small and leading nowhere: In Scotland the Nats shut down all debate unless on their own terms, and it is a bitter and pointless mess. Brutal and aggressive the atmosphere is increasingly coarse and threatening. In England the milquetoast Tory leadership feebly protest that corruption is not that bad... failing to recognize how angry voters are at the fiasco of the last 6 years.
I am sure that most people, like me after only 4 days here, are just shouting at the TV as some PR bullshit line is paraded past the graphics heavy/information lite interviewers.
If we get the governments we deserve, it seems that the voters must be apathetic and defeated on both sides of the border.
One thing is for sure, the fate of the world is certainly not being decided by the pygmy leaders in either London or in Edinburgh.
More importantly, to adapt Father Ted, Singapore, Australia and New Zealand are both small and far away.
Quite. Remember the argument on PB - one of us argued it was more efficient to import turnips or whatever it was from Australia than to grow our own or get then from the EU.
The constant harping on "cultural" identity is also suspicious.
So fine to flood UK markets with CAP funded EU agricultural products and EU cars competing with UK producers but not a few Australian products?
Fine to allow UK exporters easier access to the EU but not Australian market?
Most Australians are still of British Isles origin and Australia remains the top destination for emigration for emigrants from the UK
You really don't get trade deals do you?
There is no one sided flooding the market unless you do a bad deal. The point of a good trade deal is to improve trade for both sides for mutual benefit.
So in idiot language:
Good trade deals are good Bad trade deals are bad
We had a very, very very good trade deal with the EU when we were in the EU, we now have a much worse trade deal
We had no trade deal with Australia. We now have a trade deal that is worse than no trade deal according to many people who understand these things, including many Tories.
How do you not get this?
No we had a very bad trade deal with the EU. We paid vast sums of money for the right to have a massive trade deficit and enhance the ability of companies to move their operations out of the UK to other parts of the EU, often being subsidised by the EU to do so. Whilst we were members of the EEC/EU we were forced to destroy agriculture and food production specifically to adhere to EU quotas. The EU was a disaster for British farming and for British employment.
Just back in the UK for a few days. Driving North on the M6 was pretty interesting. Basically the infrastructure constructed in the 1960s/70s is trying to cope with the traffic levels of 50 years later, and despite band-aid fixes like the so-called "smart Motorways", it is failing badly.
Small fixes in the rail system only upgrade things from a Victorian level and the strikes make the system unusable anyway- last Wednesday I was quoted over £300 for a single ticket on trainline from London to the Cotswolds. In any event it should not take nearly three hours to complete a 90 mile journey.
It left me reflecting that the NHS strikes in England are just another stunning failure of leadership. Everywhere you look the whole country looks dreary and run down. It takes longer to drive to Scotland from the South than it did 30 years ago.
Schools in Scotland are in complete crisis, and previous Scottish excellence in, for example, STEM subjects has just evaporated. At every level political intervention and incompetence is evident, and all the Scottish Parliament can point to is legislation, which- whatever its merits- is addressing the concerns and rights of an stunningly small minority. The point is that everyone has an opinion on Trans rights, whereas few understand the scale of the economic mess that both Scotland and England now face. Several members of my family have had to up sticks and leave Scotland because the systems they rely on do not deliver what they are supposed to do.
Although the party of government is clearly bereft of ideas and talent, the entire political system is sclerotic and creaking. The national conversation is mean and small and leading nowhere: In Scotland the Nats shut down all debate unless on their own terms, and it is a bitter and pointless mess. Brutal and aggressive the atmosphere is increasingly coarse and threatening. In England the milquetoast Tory leadership feebly protest that corruption is not that bad... failing to recognize how angry voters are at the fiasco of the last 6 years.
I am sure that most people, like me after only 4 days here, are just shouting at the TV as some PR bullshit line is paraded past the graphics heavy/information lite interviewers.
If we get the governments we deserve, it seems that the voters must be apathetic and defeated on both sides of the border.
One thing is for sure, the fate of the world is certainly not being decided by the pygmy leaders in either London or in Edinburgh.
The Smart Motorways on the M6 are literally a joke. You can be stuck in a four mile queue of traffic and the hard shoulder shut, or waltzing along at 6am when there's about five cars around while the HS is open and the speed limit is set to 50. Although the worst are the phantom lane closures on all-lane running sections of the M5, which seem to be stuck up solely in proportion to how drunk the manager is.
However, a much, much bigger problem - and I'm not sure whether you saw the first fruits of this at Junction 10 - is that almost all the original overbridges are becoming life expired at once and will need replacing over the next 10-15 years. Which is going to be (a) very expensive and (b) very disruptive.
Regardless of her crazy politics/strategic ineptitude, the thing that really grated with me was her personality.
It was almost child-like, the way she turned on her parents/teachers and interpreted the behaviour of that air hostess, in her anecdotes during the leadership campaign.
You can’t expect to be taken seriously as a grown up politician if you try to weaponise your irrational teenage angst.
She’s barely mature enough to be an MP, let alone hold serious political power.
What were the Tory members thinking?
Everyone must seem a teenager from their ancient point of view. So Ms Truss wouldn't stand out.
Well if its age then the alternative candidate was even less mature to them.
Truss had 12 years as an MP and 8 years in senior posts. She wasnt widely hated. On paper she looked ok.
Even her pandering in the leadership campaign is what you'd expect. Her problem wasnt lack of experience it was that she didn't prepare her MPs for her plans, and had zero answers for the press or public either when there was a bad reaction. Her problem was laziness.
In some ways, she was the Conservative echo of Corbyn. Both of them decided what they thought about everything at the age of about fourteen and saw it as a strength that they never deviated from that.
Except Corbyn was actually a socialist. Truss wasn't even a conservative really but a libertarian
Except she was elected by MPs and members of the "Conservative" Party.
So what, she was still an ex LD libertarian who managed to fool some Tories for a few months before they forced her out anyway
She coauthored (or edited?) a whole book on the stuff, so you can't pretend the Party didn't know.
She spent a decade as a member of the government, under three quite different PMs - including a spell in great office of state - before becoming PM herself. Pretty deep cover for an LD sleeper cell.
In that time she was well known by her officials for being inconsistent, intellectually-lightweight, vain, and frequently off-the-deep-end crackers. I genuinely wouldn't trust her to make a cup of coffee. She should never have got anywhere near No. 10, and the damage she did in an unprecedentedly short time proves it. But her long ministerial career prior is an indictment of the Tory party as a whole; they've nowhere to hide on this.
More importantly, to adapt Father Ted, Singapore, Australia and New Zealand are both small and far away.
Quite. Remember the argument on PB - one of us argued it was more efficient to import turnips or whatever it was from Australia than to grow our own or get then from the EU.
The constant harping on "cultural" identity is also suspicious.
So fine to flood UK markets with CAP funded EU agricultural products and EU cars competing with UK producers but not a few Australian products?
Fine to allow UK exporters easier access to the EU but not Australian market?
Most Australians are still of British Isles origin and Australia remains the top destination for emigration for emigrants from the UK
Doesn't matter - flooding the UK market with Australian produce thanks to a crap deal is just as stupid, and far worse from a food security point of view.
The percentage of CAP subsidised EU food and fish we flooded our markets with and British farmers had to compete with was far more in the single market than there will ever be from Australian farm produce imported on the same terms as the trade deal we now have with the EU.
Plus of course British exporters now get easier access to the Australian market as they have to the EU market
But short of digging a tunnel through the centre of the Earth (travel time: 42 minutes), there's a limit to how much fresh food it is sensible to send between the UK and Australia.
If you want to make an argument that Brexit leaves Britain poorer but prouder and happier, fair enough.
But the idea that swapping a single market including our immediate neighbours for tariff reductions across the globe is for the birds.
As we're gradually seeing.
Point of pedantry, you can't travel through the centre of the earth due to gravitational issues.
I'm intrigued. It's a fairly standard first year Uni physics question. And by symmetry it feels like it ought to work; falling in energy transfers gravitational to kinetic so you end up with just enough kinetic energy to overcome gravity enough to come to rest at the other portal.
Air resistance is a bit of a bugger, but I'm a physicist- ignoring air resistance is pretty much mandatory.
Just back in the UK for a few days. Driving North on the M6 was pretty interesting. Basically the infrastructure constructed in the 1960s/70s is trying to cope with the traffic levels of 50 years later, and despite band-aid fixes like the so-called "smart Motorways", it is failing badly.
Small fixes in the rail system only upgrade things from a Victorian level and the strikes make the system unusable anyway- last Wednesday I was quoted over £300 for a single ticket on trainline from London to the Cotswolds. In any event it should not take nearly three hours to complete a 90 mile journey.
It left me reflecting that the NHS strikes in England are just another stunning failure of leadership. Everywhere you look the whole country looks dreary and run down. It takes longer to drive to Scotland from the South than it did 30 years ago.
Schools in Scotland are in complete crisis, and previous Scottish excellence in, for example, STEM subjects has just evaporated. At every level political intervention and incompetence is evident, and all the Scottish Parliament can point to is legislation, which- whatever its merits- is addressing the concerns and rights of an stunningly small minority. The point is that everyone has an opinion on Trans rights, whereas few understand the scale of the economic mess that both Scotland and England now face. Several members of my family have had to up sticks and leave Scotland because the systems they rely on do not deliver what they are supposed to do.
Although the party of government is clearly bereft of ideas and talent, the entire political system is sclerotic and creaking. The national conversation is mean and small and leading nowhere: In Scotland the Nats shut down all debate unless on their own terms, and it is a bitter and pointless mess. Brutal and aggressive the atmosphere is increasingly coarse and threatening. In England the milquetoast Tory leadership feebly protest that corruption is not that bad... failing to recognize how angry voters are at the fiasco of the last 6 years.
I am sure that most people, like me after only 4 days here, are just shouting at the TV as some PR bullshit line is paraded past the graphics heavy/information lite interviewers.
If we get the governments we deserve, it seems that the voters must be apathetic and defeated on both sides of the border.
One thing is for sure, the fate of the world is certainly not being decided by the pygmy leaders in either London or in Edinburgh.
But what about all that soft power we have from the likes of the BBC !!!!!
More importantly, to adapt Father Ted, Singapore, Australia and New Zealand are both small and far away.
Quite. Remember the argument on PB - one of us argued it was more efficient to import turnips or whatever it was from Australia than to grow our own or get then from the EU.
The constant harping on "cultural" identity is also suspicious.
So fine to flood UK markets with CAP funded EU agricultural products and EU cars competing with UK producers but not a few Australian products?
Fine to allow UK exporters easier access to the EU but not Australian market?
Most Australians are still of British Isles origin and Australia remains the top destination for emigration for emigrants from the UK
Doesn't matter - flooding the UK market with Australian produce thanks to a crap deal is just as stupid, and far worse from a food security point of view.
The percentage of CAP subsidised EU food and fish we flooded our markets with and British farmers had to compete with was far more in the single market than there will ever be from Australian farm produce imported on the same terms as the trade deal we now have with the EU.
Plus of course British exporters now get easier access to the Australian market as they have to the EU market
But short of digging a tunnel through the centre of the Earth (travel time: 42 minutes), there's a limit to how much fresh food it is sensible to send between the UK and Australia.
If you want to make an argument that Brexit leaves Britain poorer but prouder and happier, fair enough.
But the idea that swapping a single market including our immediate neighbours for tariff reductions across the globe is for the birds.
As we're gradually seeing.
Point of pedantry, you can't travel through the centre of the earth due to gravitational issues.
I'm intrigued. It's a fairly standard first year Uni physics question. And by symmetry it feels like it ought to work; falling in energy transfers gravitational to kinetic so you end up with just enough kinetic energy to overcome gravity enough to come to rest at the other portal.
Air resistance is a bit of a bugger, but I'm a physicist- ignoring air resistance is pretty much mandatory.
Is there something I've been missing?
Thermal energy from air friction. but I suppose that is counted in your comment. Though if your travelling mass is magnetic or even just conductive there would be some loss of energy due to induced currents and ?hysteresis.
Just back in the UK for a few days. Driving North on the M6 was pretty interesting. Basically the infrastructure constructed in the 1960s/70s is trying to cope with the traffic levels of 50 years later, and despite band-aid fixes like the so-called "smart Motorways", it is failing badly.
Small fixes in the rail system only upgrade things from a Victorian level and the strikes make the system unusable anyway- last Wednesday I was quoted over £300 for a single ticket on trainline from London to the Cotswolds. In any event it should not take nearly three hours to complete a 90 mile journey.
It left me reflecting that the NHS strikes in England are just another stunning failure of leadership. Everywhere you look the whole country looks dreary and run down. It takes longer to drive to Scotland from the South than it did 30 years ago.
Schools in Scotland are in complete crisis, and previous Scottish excellence in, for example, STEM subjects has just evaporated. At every level political intervention and incompetence is evident, and all the Scottish Parliament can point to is legislation, which- whatever its merits- is addressing the concerns and rights of an stunningly small minority. The point is that everyone has an opinion on Trans rights, whereas few understand the scale of the economic mess that both Scotland and England now face. Several members of my family have had to up sticks and leave Scotland because the systems they rely on do not deliver what they are supposed to do.
Although the party of government is clearly bereft of ideas and talent, the entire political system is sclerotic and creaking. The national conversation is mean and small and leading nowhere: In Scotland the Nats shut down all debate unless on their own terms, and it is a bitter and pointless mess. Brutal and aggressive the atmosphere is increasingly coarse and threatening. In England the milquetoast Tory leadership feebly protest that corruption is not that bad... failing to recognize how angry voters are at the fiasco of the last 6 years.
I am sure that most people, like me after only 4 days here, are just shouting at the TV as some PR bullshit line is paraded past the graphics heavy/information lite interviewers.
If we get the governments we deserve, it seems that the voters must be apathetic and defeated on both sides of the border.
One thing is for sure, the fate of the world is certainly not being decided by the pygmy leaders in either London or in Edinburgh.
Great that you’ve popped back to give us the benefit of your vicariously held opinions. We really don’t get enough of that on PB.
What are the odds of Truss featuring in the panel?
Truss's problem wasn't being too ambitious politically. It was being as mad as a box of frogs.
If you compare and contrast the hard work put in by Thatcher and Cameron before they became PM, Truss thought it was easy.
Truss also seemed to forget that Thatcher put up taxes first to stabilise the economy/finances then was in a position to cut taxes later on.
Being PM isn't easy.
In the planning before the leadership race, the stated intention was always to cost/balance the mini budget. JRM and others have confirmed this. It could have been hubris that lead to a change in direction, but I tend to think the Kwasi factor is responsible. Truss could never say No to Kwasi, and I think that was her Achilles heel.
Comments
A Methodist by upbringing too. Maybe not a traditional Tory but a conservative nonetheless with elements of Gladstone Liberalism.
Truss however was a genuine libertarian, a social as well as economic liberal and also at one time wanted a republic
Trying to annex the southern Don Basin which has been ethnically Russian for around 100 years would be very hard going!
Is it worth deciding to say no to the possibility of those voters, on a gamble that if you believe hard enough time will reverse to 2019?
Gonna use it. ChatGPT is on song this morning
But in most other ways she was far from a conservative. She was a massive advocate of libertarian economics: Martin Friedman and all that. She took a cudgel to institutions in a way that no C conservative would ever do.
And I really don't think calling her a monarchist washes. She had respect HMQ but she held the commonwealth in contempt, and much of the institutions of the royal family and aristocracy with it.
She loathed the kind of the institutional feudalism, entitlement, and noblesse oblige that surrounded her, including in her own party. She was utterly destructive and disdainful of institutions that had been in place for decades. A massive wrecking ball on the fabric of this country. Her fans thank her for that, but that isn't the point.
Many around her thought she was anything but a C conservative. They were right.
The protean and multiple nature of the conversation on here is one of its joys
We're speaking about your constant desire to tangentialise threads so that people can focus on you and your ego. You do it the whole time because you love to be the centre of attention.
The second duty is to play dress up as a soldier or other armed forces.
The third is to get good press coverage for one and two.
Only then come the maps and boring shit.
In me omnia sunt posita. Tenebrae factae sunt. Non sunt loquelae neque sermones. Ad me ipsum pectus habeo. In morte tua, vita mea.
AFAICS, Leon was chatting tangentially and harmlessly and largely to himelself to himself about AI. He really wasn't the centre of attention until you decided to launch a pittle sub-thread about him. And now he is.
QED
Holiday Inn - the film that launched White Christmas as THE Christmas song was released August 1942
Miracle on 34th Street - One of the greatest Christmas films of all time was released June 1947
Trading Places - which revolves entirely around the Christmas Holidays was released June 1983
Gremlins - another 80s Christmas classic was released June 1984
Oh and as an aside the Christmas Song (Chestnuts roasting on an open fire) was written in California in July 1945
Tesla driver blames full-self-driving software for eight-car Thanksgiving Day pile up
...
Police are investigating if the controversial so-called "full-self-driving" software was enabled and possibly the cause of the crash. Tesla will have full records of course, although its CEO seemingly has his mind on other things at the moment.
https://www.theregister.com/2022/12/23/tesla_driver_software_crash/
They asked it to write a formal essay exploring the relative merits of wheels bins and normal bins, which then formed the basis of an intergalactic space epic written in the style of George Lucas. I was absolutely pissing myself by this point.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/nhs-flu-cases-uk-rise-hospitals-covid-qc8vpmp8b (£££)
However she was no libertarian, if she was she would never have brought in Section 28. Truss however genuinely was a libertarian, a social and economic liberal while also having even more contempt for hierarchy and tradition than Thatcher
Anyway I shall be away over the next week and probably not commenting on here. I may however dip in to see how things are but I'll only have my phone on me. Merry Christmas everyone.
Even the Singapore trade deal was only agreed by the EU in 2018, after the UK Brexit vote
ChatGPT4 will be able to produce a perfectly passable script, and still images are old hat for AI now. So...
Still no EU and Australia trade deal agreed at all
That seems like common sense good advice to me - symptoms are covid/flu not cold/cough (of course there is an overlap). The media interpretation not helpful as always.
The constant harping on "cultural" identity is also suspicious.
Oh well..
but not a few Australian products?
Fine to allow UK exporters easier access to the EU but not Australian market?
Most Australians are still of British Isles origin and Australia remains the top destination for emigration for emigrants from the UK
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/national-flu-and-covid-19-surveillance-reports-published
It includes warnings against visiting babies as well as grandparents, and urges wearing masks if those feeling unwell must venture out.
Tory McToryface (write-in)
Plus of course British exporters now get easier access to the Australian market as they have to the EU market
There is no one sided flooding the market unless you do a bad deal. The point of a good trade deal is to improve trade for both sides for mutual benefit.
So in idiot language:
Good trade deals are good
Bad trade deals are bad
We had a very, very very good trade deal with the EU when we were in the EU, we now have a much worse trade deal
We had no trade deal with Australia. We now have a trade deal that is worse than no trade deal according to many people who understand these things, including many Tories.
How do you not get this?
If you want protectionism at least be consistent. That means backing tariffs, customs checks and trade barriers on EU imports to the UK as well as Australian imports to the UK
If they mean age, use a word directly related to age, not offspring.
Indeed if you want to argue that a deal is bad if there is an imbalance, then you would have to argue that our EU membership was a bad deal from a trade perspective because it led to a massive trade deficit.
After all, a Garden of Remembrance isn't especially festive.
If you want to make an argument that Brexit leaves Britain poorer but prouder and happier, fair enough.
But the idea that swapping a single market including our immediate neighbours for tariff reductions across the globe is for the birds.
As we're gradually seeing.
https://scottbelsky.medium.com/creating-in-the-era-of-creative-confidence-b4e251d725f
Either party in a negotiation gives away what has a higher value to the other side compared to themselves and negotiates for what has a higher value to themselves than the other side. That is the key to good negotiations as it will always result in mutual benefit to both sides. It then doesn't matter if there is an imbalance as long as both sides benefit.
Screwing the other side always eventually results in bad agreements.
https://inews.co.uk/news/uk/life-milestones-parents-grandparents-married-divorced-retirement-ons-statistics-376188
Small fixes in the rail system only upgrade things from a Victorian level and the strikes make the system unusable anyway- last Wednesday I was quoted over £300 for a single ticket on trainline from London to the Cotswolds. In any event it should not take nearly three hours to complete a 90 mile journey.
It left me reflecting that the NHS strikes in England are just another stunning failure of leadership. Everywhere you look the whole country looks dreary and run down. It takes longer to drive to Scotland from the South than it did 30 years ago.
Schools in Scotland are in complete crisis, and previous Scottish excellence in, for example, STEM subjects has just evaporated. At every level political intervention and incompetence is evident, and all the Scottish Parliament can point to is legislation, which- whatever its merits- is addressing the concerns and rights of an stunningly small minority. The point is that everyone has an opinion on Trans rights, whereas few understand the scale of the economic mess that both Scotland and England now face. Several members of my family have had to up sticks and leave Scotland because the systems they rely on do not deliver what they are supposed to do.
Although the party of government is clearly bereft of ideas and talent, the entire political system is sclerotic and creaking. The national conversation is mean and small and leading nowhere: In Scotland the Nats shut down all debate unless on their own terms, and it is a bitter and pointless mess. Brutal and aggressive the atmosphere is increasingly coarse and threatening. In England the milquetoast Tory leadership feebly protest that corruption is not that bad... failing to recognize how angry voters are at the fiasco of the last 6 years.
I am sure that most people, like me after only 4 days here, are just shouting at the TV as some PR bullshit line is paraded past the graphics heavy/information lite interviewers.
If we get the governments we deserve, it seems that the voters must be apathetic and defeated on both sides of the border.
One thing is for sure, the fate of the world is certainly not being decided by the pygmy leaders in either London or in Edinburgh.
Being the originator of true imperial rule, archetype and dynastic founder.
Also name checked in the biblical Christmas story.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52184395
However, a much, much bigger problem - and I'm not sure whether you saw the first fruits of this at Junction 10 - is that almost all the original overbridges are becoming life expired at once and will need replacing over the next 10-15 years. Which is going to be (a) very expensive and (b) very disruptive.
In that time she was well known by her officials for being inconsistent, intellectually-lightweight, vain, and frequently off-the-deep-end crackers. I genuinely wouldn't trust her to make a cup of coffee. She should never have got anywhere near No. 10, and the damage she did in an unprecedentedly short time proves it. But her long ministerial career prior is an indictment of the Tory party as a whole; they've nowhere to hide on this.
Air resistance is a bit of a bugger, but I'm a physicist- ignoring air resistance is pretty much mandatory.
Is there something I've been missing?
New at 11...