This certainly shows there is no great love for Starmer as there was for Blair in 1997. So if inflation continues to fall Sunak could close the gap or if Starmer wins and the economy is poor his government could soon become unpopular
Still a huge amount of accumulated inflation only partly compensated for by wages, and add moprtgage costs to that (not fully kicked in yet).
Remember - it's not enough for inflation to fall, as prices are still going up.
Ultimately, we can only have real terms pay rises if the economy becomes more productive. Everything else is robbing Peter to pay Paul and finding bits of furniture we can chuck on the fire.
And I don't see much sign of improved productivity out there.
I don't think I have ever heard a politician make a serious suggestion about how to improve productivity, all I have ever heard is politicians say they'd like more. And an awful lot of what politicians do propose seems to at best ignore production if not outright hinder it. It's as though production, and the efficiency of it, can take care of itself, and the politicians can spend their time on what they see as the the more important job of spending the proceeds.
I suppose that part of the problem is that the sort of person who might have good ideas about producitivty is unlikely to get anywhere in politics where promising that we can have our cake and eat it is de rigueur.
Yesterday I read @bigjohnowls list of Strarmers u turns and while I know BJO is the 'bete noire' of some on here it is hard to disagree with him
I was speaking to my son in Vancouver last night and he said there is not a politician or leader anywhere that instills confidence, and he was highly critical of Trudeau and said Biden age and dementia will see him not standing next year as the US heads into further political chaos
Truth is the global problems with climate change and war require global solutions when politicians only seek to fight each other
I think Starmer will be out of his depth the minute he walks into no 10, and at times like this we need to bury politics and have a National government drawn across all politics
I’m in so long as it doesn’t involve the Conservatives who have proved they have no interests other than their own. They have also demonstrated their complete inability to work with other countries. They need to go and give us a national government that had the interests of the country somewhere in their list of priorities. Even second or third would be an improvement.
I reckon Sunak has now seriously begun to formulate an election-winning strategy that he thinks will secure victory. It's based around transport. It consists of:
- Save the motorist. Abandon HS2, ban LTNs and ULEZ. - Stop the boats. - A helipad in every neighbourhood.
Abandoning HS2 only makes sense if he's given up all hope of winning seats in the north.
Northerners use roads not railways.
That would surprise anyone using the Tyneside metro, or the Sheffield trams.
Over 80% of journeys are made by car, proportionally even more so outside London.
On public transport more journeys are made by bus than rail.
Yesterday I read @bigjohnowls list of Strarmers u turns and while I know BJO is the 'bete noire' of some on here it is hard to disagree with him
I was speaking to my son in Vancouver last night and he said there is not a politician or leader anywhere that instills confidence, and he was highly critical of Trudeau and said Biden age and dementia will see him not standing next year as the US heads into further political chaos
Truth is the global problems with climate change and war require global solutions when politicians only seek to fight each other
I think Starmer will be out of his depth the minute he walks into no 10, and at times like this we need to bury politics and have a National government drawn across all politics
What we need is a period when the barking Brexiteers have minimal influence on our policies. Starmer offers the best chance of this.
I reckon Sunak has now seriously begun to formulate an election-winning strategy that he thinks will secure victory. It's based around transport. It consists of:
- Save the motorist. Abandon HS2, ban LTNs and ULEZ. - Stop the boats. - A helipad in every neighbourhood.
Abandoning HS2 only makes sense if he's given up all hope of winning seats in the north.
Northerners use roads not railways.
That would surprise anyone using the Tyneside metro, or the Sheffield trams.
Over 80% of journeys are made by car, proportionally even more so outside London.
On public transport more journeys are made by bus than rail.
Notice how much politicians, the media and PB talk about trains compared with buses ?
Trains are a male middle class obsession.
Memories of the Rocket and Mallard when Britain led the world.
Plus childhood Hornby railways.
Our village of 3,000 people, in Ashford Kent PC, just lost its bus service. Little things like that, even for people who don’t use the bus, don’t go unnoticed and are not a tick in the Tory box. I note that Damien Green tried and failed to run from Ashford, Ashford FFS, to Weald of Kent next door.
Yesterday I read @bigjohnowls list of Strarmers u turns and while I know BJO is the 'bete noire' of some on here it is hard to disagree with him
I was speaking to my son in Vancouver last night and he said there is not a politician or leader anywhere that instills confidence, and he was highly critical of Trudeau and said Biden age and dementia will see him not standing next year as the US heads into further political chaos
Truth is the global problems with climate change and war require global solutions when politicians only seek to fight each other
I think Starmer will be out of his depth the minute he walks into no 10, and at times like this we need to bury politics and have a National government drawn across all politics
What we need is a period when the barking Brexiteers have minimal influence on our policies. Starmer offers the best chance of this.
And how's that going to happen ?
If Sir Bland waltzes off on his anti-Brexit crusade he;s simply going to wake the sleeping dogs and then youll have a bigger problem.
I reckon Sunak has now seriously begun to formulate an election-winning strategy that he thinks will secure victory. It's based around transport. It consists of:
- Save the motorist. Abandon HS2, ban LTNs and ULEZ. - Stop the boats. - A helipad in every neighbourhood.
Abandoning HS2 only makes sense if he's given up all hope of winning seats in the north.
Northerners use roads not railways.
That would surprise anyone using the Tyneside metro, or the Sheffield trams.
Over 80% of journeys are made by car, proportionally even more so outside London.
On public transport more journeys are made by bus than rail.
Just read that the Americans paid a huge economic price for independence: per capita income collapsed by 46% between 1774 and 1790, and as late as 1805 per capita wealth was still around 14% lower than it had been in 1774.
Of course, it had all paid off about a century later but breaking up integrated empires and trading blocs does come at a price - sometimes for many decades.
Your issue is that a recent departure from a “trading bloc” was not sold as such. Economic benefits, or at least the no diminution in economic prosperity, were promised by your band or merry charlatans. The American Revolutionaries were absolutely upfront about it.
In other words -
“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.” - Samuel Adams
vs
"There will be no non-tariff barriers to trade" — Boris Johnson (or “There will be no downside to Brexit, only a considerable upside.” - David Davis. Others are available on request).
Though the American revolution had as a spark a refusal to pay taxes.
I got this wrong, thought it was a nonsense and going to be irrelevant in Uxbridge and elsewhere. Kid starver must be rattled
That article debunks it's own headline:
Local media reports inaccurately claimed that a second trial of a livable neighbourhood in south Bristol had been paused, with Alexander confirming to the Observer that this was not the case.
“It was always intended that the East Bristol Liveable Neighbourhood scheme would be a pilot to inform future schemes,” he said.
Yesterday I read @bigjohnowls list of Strarmers u turns and while I know BJO is the 'bete noire' of some on here it is hard to disagree with him
I was speaking to my son in Vancouver last night and he said there is not a politician or leader anywhere that instills confidence, and he was highly critical of Trudeau and said Biden age and dementia will see him not standing next year as the US heads into further political chaos
Truth is the global problems with climate change and war require global solutions when politicians only seek to fight each other
I think Starmer will be out of his depth the minute he walks into no 10, and at times like this we need to bury politics and have a National government drawn across all politics
What we need is a period when the barking Brexiteers have minimal influence on our policies. Starmer offers the best chance of this.
And how's that going to happen ?
If Sir Bland waltzes off on his anti-Brexit crusade he;s simply going to wake the sleeping dogs and then youll have a bigger problem.
Softly softly catchee monkey. Step 1, have Truss/Sunak/JRM on the opposition benches.
Yesterday I read @bigjohnowls list of Strarmers u turns and while I know BJO is the 'bete noire' of some on here it is hard to disagree with him
I was speaking to my son in Vancouver last night and he said there is not a politician or leader anywhere that instills confidence, and he was highly critical of Trudeau and said Biden age and dementia will see him not standing next year as the US heads into further political chaos
Truth is the global problems with climate change and war require global solutions when politicians only seek to fight each other
I think Starmer will be out of his depth the minute he walks into no 10, and at times like this we need to bury politics and have a National government drawn across all politics
What we need is a period when the barking Brexiteers have minimal influence on our policies. Starmer offers the best chance of this.
And how's that going to happen ?
If Sir Bland waltzes off on his anti-Brexit crusade he;s simply going to wake the sleeping dogs and then youll have a bigger problem.
You have just inserted an “anti-Brexit crusade” into the discussion. And I thought SKS had no policies. Which is it? Having a group of politicians in charge who’s idea of a debate over EU relations is a choice between no cooperation and nuking it is not an “anti-Brexit crusade”. If that were a possibility this thread would not have a header. It’s a dream of many and a nightmare of others.
Just read that the Americans paid a huge economic price for independence: per capita income collapsed by 46% between 1774 and 1790, and as late as 1805 per capita wealth was still around 14% lower than it had been in 1774.
Of course, it had all paid off about a century later but breaking up integrated empires and trading blocs does come at a price - sometimes for many decades.
Your issue is that a recent departure from a “trading bloc” was not sold as such. Economic benefits, or at least the no diminution in economic prosperity, were promised by your band or merry charlatans. The American Revolutionaries were absolutely upfront about it.
In other words -
“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.” - Samuel Adams
vs
"There will be no non-tariff barriers to trade" — Boris Johnson (or “There will be no downside to Brexit, only a considerable upside.” - David Davis. Others are available on request).
Though the American revolution had as a spark a refusal to pay taxes.
WTF has that got to do with this specific discussion?
Yesterday I read @bigjohnowls list of Strarmers u turns and while I know BJO is the 'bete noire' of some on here it is hard to disagree with him
I was speaking to my son in Vancouver last night and he said there is not a politician or leader anywhere that instills confidence, and he was highly critical of Trudeau and said Biden age and dementia will see him not standing next year as the US heads into further political chaos
Truth is the global problems with climate change and war require global solutions when politicians only seek to fight each other
I think Starmer will be out of his depth the minute he walks into no 10, and at times like this we need to bury politics and have a National government drawn across all politics
What we need is a period when the barking Brexiteers have minimal influence on our policies. Starmer offers the best chance of this.
And how's that going to happen ?
If Sir Bland waltzes off on his anti-Brexit crusade he;s simply going to wake the sleeping dogs and then youll have a bigger problem.
Hence Starmer's current strategy. Establish the meme that Brexit Isn't Working and make reassuring noises about making it work. Leave the bit about the only way of MBW being to dilute it to homeopathic levels unsaid, even though it's obvious.
Lest we forget, Starmer is a proven lawyer, and lawyers know not to ask questions until they are sure what the answer is.
But the first step is getting the nutters out of office. Something in which the nutters are proving surprisingly co-operative.
Starmer's coalition lasts until the day after the election.
I don't see any evidence this is solid or good for 10+ years.
Only if the Tories detoxify themselves, which doesn't seem probable.
It took eight years between losing power in 1997 and David Cameron being elected in 2005 for the Tories to start thinking properly about why they were toxic and how to detoxify themselves.
It took ten years between losing power in 2010 and Keir Starmer being elected in 2020 for Labour to make the same journey.
And even after a party stops being repulsive to the voters, you still have to wait for the next election which is probably a good few years afterwards.
So a decade in power for Labour looks like a rather small-c conservative estimate based on recent history.
Since the Second World War the only single-term government has been the Heath government of 1970-74.
That's being rather generous to the Attlee and two Wilson governments, who may have lasted more than five years, but only just. They were a bit more than one term governments, but a lot less than two terms.
Also, more arguably, the thirteen years since 2010 have seen four governments: a coalition for five years, Conservative without a working majority for two years, Conservative minority for two more years, then Conservative with an overall majority only since 2019 (and even then, with two years of the pandemic and without a serious opposition and with a barely functioning Parliament, it was a bit like a wartime national government during that strange time). Very different from the three working majority terms that Mrs Thatcher and Blair had, for instance.
Yesterday I read @bigjohnowls list of Strarmers u turns and while I know BJO is the 'bete noire' of some on here it is hard to disagree with him
I was speaking to my son in Vancouver last night and he said there is not a politician or leader anywhere that instills confidence, and he was highly critical of Trudeau and said Biden age and dementia will see him not standing next year as the US heads into further political chaos
Truth is the global problems with climate change and war require global solutions when politicians only seek to fight each other
I think Starmer will be out of his depth the minute he walks into no 10, and at times like this we need to bury politics and have a National government drawn across all politics
What we need is a period when the barking Brexiteers have minimal influence on our policies. Starmer offers the best chance of this.
And how's that going to happen ?
If Sir Bland waltzes off on his anti-Brexit crusade he;s simply going to wake the sleeping dogs and then youll have a bigger problem.
You have just inserted an “anti-Brexit crusade” into the discussion. And I thought SKS had no policies. Which is it? Having a group of politicians in charge who’s idea of a debate over EU relations is a choice between no cooperation and nuking it is not an “anti-Brexit crusade”. If that were a possibility this thread would not have a header. It’s a dream of many and a nightmare of others.
And who are these politicians in charge who wont talk to the EU ? Sunak has received credit from all sides for trying to improve relations with the EU, even from the EU. SKS is flip flopping all over the place by trying to keep his remainers on board but also his lost red wall. Thats not a policy its political chancerism.
F1: unhelpfully, the race may be dry, wet, or mixed. So it'll be fun picking a bet... Anyway, I'll get started on that presently.
Watching the F3 race now, on a half-wet and half-dry track, they’re having quite a bit of fun!
I'm in London for day 2 of Formula E. Weather forecast is for rain at race time. With inside and outside sections that could be interesting! And after yesterday's multiple red flags today we have 4 teams trying to win the constructors title. I expect more smashing fun.
Just read that the Americans paid a huge economic price for independence: per capita income collapsed by 46% between 1774 and 1790, and as late as 1805 per capita wealth was still around 14% lower than it had been in 1774.
Of course, it had all paid off about a century later but breaking up integrated empires and trading blocs does come at a price - sometimes for many decades.
Your issue is that a recent departure from a “trading bloc” was not sold as such. Economic benefits, or at least the no diminution in economic prosperity, were promised by your band or merry charlatans. The American Revolutionaries were absolutely upfront about it.
In other words -
“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.” - Samuel Adams
vs
"There will be no non-tariff barriers to trade" — Boris Johnson (or “There will be no downside to Brexit, only a considerable upside.” - David Davis. Others are available on request).
Nonsense. There was plenty of rhetoric of the former which you vociferously criticised, on the grounds it was both offensive and ludicrous.
Plenty of us on here admitted there would be a short-term economic cost to Brexit and its nothing like what the Irish or Americans had to pay for their independence. So your comparison is both defensive, disingenuous and highly selective - all at the same time.
More broadly, you are easily the poster easiest to provoke on this subject on here: you come in ever so slightly behind Scott_xP for pure invective hyperbole.
Yesterday I read @bigjohnowls list of Strarmers u turns and while I know BJO is the 'bete noire' of some on here it is hard to disagree with him
I was speaking to my son in Vancouver last night and he said there is not a politician or leader anywhere that instills confidence, and he was highly critical of Trudeau and said Biden age and dementia will see him not standing next year as the US heads into further political chaos
Truth is the global problems with climate change and war require global solutions when politicians only seek to fight each other
I think Starmer will be out of his depth the minute he walks into no 10, and at times like this we need to bury politics and have a National government drawn across all politics
What we need is a period when the barking Brexiteers have minimal influence on our policies. Starmer offers the best chance of this.
And how's that going to happen ?
If Sir Bland waltzes off on his anti-Brexit crusade he;s simply going to wake the sleeping dogs and then youll have a bigger problem.
You have just inserted an “anti-Brexit crusade” into the discussion. And I thought SKS had no policies. Which is it? Having a group of politicians in charge who’s idea of a debate over EU relations is a choice between no cooperation and nuking it is not an “anti-Brexit crusade”. If that were a possibility this thread would not have a header. It’s a dream of many and a nightmare of others.
And who are these politicians in charge who wont talk to the EU ? Sunak has received credit from all sides for trying to improve relations with the EU, even from the EU. SKS is flip flopping all over the place by trying to keep his remainers on board but also his lost red wall. Thats not a policy its political chancerism.
You have an enviable ability to move the goalposts and just bang on about whatever pops into your head even when it completely contradicts your point. Where is SKS’s “Anti-Brexit crusade” of two posts ago? Now he’s “flip flopping”? Which is it?
Just read that the Americans paid a huge economic price for independence: per capita income collapsed by 46% between 1774 and 1790, and as late as 1805 per capita wealth was still around 14% lower than it had been in 1774.
Of course, it had all paid off about a century later but breaking up integrated empires and trading blocs does come at a price - sometimes for many decades.
Your issue is that a recent departure from a “trading bloc” was not sold as such. Economic benefits, or at least the no diminution in economic prosperity, were promised by your band or merry charlatans. The American Revolutionaries were absolutely upfront about it.
In other words -
“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.” - Samuel Adams
vs
"There will be no non-tariff barriers to trade" — Boris Johnson (or “There will be no downside to Brexit, only a considerable upside.” - David Davis. Others are available on request).
Though the American revolution had as a spark a refusal to pay taxes.
WTF has that got to do with this specific discussion?
Paying fewer taxes, especially to an overseas government, means you keep the money for yourself.
I'm confident that there were plenty of American revolutionaries who thought they would become richer if they could exploit the continent without the restrictions Britain placed on them.
@viewcode didn't want to copy the whole conversation from the previous thread - but https://www.youtube.com/@DavidShapiroAutomator is a decent mix of the futurology, AI, UBI etc stuff. His community page quite often has links to other videos/articles on related subjects too.
Yesterday I read @bigjohnowls list of Strarmers u turns and while I know BJO is the 'bete noire' of some on here it is hard to disagree with him
I was speaking to my son in Vancouver last night and he said there is not a politician or leader anywhere that instills confidence, and he was highly critical of Trudeau and said Biden age and dementia will see him not standing next year as the US heads into further political chaos
Truth is the global problems with climate change and war require global solutions when politicians only seek to fight each other
I think Starmer will be out of his depth the minute he walks into no 10, and at times like this we need to bury politics and have a National government drawn across all politics
What we need is a period when the barking Brexiteers have minimal influence on our policies. Starmer offers the best chance of this.
And how's that going to happen ?
If Sir Bland waltzes off on his anti-Brexit crusade he;s simply going to wake the sleeping dogs and then youll have a bigger problem.
Hence Starmer's current strategy. Establish the meme that Brexit Isn't Working and make reassuring noises about making it work. Leave the bit about the only way of MBW being to dilute it to homeopathic levels unsaid, even though it's obvious.
Lest we forget, Starmer is a proven lawyer, and lawyers know not to ask questions until they are sure what the answer is.
But the first step is getting the nutters out of office. Something in which the nutters are proving surprisingly co-operative.
Its still nonsense.
Your so called "nutters" are only behaving themselves since they are the government. Once outside its gloves off. The Remainers are simply getting an easy time atm because nobody is running with daily guff which comes from the EU bureaucracy machine, We had a glimpse of how things might go on the vaccine spat when being outside was suddenly seen as a good thing. That will be the norm of and the popularity of the EU will reverse if the stay outs have a free hand,
Just read that the Americans paid a huge economic price for independence: per capita income collapsed by 46% between 1774 and 1790, and as late as 1805 per capita wealth was still around 14% lower than it had been in 1774.
Of course, it had all paid off about a century later but breaking up integrated empires and trading blocs does come at a price - sometimes for many decades.
Your issue is that a recent departure from a “trading bloc” was not sold as such. Economic benefits, or at least the no diminution in economic prosperity, were promised by your band or merry charlatans. The American Revolutionaries were absolutely upfront about it.
In other words -
“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.” - Samuel Adams
vs
"There will be no non-tariff barriers to trade" — Boris Johnson (or “There will be no downside to Brexit, only a considerable upside.” - David Davis. Others are available on request).
Though the American revolution had as a spark a refusal to pay taxes.
WTF has that got to do with this specific discussion?
Paying fewer taxes, especially to an overseas government, means you keep the money for yourself.
I'm confident that there were plenty of American revolutionaries who thought they would become richer if they could exploit the continent without the restrictions Britain placed on them.
Debatable and in any event nothing to do with the point that CR or I were discussing.
All very true. One problem for Labour, however, is that any policy it announces which seems popular can immediately be pinched by the Conservatives. Whether it has any such policies, we might find out closer to the election.
That is always a risk in politics, it doesn't seem to matter if the public attitude I'd in your favour.
Just read that the Americans paid a huge economic price for independence: per capita income collapsed by 46% between 1774 and 1790, and as late as 1805 per capita wealth was still around 14% lower than it had been in 1774.
Of course, it had all paid off about a century later but breaking up integrated empires and trading blocs does come at a price - sometimes for many decades.
Your issue is that a recent departure from a “trading bloc” was not sold as such. Economic benefits, or at least the no diminution in economic prosperity, were promised by your band or merry charlatans. The American Revolutionaries were absolutely upfront about it.
In other words -
“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.” - Samuel Adams
vs
"There will be no non-tariff barriers to trade" — Boris Johnson (or “There will be no downside to Brexit, only a considerable upside.” - David Davis. Others are available on request).
Though the American revolution had as a spark a refusal to pay taxes.
WTF has that got to do with this specific discussion?
Quite a lot actually. It's remarkable how instantly you lose you shit the second you think Brexit has come up as a subject. Quite quite deranged.
Maybe we should have done what the Patriots did to the Loyalists: burned and seized all their property, and chased them out the country
Yesterday I read @bigjohnowls list of Strarmers u turns and while I know BJO is the 'bete noire' of some on here it is hard to disagree with him
I was speaking to my son in Vancouver last night and he said there is not a politician or leader anywhere that instills confidence, and he was highly critical of Trudeau and said Biden age and dementia will see him not standing next year as the US heads into further political chaos
Truth is the global problems with climate change and war require global solutions when politicians only seek to fight each other
I think Starmer will be out of his depth the minute he walks into no 10, and at times like this we need to bury politics and have a National government drawn across all politics
Ah, the 'no time for amateurs' fallacy which suggests if things are going well don't change governments, and if things are going badly don't change governments. Brown used that one.
Not seen the 'national government' variation of it for awhile.
Yesterday I read @bigjohnowls list of Strarmers u turns and while I know BJO is the 'bete noire' of some on here it is hard to disagree with him
I was speaking to my son in Vancouver last night and he said there is not a politician or leader anywhere that instills confidence, and he was highly critical of Trudeau and said Biden age and dementia will see him not standing next year as the US heads into further political chaos
Truth is the global problems with climate change and war require global solutions when politicians only seek to fight each other
I think Starmer will be out of his depth the minute he walks into no 10, and at times like this we need to bury politics and have a National government drawn across all politics
The current members of this Tory government shouldn't be allowed anywhere near politics for the rest of their lives.
Yesterday I read @bigjohnowls list of Strarmers u turns and while I know BJO is the 'bete noire' of some on here it is hard to disagree with him
I was speaking to my son in Vancouver last night and he said there is not a politician or leader anywhere that instills confidence, and he was highly critical of Trudeau and said Biden age and dementia will see him not standing next year as the US heads into further political chaos
Truth is the global problems with climate change and war require global solutions when politicians only seek to fight each other
I think Starmer will be out of his depth the minute he walks into no 10, and at times like this we need to bury politics and have a National government drawn across all politics
What we need is a period when the barking Brexiteers have minimal influence on our policies. Starmer offers the best chance of this.
And how's that going to happen ?
If Sir Bland waltzes off on his anti-Brexit crusade he;s simply going to wake the sleeping dogs and then youll have a bigger problem.
Hence Starmer's current strategy. Establish the meme that Brexit Isn't Working and make reassuring noises about making it work. Leave the bit about the only way of MBW being to dilute it to homeopathic levels unsaid, even though it's obvious.
Lest we forget, Starmer is a proven lawyer, and lawyers know not to ask questions until they are sure what the answer is.
But the first step is getting the nutters out of office. Something in which the nutters are proving surprisingly co-operative.
Its still nonsense.
Your so called "nutters" are only behaving themselves since they are the government. Once outside its gloves off. The Remainers are simply getting an easy time atm because nobody is running with daily guff which comes from the EU bureaucracy machine, We had a glimpse of how things might go on the vaccine spat when being outside was suddenly seen as a good thing. That will be the norm of and the popularity of the EU will reverse if the stay outs have a free hand,
You can bet your bottom dollar the regret will flip back the other way very quickly if we ever do end up going back in. It will be insufferable.
Yesterday I read @bigjohnowls list of Strarmers u turns and while I know BJO is the 'bete noire' of some on here it is hard to disagree with him
I was speaking to my son in Vancouver last night and he said there is not a politician or leader anywhere that instills confidence, and he was highly critical of Trudeau and said Biden age and dementia will see him not standing next year as the US heads into further political chaos
Truth is the global problems with climate change and war require global solutions when politicians only seek to fight each other
I think Starmer will be out of his depth the minute he walks into no 10, and at times like this we need to bury politics and have a National government drawn across all politics
What we need is a period when the barking Brexiteers have minimal influence on our policies. Starmer offers the best chance of this.
And how's that going to happen ?
If Sir Bland waltzes off on his anti-Brexit crusade he;s simply going to wake the sleeping dogs and then youll have a bigger problem.
You have just inserted an “anti-Brexit crusade” into the discussion. And I thought SKS had no policies. Which is it? Having a group of politicians in charge who’s idea of a debate over EU relations is a choice between no cooperation and nuking it is not an “anti-Brexit crusade”. If that were a possibility this thread would not have a header. It’s a dream of many and a nightmare of others.
And who are these politicians in charge who wont talk to the EU ? Sunak has received credit from all sides for trying to improve relations with the EU, even from the EU. SKS is flip flopping all over the place by trying to keep his remainers on board but also his lost red wall. Thats not a policy its political chancerism.
You have an enviable ability to move the goalposts and just bang on about whatever pops into your head even when it completely contradicts your point. Where is SKS’s “Anti-Brexit crusade” of two posts ago? Now he’s “flip flopping”? Which is it?
The sentence started with "if" . This is where SKS heart is and where he makes reassuring noises to the middle class idiots while also trying to keep red wallers on board. At some point he is going to have to come clean since he cant do both. So still he hasnt got a policy.
All very true. One problem for Labour, however, is that any policy it announces which seems popular can immediately be pinched by the Conservatives. Whether it has any such policies, we might find out closer to the election.
That is always a risk in politics, it doesn't seem to matter if the public attitude I'd in your favour.
And if you come up with a policy the government steals, well that’s good. Assuming it’s an effective policy, it’s good for the country and you get to crow about how the other side nicked it.
The Lib Dems have a track record of proposing policies which then Labour adopts (and sometimes the Tories). They’re not the best at crowing about them but it does at least mean they get some influence.
Just read that the Americans paid a huge economic price for independence: per capita income collapsed by 46% between 1774 and 1790, and as late as 1805 per capita wealth was still around 14% lower than it had been in 1774.
Of course, it had all paid off about a century later but breaking up integrated empires and trading blocs does come at a price - sometimes for many decades.
Your issue is that a recent departure from a “trading bloc” was not sold as such. Economic benefits, or at least the no diminution in economic prosperity, were promised by your band or merry charlatans. The American Revolutionaries were absolutely upfront about it.
In other words -
“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.” - Samuel Adams
vs
"There will be no non-tariff barriers to trade" — Boris Johnson (or “There will be no downside to Brexit, only a considerable upside.” - David Davis. Others are available on request).
Nonsense. There was plenty of rhetoric of the former which you vociferously criticised, on the grounds it was both offensive and ludicrous.
Plenty of us on here admitted there would be a short-term economic cost to Brexit and its nothing like what the Irish or Americans had to pay for their independence. So your comparison is both defensive, disingenuous and highly selective - all at the same time.
More broadly, you are easily the poster easiest to provoke on this subject on here: you come in ever so slightly behind Scott_xP for pure invective hyperbole.
Perhaps you’re right. But you’re a one eyed reactive, angry, Tory shill who can’t take criticism, a deeply weird obsession with the word “woke”, and nothing to contribute than a sad devotion to a failed cause and a dying political party. So we both have our crosses to bear.
I got this wrong, thought it was a nonsense and going to be irrelevant in Uxbridge and elsewhere. Kid starver must be rattled
That article debunks it's own headline:
Local media reports inaccurately claimed that a second trial of a livable neighbourhood in south Bristol had been paused, with Alexander confirming to the Observer that this was not the case.
“It was always intended that the East Bristol Liveable Neighbourhood scheme would be a pilot to inform future schemes,” he said.
That is perhaps a matter of spin, but more pertinent are signs of a coordinated national campaign against ulez and ltns as if they were the same thing. If there is one, then who pays and who coordinates it?
Yesterday I read @bigjohnowls list of Strarmers u turns and while I know BJO is the 'bete noire' of some on here it is hard to disagree with him
I was speaking to my son in Vancouver last night and he said there is not a politician or leader anywhere that instills confidence, and he was highly critical of Trudeau and said Biden age and dementia will see him not standing next year as the US heads into further political chaos
Truth is the global problems with climate change and war require global solutions when politicians only seek to fight each other
I think Starmer will be out of his depth the minute he walks into no 10, and at times like this we need to bury politics and have a National government drawn across all politics
Ah, the 'no time for amateurs' fallacy which suggests if things are going well don't change governments, and if things are going badly don't change governments. Brown used that one.
Not seen the 'national government' variation of it for awhile.
TBF we get the latter in Scotland every now and then, on the principle that Labour needs to subordinate itself to the Tories to save the union.
Just read that the Americans paid a huge economic price for independence: per capita income collapsed by 46% between 1774 and 1790, and as late as 1805 per capita wealth was still around 14% lower than it had been in 1774.
Of course, it had all paid off about a century later but breaking up integrated empires and trading blocs does come at a price - sometimes for many decades.
Your issue is that a recent departure from a “trading bloc” was not sold as such. Economic benefits, or at least the no diminution in economic prosperity, were promised by your band or merry charlatans. The American Revolutionaries were absolutely upfront about it.
In other words -
“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.” - Samuel Adams
vs
"There will be no non-tariff barriers to trade" — Boris Johnson (or “There will be no downside to Brexit, only a considerable upside.” - David Davis. Others are available on request).
Though the American revolution had as a spark a refusal to pay taxes.
WTF has that got to do with this specific discussion?
Paying fewer taxes, especially to an overseas government, means you keep the money for yourself.
I'm confident that there were plenty of American revolutionaries who thought they would become richer if they could exploit the continent without the restrictions Britain placed on them.
They lost a lot of population (by choice, because they basically booted out the Loyalists) in the advent of the American Revolution, lost some trading advantages and then had to build all the infrastructure of an independent country whilst rebuilding from extensive war damage to several ports and cities. Meanwhile the UK started to rapidly industralise from the 1780s onwards, leading also to a large boom in population growth, whilst America remained largely agrarian for some time.
I don't think it was until the 1860s/1870s that the USA overtook the UK, probably delayed by the civil war too.
Yesterday I read @bigjohnowls list of Strarmers u turns and while I know BJO is the 'bete noire' of some on here it is hard to disagree with him
I was speaking to my son in Vancouver last night and he said there is not a politician or leader anywhere that instills confidence, and he was highly critical of Trudeau and said Biden age and dementia will see him not standing next year as the US heads into further political chaos
Truth is the global problems with climate change and war require global solutions when politicians only seek to fight each other
I think Starmer will be out of his depth the minute he walks into no 10, and at times like this we need to bury politics and have a National government drawn across all politics
What we need is a period when the barking Brexiteers have minimal influence on our policies. Starmer offers the best chance of this.
And how's that going to happen ?
If Sir Bland waltzes off on his anti-Brexit crusade he;s simply going to wake the sleeping dogs and then youll have a bigger problem.
You have just inserted an “anti-Brexit crusade” into the discussion. And I thought SKS had no policies. Which is it? Having a group of politicians in charge who’s idea of a debate over EU relations is a choice between no cooperation and nuking it is not an “anti-Brexit crusade”. If that were a possibility this thread would not have a header. It’s a dream of many and a nightmare of others.
And who are these politicians in charge who wont talk to the EU ? Sunak has received credit from all sides for trying to improve relations with the EU, even from the EU. SKS is flip flopping all over the place by trying to keep his remainers on board but also his lost red wall. Thats not a policy its political chancerism.
You have an enviable ability to move the goalposts and just bang on about whatever pops into your head even when it completely contradicts your point. Where is SKS’s “Anti-Brexit crusade” of two posts ago? Now he’s “flip flopping”? Which is it?
The sentence started with "if" . This is where SKS heart is and where he makes reassuring noises to the middle class idiots while also trying to keep red wallers on board. At some point he is going to have to come clean since he cant do both. So still he hasnt got a policy.
Are you really a lawyer ?
Yes. You can tell because you are being forced to reinterpret what you said. Are you really a General?
Yesterday I read @bigjohnowls list of Strarmers u turns and while I know BJO is the 'bete noire' of some on here it is hard to disagree with him
I was speaking to my son in Vancouver last night and he said there is not a politician or leader anywhere that instills confidence, and he was highly critical of Trudeau and said Biden age and dementia will see him not standing next year as the US heads into further political chaos
Truth is the global problems with climate change and war require global solutions when politicians only seek to fight each other
I think Starmer will be out of his depth the minute he walks into no 10, and at times like this we need to bury politics and have a National government drawn across all politics
What we need is a period when the barking Brexiteers have minimal influence on our policies. Starmer offers the best chance of this.
And how's that going to happen ?
If Sir Bland waltzes off on his anti-Brexit crusade he;s simply going to wake the sleeping dogs and then youll have a bigger problem.
Hence Starmer's current strategy. Establish the meme that Brexit Isn't Working and make reassuring noises about making it work. Leave the bit about the only way of MBW being to dilute it to homeopathic levels unsaid, even though it's obvious.
Lest we forget, Starmer is a proven lawyer, and lawyers know not to ask questions until they are sure what the answer is.
But the first step is getting the nutters out of office. Something in which the nutters are proving surprisingly co-operative.
Its still nonsense.
Your so called "nutters" are only behaving themselves since they are the government. Once outside its gloves off. The Remainers are simply getting an easy time atm because nobody is running with daily guff which comes from the EU bureaucracy machine, We had a glimpse of how things might go on the vaccine spat when being outside was suddenly seen as a good thing. That will be the norm of and the popularity of the EU will reverse if the stay outs have a free hand,
You can bet your bottom dollar the regret will flip back the other way very quickly if we ever do end up going back in. It will be insufferable.
I'm perfectly happy with Brexit.
The Brexit balance sheet at present is
Remainers havent had the big downside they forecast Leavers havent produced the big upside they forecast
Scoreless draw.
However changing the status quo simply opens the can of worms. Going back in requires sacrifices for indeterminate benefits. The polls will quickly change.
I reckon Sunak has now seriously begun to formulate an election-winning strategy that he thinks will secure victory. It's based around transport. It consists of:
- Save the motorist. Abandon HS2, ban LTNs and ULEZ. - Stop the boats. - A helipad in every neighbourhood.
Abandoning HS2 only makes sense if he's given up all hope of winning seats in the north.
Northerners use roads not railways.
That would surprise anyone using the Tyneside metro, or the Sheffield trams.
Over 80% of journeys are made by car, proportionally even more so outside London.
On public transport more journeys are made by bus than rail.
From that source, the 80%+ figure is "passenger km", not "journeys" (or "trips" as they call them).
When counted in "trips" the "trips by car" share falls to around 60-65%.
But that has nothing to do with the current arguments, which are about short local trips of just a few miles, and whether people living in a housing area are to be forced to endure rat-runners driving at dangerously high speed down their residential streets, or not.
The Government are doubling down on this, and sod the human cost - what do a few thousand extra dead people from road kill or chronic conditions matter if it saves the Government's political skin?
From the Guardian piece linked earlier:
Downing Street is reportedly considering a ban on councils introducing new LTNs (although government sources described this as “speculation”), as well as denying local authorities access to the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency database, making the zones unenforceable.
This follows an announcement earlier this year that LTNs would no longer be able to be created using government money. For cash-strapped councils already struggling to make ends meet, the decision may lead to them scrapping their plans altogether. This has prompted questions as to whether we are seeing the end of LTNs nationally.
Just read that the Americans paid a huge economic price for independence: per capita income collapsed by 46% between 1774 and 1790, and as late as 1805 per capita wealth was still around 14% lower than it had been in 1774.
Of course, it had all paid off about a century later but breaking up integrated empires and trading blocs does come at a price - sometimes for many decades.
Your issue is that a recent departure from a “trading bloc” was not sold as such. Economic benefits, or at least the no diminution in economic prosperity, were promised by your band or merry charlatans. The American Revolutionaries were absolutely upfront about it.
In other words -
“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.” - Samuel Adams
vs
"There will be no non-tariff barriers to trade" — Boris Johnson (or “There will be no downside to Brexit, only a considerable upside.” - David Davis. Others are available on request).
Though the American revolution had as a spark a refusal to pay taxes.
WTF has that got to do with this specific discussion?
Paying fewer taxes, especially to an overseas government, means you keep the money for yourself.
I'm confident that there were plenty of American revolutionaries who thought they would become richer if they could exploit the continent without the restrictions Britain placed on them.
They lost a lot of population (by choice, because they basically booted out the Loyalists) in the advent of the American Revolution, lost some trading advantages and then had to build all the infrastructure of an independent country whilst rebuilding from extensive war damage to several ports and cities. Meanwhile the UK started to rapidly industralise from the 1780s onwards, leading also to a large boom in population growth, whilst America remained largely agrarian for some time.
I don't think it was until the 1860s/1870s that the USA overtook the UK, probably delayed by the civil war too.
OTOH (and bearing in mind the existence of alternative sources such as Egypt and the Windies) the UK industrial revolution remained partly dependent on US agrarianism, or rather slave plantationism, for critical resources - cotton, sugar (for cheap urban proletariat fodder), etc.
Just read that the Americans paid a huge economic price for independence: per capita income collapsed by 46% between 1774 and 1790, and as late as 1805 per capita wealth was still around 14% lower than it had been in 1774.
Of course, it had all paid off about a century later but breaking up integrated empires and trading blocs does come at a price - sometimes for many decades.
Your issue is that a recent departure from a “trading bloc” was not sold as such. Economic benefits, or at least the no diminution in economic prosperity, were promised by your band or merry charlatans. The American Revolutionaries were absolutely upfront about it.
In other words -
“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.” - Samuel Adams
vs
"There will be no non-tariff barriers to trade" — Boris Johnson (or “There will be no downside to Brexit, only a considerable upside.” - David Davis. Others are available on request).
Though the American revolution had as a spark a refusal to pay taxes.
WTF has that got to do with this specific discussion?
Paying fewer taxes, especially to an overseas government, means you keep the money for yourself.
I'm confident that there were plenty of American revolutionaries who thought they would become richer if they could exploit the continent without the restrictions Britain placed on them.
Debatable and in any event nothing to do with the point that CR or I were discussing.
Given that the UK hasn't had a 46% fall in per capita income as the early USA did then the relevance of comparing Samuel Adams to David Davis is more than dubious.
In reality the working class Leave block which voted for immigration control, higher wages and more spending on the NHS has got what it wanted.
While the middle class extremists, on both sides, the 'go global' Brexiteers and the 'job losses and pension cuts' Remainers are both disappointed.
Yesterday I read @bigjohnowls list of Strarmers u turns and while I know BJO is the 'bete noire' of some on here it is hard to disagree with him
I was speaking to my son in Vancouver last night and he said there is not a politician or leader anywhere that instills confidence, and he was highly critical of Trudeau and said Biden age and dementia will see him not standing next year as the US heads into further political chaos
Truth is the global problems with climate change and war require global solutions when politicians only seek to fight each other
I think Starmer will be out of his depth the minute he walks into no 10, and at times like this we need to bury politics and have a National government drawn across all politics
What we need is a period when the barking Brexiteers have minimal influence on our policies. Starmer offers the best chance of this.
And how's that going to happen ?
If Sir Bland waltzes off on his anti-Brexit crusade he;s simply going to wake the sleeping dogs and then youll have a bigger problem.
You have just inserted an “anti-Brexit crusade” into the discussion. And I thought SKS had no policies. Which is it? Having a group of politicians in charge who’s idea of a debate over EU relations is a choice between no cooperation and nuking it is not an “anti-Brexit crusade”. If that were a possibility this thread would not have a header. It’s a dream of many and a nightmare of others.
And who are these politicians in charge who wont talk to the EU ? Sunak has received credit from all sides for trying to improve relations with the EU, even from the EU. SKS is flip flopping all over the place by trying to keep his remainers on board but also his lost red wall. Thats not a policy its political chancerism.
You have an enviable ability to move the goalposts and just bang on about whatever pops into your head even when it completely contradicts your point. Where is SKS’s “Anti-Brexit crusade” of two posts ago? Now he’s “flip flopping”? Which is it?
The sentence started with "if" . This is where SKS heart is and where he makes reassuring noises to the middle class idiots while also trying to keep red wallers on board. At some point he is going to have to come clean since he cant do both. So still he hasnt got a policy.
Are you really a lawyer ?
Yes. You can tell because you are being forced to reinterpret what you said. Are you really a General?
Just read that the Americans paid a huge economic price for independence: per capita income collapsed by 46% between 1774 and 1790, and as late as 1805 per capita wealth was still around 14% lower than it had been in 1774.
Of course, it had all paid off about a century later but breaking up integrated empires and trading blocs does come at a price - sometimes for many decades.
Your issue is that a recent departure from a “trading bloc” was not sold as such. Economic benefits, or at least the no diminution in economic prosperity, were promised by your band or merry charlatans. The American Revolutionaries were absolutely upfront about it.
In other words -
“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.” - Samuel Adams
vs
"There will be no non-tariff barriers to trade" — Boris Johnson (or “There will be no downside to Brexit, only a considerable upside.” - David Davis. Others are available on request).
Though the American revolution had as a spark a refusal to pay taxes.
WTF has that got to do with this specific discussion?
Quite a lot actually. It's remarkable how instantly you lose you shit the second you think Brexit has come up as a subject. Quite quite deranged.
Maybe we should have done what the Patriots did to the Loyalists: burned and seized all their property, and chased them out the country
It’s remarkable how you lose your shit everytime someone dares to criticise you and start talking about violence against your opponents. You really should learn to calm down. Your anger is really unhealthy. It’s amazing how the smallest criticism makes you go completely batshit. Take up a sport or something. You are deranged,
Yesterday I read @bigjohnowls list of Strarmers u turns and while I know BJO is the 'bete noire' of some on here it is hard to disagree with him
I was speaking to my son in Vancouver last night and he said there is not a politician or leader anywhere that instills confidence, and he was highly critical of Trudeau and said Biden age and dementia will see him not standing next year as the US heads into further political chaos
Truth is the global problems with climate change and war require global solutions when politicians only seek to fight each other
I think Starmer will be out of his depth the minute he walks into no 10, and at times like this we need to bury politics and have a National government drawn across all politics
What we need is a period when the barking Brexiteers have minimal influence on our policies. Starmer offers the best chance of this.
And how's that going to happen ?
If Sir Bland waltzes off on his anti-Brexit crusade he;s simply going to wake the sleeping dogs and then youll have a bigger problem.
You have just inserted an “anti-Brexit crusade” into the discussion. And I thought SKS had no policies. Which is it? Having a group of politicians in charge who’s idea of a debate over EU relations is a choice between no cooperation and nuking it is not an “anti-Brexit crusade”. If that were a possibility this thread would not have a header. It’s a dream of many and a nightmare of others.
And who are these politicians in charge who wont talk to the EU ? Sunak has received credit from all sides for trying to improve relations with the EU, even from the EU. SKS is flip flopping all over the place by trying to keep his remainers on board but also his lost red wall. Thats not a policy its political chancerism.
You have an enviable ability to move the goalposts and just bang on about whatever pops into your head even when it completely contradicts your point. Where is SKS’s “Anti-Brexit crusade” of two posts ago? Now he’s “flip flopping”? Which is it?
The sentence started with "if" . This is where SKS heart is and where he makes reassuring noises to the middle class idiots while also trying to keep red wallers on board. At some point he is going to have to come clean since he cant do both. So still he hasnt got a policy.
Are you really a lawyer ?
Yes. You can tell because you are being forced to reinterpret what you said. Are you really a General?
Yesterday I read @bigjohnowls list of Strarmers u turns and while I know BJO is the 'bete noire' of some on here it is hard to disagree with him
I was speaking to my son in Vancouver last night and he said there is not a politician or leader anywhere that instills confidence, and he was highly critical of Trudeau and said Biden age and dementia will see him not standing next year as the US heads into further political chaos
Truth is the global problems with climate change and war require global solutions when politicians only seek to fight each other
I think Starmer will be out of his depth the minute he walks into no 10, and at times like this we need to bury politics and have a National government drawn across all politics
What we need is a period when the barking Brexiteers have minimal influence on our policies. Starmer offers the best chance of this.
And how's that going to happen ?
If Sir Bland waltzes off on his anti-Brexit crusade he;s simply going to wake the sleeping dogs and then youll have a bigger problem.
You have just inserted an “anti-Brexit crusade” into the discussion. And I thought SKS had no policies. Which is it? Having a group of politicians in charge who’s idea of a debate over EU relations is a choice between no cooperation and nuking it is not an “anti-Brexit crusade”. If that were a possibility this thread would not have a header. It’s a dream of many and a nightmare of others.
And who are these politicians in charge who wont talk to the EU ? Sunak has received credit from all sides for trying to improve relations with the EU, even from the EU. SKS is flip flopping all over the place by trying to keep his remainers on board but also his lost red wall. Thats not a policy its political chancerism.
You have an enviable ability to move the goalposts and just bang on about whatever pops into your head even when it completely contradicts your point. Where is SKS’s “Anti-Brexit crusade” of two posts ago? Now he’s “flip flopping”? Which is it?
The sentence started with "if" . This is where SKS heart is and where he makes reassuring noises to the middle class idiots while also trying to keep red wallers on board. At some point he is going to have to come clean since he cant do both. So still he hasnt got a policy.
Are you really a lawyer ?
Yes. You can tell because you are being forced to reinterpret what you said. Are you really a General?
Field Marshal ...
What’s a Field Marshal?
What Viscount Alanbrooke was/is. No point asking him if he is a General, he's been promoted ...
Yesterday I read @bigjohnowls list of Strarmers u turns and while I know BJO is the 'bete noire' of some on here it is hard to disagree with him
I was speaking to my son in Vancouver last night and he said there is not a politician or leader anywhere that instills confidence, and he was highly critical of Trudeau and said Biden age and dementia will see him not standing next year as the US heads into further political chaos
Truth is the global problems with climate change and war require global solutions when politicians only seek to fight each other
I think Starmer will be out of his depth the minute he walks into no 10, and at times like this we need to bury politics and have a National government drawn across all politics
What we need is a period when the barking Brexiteers have minimal influence on our policies. Starmer offers the best chance of this.
And how's that going to happen ?
If Sir Bland waltzes off on his anti-Brexit crusade he;s simply going to wake the sleeping dogs and then youll have a bigger problem.
You have just inserted an “anti-Brexit crusade” into the discussion. And I thought SKS had no policies. Which is it? Having a group of politicians in charge who’s idea of a debate over EU relations is a choice between no cooperation and nuking it is not an “anti-Brexit crusade”. If that were a possibility this thread would not have a header. It’s a dream of many and a nightmare of others.
And who are these politicians in charge who wont talk to the EU ? Sunak has received credit from all sides for trying to improve relations with the EU, even from the EU. SKS is flip flopping all over the place by trying to keep his remainers on board but also his lost red wall. Thats not a policy its political chancerism.
You have an enviable ability to move the goalposts and just bang on about whatever pops into your head even when it completely contradicts your point. Where is SKS’s “Anti-Brexit crusade” of two posts ago? Now he’s “flip flopping”? Which is it?
The sentence started with "if" . This is where SKS heart is and where he makes reassuring noises to the middle class idiots while also trying to keep red wallers on board. At some point he is going to have to come clean since he cant do both. So still he hasnt got a policy.
Are you really a lawyer ?
Yes. You can tell because you are being forced to reinterpret what you said. Are you really a General?
Yesterday I read @bigjohnowls list of Strarmers u turns and while I know BJO is the 'bete noire' of some on here it is hard to disagree with him
I was speaking to my son in Vancouver last night and he said there is not a politician or leader anywhere that instills confidence, and he was highly critical of Trudeau and said Biden age and dementia will see him not standing next year as the US heads into further political chaos
Truth is the global problems with climate change and war require global solutions when politicians only seek to fight each other
I think Starmer will be out of his depth the minute he walks into no 10, and at times like this we need to bury politics and have a National government drawn across all politics
What we need is a period when the barking Brexiteers have minimal influence on our policies. Starmer offers the best chance of this.
And how's that going to happen ?
If Sir Bland waltzes off on his anti-Brexit crusade he;s simply going to wake the sleeping dogs and then youll have a bigger problem.
You have just inserted an “anti-Brexit crusade” into the discussion. And I thought SKS had no policies. Which is it? Having a group of politicians in charge who’s idea of a debate over EU relations is a choice between no cooperation and nuking it is not an “anti-Brexit crusade”. If that were a possibility this thread would not have a header. It’s a dream of many and a nightmare of others.
And who are these politicians in charge who wont talk to the EU ? Sunak has received credit from all sides for trying to improve relations with the EU, even from the EU. SKS is flip flopping all over the place by trying to keep his remainers on board but also his lost red wall. Thats not a policy its political chancerism.
You have an enviable ability to move the goalposts and just bang on about whatever pops into your head even when it completely contradicts your point. Where is SKS’s “Anti-Brexit crusade” of two posts ago? Now he’s “flip flopping”? Which is it?
The sentence started with "if" . This is where SKS heart is and where he makes reassuring noises to the middle class idiots while also trying to keep red wallers on board. At some point he is going to have to come clean since he cant do both. So still he hasnt got a policy.
Are you really a lawyer ?
Yes. You can tell because you are being forced to reinterpret what you said. Are you really a General?
LOL dont be silly Brooke was a Field Marshal,
Anyway thrilling as this is I now have to go out and buy Sunday lunch,
And I shall reflect on the words of @CR to you just down thread
"It's remarkable how instantly you lose you shit the second you think Brexit has come up as a subject. Quite quite deranged."
I reckon Sunak has now seriously begun to formulate an election-winning strategy that he thinks will secure victory. It's based around transport. It consists of:
- Save the motorist. Abandon HS2, ban LTNs and ULEZ. - Stop the boats. - A helipad in every neighbourhood.
Abandoning HS2 only makes sense if he's given up all hope of winning seats in the north.
Northerners use roads not railways.
That would surprise anyone using the Tyneside metro, or the Sheffield trams.
Over 80% of journeys are made by car, proportionally even more so outside London.
On public transport more journeys are made by bus than rail.
From that source, the 80%+ figure is "passenger km", not "journeys" (or "trips" as they call them).
When counted in "trips" the "trips by car" share falls to around 60-65%.
But that has nothing to do with the current arguments, which are about short local trips of just a few miles, and whether people living in a housing area are to be forced to endure rat-runners driving at dangerously high speed down their residential streets, or not.
The Government are doubling down on this, and sod the human cost - what do a few thousand extra dead people from road kill or chronic conditions matter if it saves the Government's political skin?
From the Guardian piece linked earlier:
Downing Street is reportedly considering a ban on councils introducing new LTNs (although government sources described this as “speculation”), as well as denying local authorities access to the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency database, making the zones unenforceable.
This follows an announcement earlier this year that LTNs would no longer be able to be created using government money. For cash-strapped councils already struggling to make ends meet, the decision may lead to them scrapping their plans altogether. This has prompted questions as to whether we are seeing the end of LTNs nationally.
Even if you think LTNs are a bad policy, shouldn't we leave it to local councils to decide what to do?
Given the size and stability of Labour's lead in the polls, I'd have thought the best bet for Starmer is simply to carry on doing what he is doing for now. There's no point pissing anyone off or tying his own hands with specific policy announcements when he doesn't need to. No big promises, and hope to surprise on the upside once in power.
Yesterday I read @bigjohnowls list of Strarmers u turns and while I know BJO is the 'bete noire' of some on here it is hard to disagree with him
I was speaking to my son in Vancouver last night and he said there is not a politician or leader anywhere that instills confidence, and he was highly critical of Trudeau and said Biden age and dementia will see him not standing next year as the US heads into further political chaos
Truth is the global problems with climate change and war require global solutions when politicians only seek to fight each other
I think Starmer will be out of his depth the minute he walks into no 10, and at times like this we need to bury politics and have a National government drawn across all politics
What we need is a period when the barking Brexiteers have minimal influence on our policies. Starmer offers the best chance of this.
And how's that going to happen ?
If Sir Bland waltzes off on his anti-Brexit crusade he;s simply going to wake the sleeping dogs and then youll have a bigger problem.
You have just inserted an “anti-Brexit crusade” into the discussion. And I thought SKS had no policies. Which is it? Having a group of politicians in charge who’s idea of a debate over EU relations is a choice between no cooperation and nuking it is not an “anti-Brexit crusade”. If that were a possibility this thread would not have a header. It’s a dream of many and a nightmare of others.
And who are these politicians in charge who wont talk to the EU ? Sunak has received credit from all sides for trying to improve relations with the EU, even from the EU. SKS is flip flopping all over the place by trying to keep his remainers on board but also his lost red wall. Thats not a policy its political chancerism.
You have an enviable ability to move the goalposts and just bang on about whatever pops into your head even when it completely contradicts your point. Where is SKS’s “Anti-Brexit crusade” of two posts ago? Now he’s “flip flopping”? Which is it?
The sentence started with "if" . This is where SKS heart is and where he makes reassuring noises to the middle class idiots while also trying to keep red wallers on board. At some point he is going to have to come clean since he cant do both. So still he hasnt got a policy.
Are you really a lawyer ?
Yes. You can tell because you are being forced to reinterpret what you said. Are you really a General?
LOL dont be silly Brooke was a Field Marshal,
Anyway thrilling as this is I now have to go out and buy Sunday lunch,
And I shall reflect on the words of @CR to you just down thread
"It's remarkable how instantly you lose you shit the second you think Brexit has come up as a subject. Quite quite deranged."
He has a point.
You really need to calm down when someone criticises your point. Chill out FFS. This isn’t healthy.
I reckon Sunak has now seriously begun to formulate an election-winning strategy that he thinks will secure victory. It's based around transport. It consists of:
- Save the motorist. Abandon HS2, ban LTNs and ULEZ. - Stop the boats. - A helipad in every neighbourhood.
Abandoning HS2 only makes sense if he's given up all hope of winning seats in the north.
Northerners use roads not railways.
That would surprise anyone using the Tyneside metro, or the Sheffield trams.
Over 80% of journeys are made by car, proportionally even more so outside London.
On public transport more journeys are made by bus than rail.
Notice how much politicians, the media and PB talk about trains compared with buses ?
Trains are a male middle class obsession.
Memories of the Rocket and Mallard when Britain led the world.
Plus childhood Hornby railways.
Our village of 3,000 people, in Ashford Kent PC, just lost its bus service. Little things like that, even for people who don’t use the bus, don’t go unnoticed and are not a tick in the Tory box. I note that Damien Green tried and failed to run from Ashford, Ashford FFS, to Weald of Kent next door.
Yes, bus services have declined noticeably over the last decade. My bus route is threatened again by our Tory council. Red Wall voters are often older and reliant on buses.
Yesterday I read @bigjohnowls list of Strarmers u turns and while I know BJO is the 'bete noire' of some on here it is hard to disagree with him
I was speaking to my son in Vancouver last night and he said there is not a politician or leader anywhere that instills confidence, and he was highly critical of Trudeau and said Biden age and dementia will see him not standing next year as the US heads into further political chaos
Truth is the global problems with climate change and war require global solutions when politicians only seek to fight each other
I think Starmer will be out of his depth the minute he walks into no 10, and at times like this we need to bury politics and have a National government drawn across all politics
What we need is a period when the barking Brexiteers have minimal influence on our policies. Starmer offers the best chance of this.
And how's that going to happen ?
If Sir Bland waltzes off on his anti-Brexit crusade he;s simply going to wake the sleeping dogs and then youll have a bigger problem.
You have just inserted an “anti-Brexit crusade” into the discussion. And I thought SKS had no policies. Which is it? Having a group of politicians in charge who’s idea of a debate over EU relations is a choice between no cooperation and nuking it is not an “anti-Brexit crusade”. If that were a possibility this thread would not have a header. It’s a dream of many and a nightmare of others.
And who are these politicians in charge who wont talk to the EU ? Sunak has received credit from all sides for trying to improve relations with the EU, even from the EU. SKS is flip flopping all over the place by trying to keep his remainers on board but also his lost red wall. Thats not a policy its political chancerism.
You have an enviable ability to move the goalposts and just bang on about whatever pops into your head even when it completely contradicts your point. Where is SKS’s “Anti-Brexit crusade” of two posts ago? Now he’s “flip flopping”? Which is it?
The sentence started with "if" . This is where SKS heart is and where he makes reassuring noises to the middle class idiots while also trying to keep red wallers on board. At some point he is going to have to come clean since he cant do both. So still he hasnt got a policy.
Are you really a lawyer ?
Yes. You can tell because you are being forced to reinterpret what you said. Are you really a General?
Field Marshal ...
What’s a Field Marshal?
What Viscount Alanbrooke was/is. No point asking him if he is a General, he's been promoted ...
A Field Marshal is an old General with one short plank:
Just read that the Americans paid a huge economic price for independence: per capita income collapsed by 46% between 1774 and 1790, and as late as 1805 per capita wealth was still around 14% lower than it had been in 1774.
Of course, it had all paid off about a century later but breaking up integrated empires and trading blocs does come at a price - sometimes for many decades.
Your issue is that a recent departure from a “trading bloc” was not sold as such. Economic benefits, or at least the no diminution in economic prosperity, were promised by your band or merry charlatans. The American Revolutionaries were absolutely upfront about it.
In other words -
“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.” - Samuel Adams
vs
"There will be no non-tariff barriers to trade" — Boris Johnson (or “There will be no downside to Brexit, only a considerable upside.” - David Davis. Others are available on request).
Though the American revolution had as a spark a refusal to pay taxes.
WTF has that got to do with this specific discussion?
Paying fewer taxes, especially to an overseas government, means you keep the money for yourself.
I'm confident that there were plenty of American revolutionaries who thought they would become richer if they could exploit the continent without the restrictions Britain placed on them.
Debatable and in any event nothing to do with the point that CR or I were discussing.
Given that the UK hasn't had a 46% fall in per capita income as the early USA did then the relevance of comparing Samuel Adams to David Davis is more than dubious.
In reality the working class Leave block which voted for immigration control, higher wages and more spending on the NHS has got what it wanted.
While the middle class extremists, on both sides, the 'go global' Brexiteers and the 'job losses and pension cuts' Remainers are both disappointed.
Nah, even working class Leavers now react to Brexit like a turd in the swimming pool.
I reckon Sunak has now seriously begun to formulate an election-winning strategy that he thinks will secure victory. It's based around transport. It consists of:
- Save the motorist. Abandon HS2, ban LTNs and ULEZ. - Stop the boats. - A helipad in every neighbourhood.
Abandoning HS2 only makes sense if he's given up all hope of winning seats in the north.
Northerners use roads not railways.
That would surprise anyone using the Tyneside metro, or the Sheffield trams.
Over 80% of journeys are made by car, proportionally even more so outside London.
On public transport more journeys are made by bus than rail.
Notice how much politicians, the media and PB talk about trains compared with buses ?
Trains are a male middle class obsession.
Memories of the Rocket and Mallard when Britain led the world.
Plus childhood Hornby railways.
Our village of 3,000 people, in Ashford Kent PC, just lost its bus service. Little things like that, even for people who don’t use the bus, don’t go unnoticed and are not a tick in the Tory box. I note that Damien Green tried and failed to run from Ashford, Ashford FFS, to Weald of Kent next door.
Yes, bus services have declined noticeably over the last decade. My bus route is threatened again by our Tory council. Red Wall voters are often older and reliant on buses.
Yesterday I read @bigjohnowls list of Strarmers u turns and while I know BJO is the 'bete noire' of some on here it is hard to disagree with him
I was speaking to my son in Vancouver last night and he said there is not a politician or leader anywhere that instills confidence, and he was highly critical of Trudeau and said Biden age and dementia will see him not standing next year as the US heads into further political chaos
Truth is the global problems with climate change and war require global solutions when politicians only seek to fight each other
I think Starmer will be out of his depth the minute he walks into no 10, and at times like this we need to bury politics and have a National government drawn across all politics
What we need is a period when the barking Brexiteers have minimal influence on our policies. Starmer offers the best chance of this.
And how's that going to happen ?
If Sir Bland waltzes off on his anti-Brexit crusade he;s simply going to wake the sleeping dogs and then youll have a bigger problem.
You have just inserted an “anti-Brexit crusade” into the discussion. And I thought SKS had no policies. Which is it? Having a group of politicians in charge who’s idea of a debate over EU relations is a choice between no cooperation and nuking it is not an “anti-Brexit crusade”. If that were a possibility this thread would not have a header. It’s a dream of many and a nightmare of others.
And who are these politicians in charge who wont talk to the EU ? Sunak has received credit from all sides for trying to improve relations with the EU, even from the EU. SKS is flip flopping all over the place by trying to keep his remainers on board but also his lost red wall. Thats not a policy its political chancerism.
You have an enviable ability to move the goalposts and just bang on about whatever pops into your head even when it completely contradicts your point. Where is SKS’s “Anti-Brexit crusade” of two posts ago? Now he’s “flip flopping”? Which is it?
The sentence started with "if" . This is where SKS heart is and where he makes reassuring noises to the middle class idiots while also trying to keep red wallers on board. At some point he is going to have to come clean since he cant do both. So still he hasnt got a policy.
Are you really a lawyer ?
Yes. You can tell because you are being forced to reinterpret what you said. Are you really a General?
Field Marshal ...
What’s a Field Marshal?
What Viscount Alanbrooke was/is. No point asking him if he is a General, he's been promoted ...
A Field Marshal is an old General with one short plank:
Upmarket short plank. Lathe-turned, gilded and all.
Just read that the Americans paid a huge economic price for independence: per capita income collapsed by 46% between 1774 and 1790, and as late as 1805 per capita wealth was still around 14% lower than it had been in 1774.
Of course, it had all paid off about a century later but breaking up integrated empires and trading blocs does come at a price - sometimes for many decades.
Your issue is that a recent departure from a “trading bloc” was not sold as such. Economic benefits, or at least the no diminution in economic prosperity, were promised by your band or merry charlatans. The American Revolutionaries were absolutely upfront about it.
In other words -
“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.” - Samuel Adams
vs
"There will be no non-tariff barriers to trade" — Boris Johnson (or “There will be no downside to Brexit, only a considerable upside.” - David Davis. Others are available on request).
Though the American revolution had as a spark a refusal to pay taxes.
WTF has that got to do with this specific discussion?
Paying fewer taxes, especially to an overseas government, means you keep the money for yourself.
I'm confident that there were plenty of American revolutionaries who thought they would become richer if they could exploit the continent without the restrictions Britain placed on them.
Debatable and in any event nothing to do with the point that CR or I were discussing.
Given that the UK hasn't had a 46% fall in per capita income as the early USA did then the relevance of comparing Samuel Adams to David Davis is more than dubious.
In reality the working class Leave block which voted for immigration control, higher wages and more spending on the NHS has got what it wanted.
While the middle class extremists, on both sides, the 'go global' Brexiteers and the 'job losses and pension cuts' Remainers are both disappointed.
Just read that the Americans paid a huge economic price for independence: per capita income collapsed by 46% between 1774 and 1790, and as late as 1805 per capita wealth was still around 14% lower than it had been in 1774.
Of course, it had all paid off about a century later but breaking up integrated empires and trading blocs does come at a price - sometimes for many decades.
Your issue is that a recent departure from a “trading bloc” was not sold as such. Economic benefits, or at least the no diminution in economic prosperity, were promised by your band or merry charlatans. The American Revolutionaries were absolutely upfront about it.
In other words -
“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.” - Samuel Adams
vs
"There will be no non-tariff barriers to trade" — Boris Johnson (or “There will be no downside to Brexit, only a considerable upside.” - David Davis. Others are available on request).
Though the American revolution had as a spark a refusal to pay taxes.
WTF has that got to do with this specific discussion?
Paying fewer taxes, especially to an overseas government, means you keep the money for yourself.
I'm confident that there were plenty of American revolutionaries who thought they would become richer if they could exploit the continent without the restrictions Britain placed on them.
Yesterday I read @bigjohnowls list of Strarmers u turns and while I know BJO is the 'bete noire' of some on here it is hard to disagree with him
I was speaking to my son in Vancouver last night and he said there is not a politician or leader anywhere that instills confidence, and he was highly critical of Trudeau and said Biden age and dementia will see him not standing next year as the US heads into further political chaos
Truth is the global problems with climate change and war require global solutions when politicians only seek to fight each other
I think Starmer will be out of his depth the minute he walks into no 10, and at times like this we need to bury politics and have a National government drawn across all politics
What we need is a period when the barking Brexiteers have minimal influence on our policies. Starmer offers the best chance of this.
And how's that going to happen ?
If Sir Bland waltzes off on his anti-Brexit crusade he;s simply going to wake the sleeping dogs and then youll have a bigger problem.
You have just inserted an “anti-Brexit crusade” into the discussion. And I thought SKS had no policies. Which is it? Having a group of politicians in charge who’s idea of a debate over EU relations is a choice between no cooperation and nuking it is not an “anti-Brexit crusade”. If that were a possibility this thread would not have a header. It’s a dream of many and a nightmare of others.
And who are these politicians in charge who wont talk to the EU ? Sunak has received credit from all sides for trying to improve relations with the EU, even from the EU. SKS is flip flopping all over the place by trying to keep his remainers on board but also his lost red wall. Thats not a policy its political chancerism.
You have an enviable ability to move the goalposts and just bang on about whatever pops into your head even when it completely contradicts your point. Where is SKS’s “Anti-Brexit crusade” of two posts ago? Now he’s “flip flopping”? Which is it?
The sentence started with "if" . This is where SKS heart is and where he makes reassuring noises to the middle class idiots while also trying to keep red wallers on board. At some point he is going to have to come clean since he cant do both. So still he hasnt got a policy.
Are you really a lawyer ?
Yes. You can tell because you are being forced to reinterpret what you said. Are you really a General?
Yesterday I read @bigjohnowls list of Strarmers u turns and while I know BJO is the 'bete noire' of some on here it is hard to disagree with him
I was speaking to my son in Vancouver last night and he said there is not a politician or leader anywhere that instills confidence, and he was highly critical of Trudeau and said Biden age and dementia will see him not standing next year as the US heads into further political chaos
Truth is the global problems with climate change and war require global solutions when politicians only seek to fight each other
I think Starmer will be out of his depth the minute he walks into no 10, and at times like this we need to bury politics and have a National government drawn across all politics
What we need is a period when the barking Brexiteers have minimal influence on our policies. Starmer offers the best chance of this.
And how's that going to happen ?
If Sir Bland waltzes off on his anti-Brexit crusade he;s simply going to wake the sleeping dogs and then youll have a bigger problem.
Hence Starmer's current strategy. Establish the meme that Brexit Isn't Working and make reassuring noises about making it work. Leave the bit about the only way of MBW being to dilute it to homeopathic levels unsaid, even though it's obvious.
Lest we forget, Starmer is a proven lawyer, and lawyers know not to ask questions until they are sure what the answer is.
But the first step is getting the nutters out of office. Something in which the nutters are proving surprisingly co-operative.
Its still nonsense.
Your so called "nutters" are only behaving themselves since they are the government. Once outside its gloves off. The Remainers are simply getting an easy time atm because nobody is running with daily guff which comes from the EU bureaucracy machine, We had a glimpse of how things might go on the vaccine spat when being outside was suddenly seen as a good thing. That will be the norm of and the popularity of the EU will reverse if the stay outs have a free hand,
You can bet your bottom dollar the regret will flip back the other way very quickly if we ever do end up going back in. It will be insufferable.
I'm perfectly happy with Brexit.
The Brexit balance sheet at present is
Remainers havent had the big downside they forecast Leavers havent produced the big upside they forecast
Scoreless draw.
However changing the status quo simply opens the can of worms. Going back in requires sacrifices for indeterminate benefits. The polls will quickly change.
Isn't it all a bit academic, Alan?
They wouldn't let us back in any time soon, and certainly not on the terms which we once had.
Yesterday I read @bigjohnowls list of Strarmers u turns and while I know BJO is the 'bete noire' of some on here it is hard to disagree with him
I was speaking to my son in Vancouver last night and he said there is not a politician or leader anywhere that instills confidence, and he was highly critical of Trudeau and said Biden age and dementia will see him not standing next year as the US heads into further political chaos
Truth is the global problems with climate change and war require global solutions when politicians only seek to fight each other
I think Starmer will be out of his depth the minute he walks into no 10, and at times like this we need to bury politics and have a National government drawn across all politics
A national government of all the talents? Rishi with deputy PM Farage?
Yesterday I read @bigjohnowls list of Strarmers u turns and while I know BJO is the 'bete noire' of some on here it is hard to disagree with him
I was speaking to my son in Vancouver last night and he said there is not a politician or leader anywhere that instills confidence, and he was highly critical of Trudeau and said Biden age and dementia will see him not standing next year as the US heads into further political chaos
Truth is the global problems with climate change and war require global solutions when politicians only seek to fight each other
I think Starmer will be out of his depth the minute he walks into no 10, and at times like this we need to bury politics and have a National government drawn across all politics
A national government of all the talents? Rishi with deputy PM Farage?
Rishi would be cleaning the toilets in that event.
Given the size and stability of Labour's lead in the polls, I'd have thought the best bet for Starmer is simply to carry on doing what he is doing for now. There's no point pissing anyone off or tying his own hands with specific policy announcements when he doesn't need to. No big promises, and hope to surprise on the upside once in power.
That is clearly the plan, but I do think the current Labour front bench policy of timidity and fear will be so ingrained that they won't be able to campaign positively when the time comes.
A Starmer government will benefit from a return to growth though, as the current economic flatlining and retrenchment ends. The last 18 months of the Sunak government are going to get most of the economic misery as debt laden individuals and companies fail. The economic cycle will turn, as it always does, and that timing will be good for Starmer and Reeves.
I will be voting LD or Green though, depending on the local situation in my constituency.
Just read that the Americans paid a huge economic price for independence: per capita income collapsed by 46% between 1774 and 1790, and as late as 1805 per capita wealth was still around 14% lower than it had been in 1774.
Of course, it had all paid off about a century later but breaking up integrated empires and trading blocs does come at a price - sometimes for many decades.
Your issue is that a recent departure from a “trading bloc” was not sold as such. Economic benefits, or at least the no diminution in economic prosperity, were promised by your band or merry charlatans. The American Revolutionaries were absolutely upfront about it.
In other words -
“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.” - Samuel Adams
vs
"There will be no non-tariff barriers to trade" — Boris Johnson (or “There will be no downside to Brexit, only a considerable upside.” - David Davis. Others are available on request).
Though the American revolution had as a spark a refusal to pay taxes.
WTF has that got to do with this specific discussion?
Paying fewer taxes, especially to an overseas government, means you keep the money for yourself.
I'm confident that there were plenty of American revolutionaries who thought they would become richer if they could exploit the continent without the restrictions Britain placed on them.
They lost a lot of population (by choice, because they basically booted out the Loyalists) in the advent of the American Revolution, lost some trading advantages and then had to build all the infrastructure of an independent country whilst rebuilding from extensive war damage to several ports and cities. Meanwhile the UK started to rapidly industralise from the 1780s onwards, leading also to a large boom in population growth, whilst America remained largely agrarian for some time.
I don't think it was until the 1860s/1870s that the USA overtook the UK, probably delayed by the civil war too.
OTOH (and bearing in mind the existence of alternative sources such as Egypt and the Windies) the UK industrial revolution remained partly dependent on US agrarianism, or rather slave plantationism, for critical resources - cotton, sugar (for cheap urban proletariat fodder), etc.
Thats the modern Woke take and almost certainly bollocks.
Given the size and stability of Labour's lead in the polls, I'd have thought the best bet for Starmer is simply to carry on doing what he is doing for now. There's no point pissing anyone off or tying his own hands with specific policy announcements when he doesn't need to. No big promises, and hope to surprise on the upside once in power.
Anyone paying attention to the last few weeks would have seen that Labour have been intentionally removing their historic commitments (such as green investment funds) because they don't want to be committed to things they can't deliver due to lack of money.
Just read that the Americans paid a huge economic price for independence: per capita income collapsed by 46% between 1774 and 1790, and as late as 1805 per capita wealth was still around 14% lower than it had been in 1774.
Of course, it had all paid off about a century later but breaking up integrated empires and trading blocs does come at a price - sometimes for many decades.
Your issue is that a recent departure from a “trading bloc” was not sold as such. Economic benefits, or at least the no diminution in economic prosperity, were promised by your band or merry charlatans. The American Revolutionaries were absolutely upfront about it.
In other words -
“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.” - Samuel Adams
vs
"There will be no non-tariff barriers to trade" — Boris Johnson (or “There will be no downside to Brexit, only a considerable upside.” - David Davis. Others are available on request).
Though the American revolution had as a spark a refusal to pay taxes.
WTF has that got to do with this specific discussion?
Paying fewer taxes, especially to an overseas government, means you keep the money for yourself.
I'm confident that there were plenty of American revolutionaries who thought they would become richer if they could exploit the continent without the restrictions Britain placed on them.
Debatable and in any event nothing to do with the point that CR or I were discussing.
Given that the UK hasn't had a 46% fall in per capita income as the early USA did then the relevance of comparing Samuel Adams to David Davis is more than dubious.
In reality the working class Leave block which voted for immigration control, higher wages and more spending on the NHS has got what it wanted.
While the middle class extremists, on both sides, the 'go global' Brexiteers and the 'job losses and pension cuts' Remainers are both disappointed.
They've got higher immigration, real terms pay cuts and a postcode lottery NHS struggling to do the basics.
Yesterday I read @bigjohnowls list of Strarmers u turns and while I know BJO is the 'bete noire' of some on here it is hard to disagree with him
I was speaking to my son in Vancouver last night and he said there is not a politician or leader anywhere that instills confidence, and he was highly critical of Trudeau and said Biden age and dementia will see him not standing next year as the US heads into further political chaos
Truth is the global problems with climate change and war require global solutions when politicians only seek to fight each other
I think Starmer will be out of his depth the minute he walks into no 10, and at times like this we need to bury politics and have a National government drawn across all politics
What we need is a period when the barking Brexiteers have minimal influence on our policies. Starmer offers the best chance of this.
And how's that going to happen ?
If Sir Bland waltzes off on his anti-Brexit crusade he;s simply going to wake the sleeping dogs and then youll have a bigger problem.
Hence Starmer's current strategy. Establish the meme that Brexit Isn't Working and make reassuring noises about making it work. Leave the bit about the only way of MBW being to dilute it to homeopathic levels unsaid, even though it's obvious.
Lest we forget, Starmer is a proven lawyer, and lawyers know not to ask questions until they are sure what the answer is.
But the first step is getting the nutters out of office. Something in which the nutters are proving surprisingly co-operative.
Its still nonsense.
Your so called "nutters" are only behaving themselves since they are the government. Once outside its gloves off. The Remainers are simply getting an easy time atm because nobody is running with daily guff which comes from the EU bureaucracy machine, We had a glimpse of how things might go on the vaccine spat when being outside was suddenly seen as a good thing. That will be the norm of and the popularity of the EU will reverse if the stay outs have a free hand,
You can bet your bottom dollar the regret will flip back the other way very quickly if we ever do end up going back in. It will be insufferable.
I'm perfectly happy with Brexit.
The Brexit balance sheet at present is
Remainers havent had the big downside they forecast Leavers havent produced the big upside they forecast
Scoreless draw.
However changing the status quo simply opens the can of worms. Going back in requires sacrifices for indeterminate benefits. The polls will quickly change.
Isn't it all a bit academic, Alan?
They wouldn't let us back in any time soon, and certainly not on the terms which we once had.
No one capable of forming a government is talking about rejoining or an “Anti-Brexit Crusade”. It’s a straw man established by people like AB and CR to rally the troops.
Yesterday I read @bigjohnowls list of Strarmers u turns and while I know BJO is the 'bete noire' of some on here it is hard to disagree with him
I was speaking to my son in Vancouver last night and he said there is not a politician or leader anywhere that instills confidence, and he was highly critical of Trudeau and said Biden age and dementia will see him not standing next year as the US heads into further political chaos
Truth is the global problems with climate change and war require global solutions when politicians only seek to fight each other
I think Starmer will be out of his depth the minute he walks into no 10, and at times like this we need to bury politics and have a National government drawn across all politics
What we need is a period when the barking Brexiteers have minimal influence on our policies. Starmer offers the best chance of this.
And how's that going to happen ?
If Sir Bland waltzes off on his anti-Brexit crusade he;s simply going to wake the sleeping dogs and then youll have a bigger problem.
You have just inserted an “anti-Brexit crusade” into the discussion. And I thought SKS had no policies. Which is it? Having a group of politicians in charge who’s idea of a debate over EU relations is a choice between no cooperation and nuking it is not an “anti-Brexit crusade”. If that were a possibility this thread would not have a header. It’s a dream of many and a nightmare of others.
And who are these politicians in charge who wont talk to the EU ? Sunak has received credit from all sides for trying to improve relations with the EU, even from the EU. SKS is flip flopping all over the place by trying to keep his remainers on board but also his lost red wall. Thats not a policy its political chancerism.
You have an enviable ability to move the goalposts and just bang on about whatever pops into your head even when it completely contradicts your point. Where is SKS’s “Anti-Brexit crusade” of two posts ago? Now he’s “flip flopping”? Which is it?
The sentence started with "if" . This is where SKS heart is and where he makes reassuring noises to the middle class idiots while also trying to keep red wallers on board. At some point he is going to have to come clean since he cant do both. So still he hasnt got a policy.
Are you really a lawyer ?
Yes. You can tell because you are being forced to reinterpret what you said. Are you really a General?
LOL dont be silly Brooke was a Field Marshal,
Anyway thrilling as this is I now have to go out and buy Sunday lunch,
And I shall reflect on the words of @CR to you just down thread
"It's remarkable how instantly you lose you shit the second you think Brexit has come up as a subject. Quite quite deranged."
He has a point.
You really need to calm down when someone criticises your point. Chill out FFS. This isn’t healthy.
Just read that the Americans paid a huge economic price for independence: per capita income collapsed by 46% between 1774 and 1790, and as late as 1805 per capita wealth was still around 14% lower than it had been in 1774.
Of course, it had all paid off about a century later but breaking up integrated empires and trading blocs does come at a price - sometimes for many decades.
Your issue is that a recent departure from a “trading bloc” was not sold as such. Economic benefits, or at least the no diminution in economic prosperity, were promised by your band or merry charlatans. The American Revolutionaries were absolutely upfront about it.
In other words -
“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.” - Samuel Adams
vs
"There will be no non-tariff barriers to trade" — Boris Johnson (or “There will be no downside to Brexit, only a considerable upside.” - David Davis. Others are available on request).
Though the American revolution had as a spark a refusal to pay taxes.
WTF has that got to do with this specific discussion?
Quite a lot actually. It's remarkable how instantly you lose you shit the second you think Brexit has come up as a subject. Quite quite deranged.
Maybe we should have done what the Patriots did to the Loyalists: burned and seized all their property, and chased them out the country
It’s remarkable how you lose your shit everytime someone dares to criticise you and start talking about violence against your opponents. You really should learn to calm down. Your anger is really unhealthy. It’s amazing how the smallest criticism makes you go completely batshit. Take up a sport or something. You are deranged,
I reckon Sunak has now seriously begun to formulate an election-winning strategy that he thinks will secure victory. It's based around transport. It consists of:
- Save the motorist. Abandon HS2, ban LTNs and ULEZ. - Stop the boats. - A helipad in every neighbourhood.
Abandoning HS2 only makes sense if he's given up all hope of winning seats in the north.
Northerners use roads not railways.
That would surprise anyone using the Tyneside metro, or the Sheffield trams.
Over 80% of journeys are made by car, proportionally even more so outside London.
On public transport more journeys are made by bus than rail.
From that source, the 80%+ figure is "passenger km", not "journeys" (or "trips" as they call them).
When counted in "trips" the "trips by car" share falls to around 60-65%.
But that has nothing to do with the current arguments, which are about short local trips of just a few miles, and whether people living in a housing area are to be forced to endure rat-runners driving at dangerously high speed down their residential streets, or not.
The Government are doubling down on this, and sod the human cost - what do a few thousand extra dead people from road kill or chronic conditions matter if it saves the Government's political skin?
From the Guardian piece linked earlier:
Downing Street is reportedly considering a ban on councils introducing new LTNs (although government sources described this as “speculation”), as well as denying local authorities access to the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency database, making the zones unenforceable.
This follows an announcement earlier this year that LTNs would no longer be able to be created using government money. For cash-strapped councils already struggling to make ends meet, the decision may lead to them scrapping their plans altogether. This has prompted questions as to whether we are seeing the end of LTNs nationally.
Certainly once you include walking then car travel falls as a proportion - as do the other methods.
Though walking does tend to be alongside roads.
As to the effects of driving then that, of course, varies depending on the location.
And inner urban driving is certainly very different to that in conurbation sprawls and rural areas.
Personally I'd say such decisions tend to be better decided locally but few politicians can resist imposing their prejudices.
No one capable of forming a government is talking about rejoining or an “Anti-Brexit Crusade”. It’s a straw man established by people like AB and CR to rally the troops.
Yesterday I read @bigjohnowls list of Strarmers u turns and while I know BJO is the 'bete noire' of some on here it is hard to disagree with him
I was speaking to my son in Vancouver last night and he said there is not a politician or leader anywhere that instills confidence, and he was highly critical of Trudeau and said Biden age and dementia will see him not standing next year as the US heads into further political chaos
Truth is the global problems with climate change and war require global solutions when politicians only seek to fight each other
I think Starmer will be out of his depth the minute he walks into no 10, and at times like this we need to bury politics and have a National government drawn across all politics
What we need is a period when the barking Brexiteers have minimal influence on our policies. Starmer offers the best chance of this.
And how's that going to happen ?
If Sir Bland waltzes off on his anti-Brexit crusade he;s simply going to wake the sleeping dogs and then youll have a bigger problem.
You have just inserted an “anti-Brexit crusade” into the discussion. And I thought SKS had no policies. Which is it? Having a group of politicians in charge who’s idea of a debate over EU relations is a choice between no cooperation and nuking it is not an “anti-Brexit crusade”. If that were a possibility this thread would not have a header. It’s a dream of many and a nightmare of others.
And who are these politicians in charge who wont talk to the EU ? Sunak has received credit from all sides for trying to improve relations with the EU, even from the EU. SKS is flip flopping all over the place by trying to keep his remainers on board but also his lost red wall. Thats not a policy its political chancerism.
You have an enviable ability to move the goalposts and just bang on about whatever pops into your head even when it completely contradicts your point. Where is SKS’s “Anti-Brexit crusade” of two posts ago? Now he’s “flip flopping”? Which is it?
The sentence started with "if" . This is where SKS heart is and where he makes reassuring noises to the middle class idiots while also trying to keep red wallers on board. At some point he is going to have to come clean since he cant do both. So still he hasnt got a policy.
Are you really a lawyer ?
Yes. You can tell because you are being forced to reinterpret what you said. Are you really a General?
LOL dont be silly Brooke was a Field Marshal,
Anyway thrilling as this is I now have to go out and buy Sunday lunch,
And I shall reflect on the words of @CR to you just down thread
"It's remarkable how instantly you lose you shit the second you think Brexit has come up as a subject. Quite quite deranged."
He has a point.
You really need to calm down when someone criticises your point. Chill out FFS. This isn’t healthy.
Maaate..
I’ll accept much criticism - but that I most certainly am not.
Starmer's coalition lasts until the day after the election.
I don't see any evidence this is solid or good for 10+ years.
Only if the Tories detoxify themselves, which doesn't seem probable.
It took eight years between losing power in 1997 and David Cameron being elected in 2005 for the Tories to start thinking properly about why they were toxic and how to detoxify themselves.
It took ten years between losing power in 2010 and Keir Starmer being elected in 2020 for Labour to make the same journey.
And even after a party stops being repulsive to the voters, you still have to wait for the next election which is probably a good few years afterwards.
So a decade in power for Labour looks like a rather small-c conservative estimate based on recent history.
Just read that the Americans paid a huge economic price for independence: per capita income collapsed by 46% between 1774 and 1790, and as late as 1805 per capita wealth was still around 14% lower than it had been in 1774.
Of course, it had all paid off about a century later but breaking up integrated empires and trading blocs does come at a price - sometimes for many decades.
Your issue is that a recent departure from a “trading bloc” was not sold as such. Economic benefits, or at least the no diminution in economic prosperity, were promised by your band or merry charlatans. The American Revolutionaries were absolutely upfront about it.
In other words -
“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.” - Samuel Adams
vs
"There will be no non-tariff barriers to trade" — Boris Johnson (or “There will be no downside to Brexit, only a considerable upside.” - David Davis. Others are available on request).
Though the American revolution had as a spark a refusal to pay taxes.
WTF has that got to do with this specific discussion?
Paying fewer taxes, especially to an overseas government, means you keep the money for yourself.
I'm confident that there were plenty of American revolutionaries who thought they would become richer if they could exploit the continent without the restrictions Britain placed on them.
They lost a lot of population (by choice, because they basically booted out the Loyalists) in the advent of the American Revolution, lost some trading advantages and then had to build all the infrastructure of an independent country whilst rebuilding from extensive war damage to several ports and cities. Meanwhile the UK started to rapidly industralise from the 1780s onwards, leading also to a large boom in population growth, whilst America remained largely agrarian for some time.
I don't think it was until the 1860s/1870s that the USA overtook the UK, probably delayed by the civil war too.
OTOH (and bearing in mind the existence of alternative sources such as Egypt and the Windies) the UK industrial revolution remained partly dependent on US agrarianism, or rather slave plantationism, for critical resources - cotton, sugar (for cheap urban proletariat fodder), etc.
Thats the modern Woke take and almost certainly bollocks.
I was reading aboutr that decades ago - possibly before you were born.
For instance, the problems caused in Lancashire by the American Civil War.
Just read that the Americans paid a huge economic price for independence: per capita income collapsed by 46% between 1774 and 1790, and as late as 1805 per capita wealth was still around 14% lower than it had been in 1774.
Of course, it had all paid off about a century later but breaking up integrated empires and trading blocs does come at a price - sometimes for many decades.
Your issue is that a recent departure from a “trading bloc” was not sold as such. Economic benefits, or at least the no diminution in economic prosperity, were promised by your band or merry charlatans. The American Revolutionaries were absolutely upfront about it.
In other words -
“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.” - Samuel Adams
vs
"There will be no non-tariff barriers to trade" — Boris Johnson (or “There will be no downside to Brexit, only a considerable upside.” - David Davis. Others are available on request).
Though the American revolution had as a spark a refusal to pay taxes.
WTF has that got to do with this specific discussion?
Paying fewer taxes, especially to an overseas government, means you keep the money for yourself.
I'm confident that there were plenty of American revolutionaries who thought they would become richer if they could exploit the continent without the restrictions Britain placed on them.
They lost a lot of population (by choice, because they basically booted out the Loyalists) in the advent of the American Revolution, lost some trading advantages and then had to build all the infrastructure of an independent country whilst rebuilding from extensive war damage to several ports and cities. Meanwhile the UK started to rapidly industralise from the 1780s onwards, leading also to a large boom in population growth, whilst America remained largely agrarian for some time.
I don't think it was until the 1860s/1870s that the USA overtook the UK, probably delayed by the civil war too.
OTOH (and bearing in mind the existence of alternative sources such as Egypt and the Windies) the UK industrial revolution remained partly dependent on US agrarianism, or rather slave plantationism, for critical resources - cotton, sugar (for cheap urban proletariat fodder), etc.
Thats the modern Woke take and almost certainly bollocks.
Oh here we go again…academic view based on extensive research is dismissed as “woke” and “bollocks”. I swoon at the intellectual rigour.
All very true. One problem for Labour, however, is that any policy it announces which seems popular can immediately be pinched by the Conservatives. Whether it has any such policies, we might find out closer to the election.
That is always a risk in politics, it doesn't seem to matter if the public attitude I'd in your favour.
And if you come up with a policy the government steals, well that’s good. Assuming it’s an effective policy, it’s good for the country and you get to crow about how the other side nicked it.
The Lib Dems have a track record of proposing policies which then Labour adopts (and sometimes the Tories). They’re not the best at crowing about them but it does at least mean they get some influence.
A significant part of the good that the coalition government did was LibDem policies. Yes I give credit to Cameron in acquiescing, but gay marriage, pupil premium funding, raising the tax free threshold - they were ours.
I reckon Sunak has now seriously begun to formulate an election-winning strategy that he thinks will secure victory. It's based around transport. It consists of:
- Save the motorist. Abandon HS2, ban LTNs and ULEZ. - Stop the boats. - A helipad in every neighbourhood.
Abandoning HS2 only makes sense if he's given up all hope of winning seats in the north.
Northerners use roads not railways.
That would surprise anyone using the Tyneside metro, or the Sheffield trams.
Over 80% of journeys are made by car, proportionally even more so outside London.
On public transport more journeys are made by bus than rail.
Notice how much politicians, the media and PB talk about trains compared with buses ?
Trains are a male middle class obsession.
Memories of the Rocket and Mallard when Britain led the world.
Plus childhood Hornby railways.
Our village of 3,000 people, in Ashford Kent PC, just lost its bus service. Little things like that, even for people who don’t use the bus, don’t go unnoticed and are not a tick in the Tory box. I note that Damien Green tried and failed to run from Ashford, Ashford FFS, to Weald of Kent next door.
Yes, bus services have declined noticeably over the last decade. My bus route is threatened again by our Tory council. Red Wall voters are often older and reliant on buses.
I was also re-thinking @TSE's point about Labour potential unpopularity and it seems more flawed than I thought.
If you're not that into their policies then you're less, not more, likely not to be disappointed. If your expectations aren't high, Labour aren't going to let you down.
So it might turn out the opposite of what people like Casino Royale hope. Indeed, it's entirely plausible that with a low bar of expectation, Labour exceed them.
Might be that rare example of a party increasing its majority the second time election after their historic win, especially if the Conservatives have continued their lurch into the wilderness Right.
I reckon Sunak has now seriously begun to formulate an election-winning strategy that he thinks will secure victory. It's based around transport. It consists of:
- Save the motorist. Abandon HS2, ban LTNs and ULEZ. - Stop the boats. - A helipad in every neighbourhood.
Abandoning HS2 only makes sense if he's given up all hope of winning seats in the north.
Northerners use roads not railways.
That would surprise anyone using the Tyneside metro, or the Sheffield trams.
Over 80% of journeys are made by car, proportionally even more so outside London.
On public transport more journeys are made by bus than rail.
From that source, the 80%+ figure is "passenger km", not "journeys" (or "trips" as they call them).
When counted in "trips" the "trips by car" share falls to around 60-65%.
But that has nothing to do with the current arguments, which are about short local trips of just a few miles, and whether people living in a housing area are to be forced to endure rat-runners driving at dangerously high speed down their residential streets, or not.
The Government are doubling down on this, and sod the human cost - what do a few thousand extra dead people from road kill or chronic conditions matter if it saves the Government's political skin?
From the Guardian piece linked earlier:
Downing Street is reportedly considering a ban on councils introducing new LTNs (although government sources described this as “speculation”), as well as denying local authorities access to the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency database, making the zones unenforceable.
This follows an announcement earlier this year that LTNs would no longer be able to be created using government money. For cash-strapped councils already struggling to make ends meet, the decision may lead to them scrapping their plans altogether. This has prompted questions as to whether we are seeing the end of LTNs nationally.
What does "all new LTNs" mean? Pretty much all new housing developments are LTNs - mandatory arterial routes through residential areas?
Banning access to the DVLA database is silly because it will push councils towards rising bollards, which is in practice a much better way to keep people safe from unregistered drivers who wouldn't care about a fine anyway.
I assume it will cause problems for other types of enforcement like parking too.
"Lib Dem councillor suggests he’d gas anti-Ulez campaigners Michael Tarling says he would ‘happily fill the room with carbon monoxide’ in response to post about meeting against new zone"
Just read that the Americans paid a huge economic price for independence: per capita income collapsed by 46% between 1774 and 1790, and as late as 1805 per capita wealth was still around 14% lower than it had been in 1774.
Of course, it had all paid off about a century later but breaking up integrated empires and trading blocs does come at a price - sometimes for many decades.
Your issue is that a recent departure from a “trading bloc” was not sold as such. Economic benefits, or at least the no diminution in economic prosperity, were promised by your band or merry charlatans. The American Revolutionaries were absolutely upfront about it.
In other words -
“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.” - Samuel Adams
vs
"There will be no non-tariff barriers to trade" — Boris Johnson (or “There will be no downside to Brexit, only a considerable upside.” - David Davis. Others are available on request).
Though the American revolution had as a spark a refusal to pay taxes.
WTF has that got to do with this specific discussion?
Paying fewer taxes, especially to an overseas government, means you keep the money for yourself.
I'm confident that there were plenty of American revolutionaries who thought they would become richer if they could exploit the continent without the restrictions Britain placed on them.
They lost a lot of population (by choice, because they basically booted out the Loyalists) in the advent of the American Revolution, lost some trading advantages and then had to build all the infrastructure of an independent country whilst rebuilding from extensive war damage to several ports and cities. Meanwhile the UK started to rapidly industralise from the 1780s onwards, leading also to a large boom in population growth, whilst America remained largely agrarian for some time.
I don't think it was until the 1860s/1870s that the USA overtook the UK, probably delayed by the civil war too.
OTOH (and bearing in mind the existence of alternative sources such as Egypt and the Windies) the UK industrial revolution remained partly dependent on US agrarianism, or rather slave plantationism, for critical resources - cotton, sugar (for cheap urban proletariat fodder), etc.
Thats the modern Woke take and almost certainly bollocks.
Oh here we go again…academic view based on extensive research is dismissed as “woke” and “bollocks”. I swoon at the intellectual rigour.
I must say I was a bit taken aback to see such references as the Spectator in 1864 dismissed as modern wokery and in terms more appropriate for Mrs Dorries's Australian dinners al fresco.
Given the size and stability of Labour's lead in the polls, I'd have thought the best bet for Starmer is simply to carry on doing what he is doing for now. There's no point pissing anyone off or tying his own hands with specific policy announcements when he doesn't need to. No big promises, and hope to surprise on the upside once in power.
That is clearly the plan, but I do think the current Labour front bench policy of timidity and fear will be so ingrained that they won't be able to campaign positively when the time comes.
A Starmer government will benefit from a return to growth though, as the current economic flatlining and retrenchment ends. The last 18 months of the Sunak government are going to get most of the economic misery as debt laden individuals and companies fail. The economic cycle will turn, as it always does, and that timing will be good for Starmer and Reeves.
I will be voting LD or Green though, depending on the local situation in my constituency.
I’ll be voting LD as usual and, as usual, it’ll make zero difference because of our voting system which disenfranchises people in safe seats and over-enfranchises people in marginals. My constituency has a 30k+ Labour majority and Lewisham borough has 50/50 Labour councillors.
Starmer’s best plan if he wants to reinforce the look of a government in waiting is to get the focus on to the other shadow cabinet members and their respective briefs. As indeed he seems to be doing.
The Lib Dems should propose a slew of interesting new policies, in a think tanky sort of way. To prod Labour a bit.
1. Labour hasn't got much of a winning positive message, unlike in 1997 and 2017 - and indeed in 2019 when it was crushed.
2. Starmer is not an attractive figure. Can we imagine at Glastonbury, "Oooooh, Sir Keir!"
3. There's nothing yet like the sleaze stories of the final months of the Major administration, which was the time of the Blair sunrise, and no rerun of sleaze may be around the corner either. (Nice it would be, sure, but nice doesn't always happen.)
4. A little bit of a Tory recovery will do wonders for Tory morale, given that Tories are basically a bunch of whingeing crybaby herdthinkers who wet their expensive underwear at whatever is said in that day's poll, and who fear big strong foreign orcs coming round their places and removing their right to inherit wealth, but who are bound to believe that all is right in the world once again as soon as the Heil or the Torygraph tell them on their front pages that Labour have started to lose points in the polls to Reform, and that the Con->Lab segment has started to shrink. And what's that I hear? Oh there's been a skirmish or a bit of brushfire action for "our boys" in the Baltic Sea or somewhere else, or somebody whoopsadaisy sank a refugee boat and oh dear how the liberals and lefties and wokers complained, it was like music to our ears, let's show support for our side...
Anybody who thinks the Tories will be 20pp behind Labour in the next election is a moron.
IMO the Tories will win most seats and may well win a majority.
I reckon Sunak has now seriously begun to formulate an election-winning strategy that he thinks will secure victory. It's based around transport. It consists of:
- Save the motorist. Abandon HS2, ban LTNs and ULEZ. - Stop the boats. - A helipad in every neighbourhood.
Abandoning HS2 only makes sense if he's given up all hope of winning seats in the north.
Northerners use roads not railways.
That would surprise anyone using the Tyneside metro, or the Sheffield trams.
Yes. Tyneside Metro is awesome. And very well used.
I reckon Sunak has now seriously begun to formulate an election-winning strategy that he thinks will secure victory. It's based around transport. It consists of:
- Save the motorist. Abandon HS2, ban LTNs and ULEZ. - Stop the boats. - A helipad in every neighbourhood.
Abandoning HS2 only makes sense if he's given up all hope of winning seats in the north.
Northerners use roads not railways.
That would surprise anyone using the Tyneside metro, or the Sheffield trams.
Over 80% of journeys are made by car, proportionally even more so outside London.
On public transport more journeys are made by bus than rail.
Notice how much politicians, the media and PB talk about trains compared with buses ?
Trains are a male middle class obsession.
Memories of the Rocket and Mallard when Britain led the world.
Plus childhood Hornby railways.
Our village of 3,000 people, in Ashford Kent PC, just lost its bus service. Little things like that, even for people who don’t use the bus, don’t go unnoticed and are not a tick in the Tory box. I note that Damien Green tried and failed to run from Ashford, Ashford FFS, to Weald of Kent next door.
Yes, bus services have declined noticeably over the last decade. My bus route is threatened again by our Tory council. Red Wall voters are often older and reliant on buses.
I am not surprised that the USA declined in GDP per capita by 46% between 1770 and 1790. It was in a state of civil war, with Patriot controlled areas economically blockaded by British control of the seas. The war ended in 1783, but it was only with the US Constitution in 1789 that a single market and currency was established, setting the foundations of economic growth.
The exodus of often wealthy Loyalists to what is now Canada, the West Indies and back to GB must have significantly contributed to loss of both economic and social capital.
I reckon Sunak has now seriously begun to formulate an election-winning strategy that he thinks will secure victory. It's based around transport. It consists of:
- Save the motorist. Abandon HS2, ban LTNs and ULEZ. - Stop the boats. - A helipad in every neighbourhood.
Abandoning HS2 only makes sense if he's given up all hope of winning seats in the north.
Northerners use roads not railways.
That would surprise anyone using the Tyneside metro, or the Sheffield trams.
Over 80% of journeys are made by car, proportionally even more so outside London.
On public transport more journeys are made by bus than rail.
Notice how much politicians, the media and PB talk about trains compared with buses ?
Trains are a male middle class obsession.
Memories of the Rocket and Mallard when Britain led the world.
Plus childhood Hornby railways.
Our village of 3,000 people, in Ashford Kent PC, just lost its bus service. Little things like that, even for people who don’t use the bus, don’t go unnoticed and are not a tick in the Tory box. I note that Damien Green tried and failed to run from Ashford, Ashford FFS, to Weald of Kent next door.
Yes, bus services have declined noticeably over the last decade. My bus route is threatened again by our Tory council. Red Wall voters are often older and reliant on buses.
Just read that the Americans paid a huge economic price for independence: per capita income collapsed by 46% between 1774 and 1790, and as late as 1805 per capita wealth was still around 14% lower than it had been in 1774.
Of course, it had all paid off about a century later but breaking up integrated empires and trading blocs does come at a price - sometimes for many decades.
Your issue is that a recent departure from a “trading bloc” was not sold as such. Economic benefits, or at least the no diminution in economic prosperity, were promised by your band or merry charlatans. The American Revolutionaries were absolutely upfront about it.
In other words -
“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.” - Samuel Adams
vs
"There will be no non-tariff barriers to trade" — Boris Johnson (or “There will be no downside to Brexit, only a considerable upside.” - David Davis. Others are available on request).
Though the American revolution had as a spark a refusal to pay taxes.
WTF has that got to do with this specific discussion?
Paying fewer taxes, especially to an overseas government, means you keep the money for yourself.
I'm confident that there were plenty of American revolutionaries who thought they would become richer if they could exploit the continent without the restrictions Britain placed on them.
They lost a lot of population (by choice, because they basically booted out the Loyalists) in the advent of the American Revolution, lost some trading advantages and then had to build all the infrastructure of an independent country whilst rebuilding from extensive war damage to several ports and cities. Meanwhile the UK started to rapidly industralise from the 1780s onwards, leading also to a large boom in population growth, whilst America remained largely agrarian for some time.
I don't think it was until the 1860s/1870s that the USA overtook the UK, probably delayed by the civil war too.
OTOH (and bearing in mind the existence of alternative sources such as Egypt and the Windies) the UK industrial revolution remained partly dependent on US agrarianism, or rather slave plantationism, for critical resources - cotton, sugar (for cheap urban proletariat fodder), etc.
Thats the modern Woke take and almost certainly bollocks.
Oh here we go again…academic view based on extensive research is dismissed as “woke” and “bollocks”. I swoon at the intellectual rigour.
I must say I was a bit taken aback to see such references as the Spectator in 1864 dismissed as modern wokery and in terms more appropriate for Mrs Dorries's Australian dinners al fresco.
I distinctly remember referencing the Lancashire Cotton Famine resulting from reliance on Southern US supply in my A-Level History exam. Perhaps my offer from Oxford and my subsequent life should simply be cancelled as being “woke”. And the Spectator too.
"Lib Dem councillor suggests he’d gas anti-Ulez campaigners Michael Tarling says he would ‘happily fill the room with carbon monoxide’ in response to post about meeting against new zone"
Just read that the Americans paid a huge economic price for independence: per capita income collapsed by 46% between 1774 and 1790, and as late as 1805 per capita wealth was still around 14% lower than it had been in 1774.
Of course, it had all paid off about a century later but breaking up integrated empires and trading blocs does come at a price - sometimes for many decades.
Your issue is that a recent departure from a “trading bloc” was not sold as such. Economic benefits, or at least the no diminution in economic prosperity, were promised by your band or merry charlatans. The American Revolutionaries were absolutely upfront about it.
In other words -
“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.” - Samuel Adams
vs
"There will be no non-tariff barriers to trade" — Boris Johnson (or “There will be no downside to Brexit, only a considerable upside.” - David Davis. Others are available on request).
Though the American revolution had as a spark a refusal to pay taxes.
WTF has that got to do with this specific discussion?
Paying fewer taxes, especially to an overseas government, means you keep the money for yourself.
I'm confident that there were plenty of American revolutionaries who thought they would become richer if they could exploit the continent without the restrictions Britain placed on them.
Debatable and in any event nothing to do with the point that CR or I were discussing.
Given that the UK hasn't had a 46% fall in per capita income as the early USA did then the relevance of comparing Samuel Adams to David Davis is more than dubious.
In reality the working class Leave block which voted for immigration control, higher wages and more spending on the NHS has got what it wanted.
While the middle class extremists, on both sides, the 'go global' Brexiteers and the 'job losses and pension cuts' Remainers are both disappointed.
They've got higher immigration, real terms pay cuts and a postcode lottery NHS struggling to do the basics.
They've got lower immigration than they would have got, fuller employment than they would have got, higher pay than they would have got and higher NHS spending than they would have got.
And many are doing very well for themselves.
Is it a 'land of milk and honey' ? Certainly not but anyone who expected it to be so was fooling themselves. Likewise anyone who expected a Corbyn government to bring the New Jerusalem or expects a Starmer government to lead to an earthly paradise are fooling themselves.
Because the world has fundamental problems, the western world has fundamental problems, this country has fundamental problems, most areas have fundamental problems and many individuals have fundamental problems.
And few of those problems will disappear, or indeed did disappear, by changes in government or to international trading relationships.
I reckon Sunak has now seriously begun to formulate an election-winning strategy that he thinks will secure victory. It's based around transport. It consists of:
- Save the motorist. Abandon HS2, ban LTNs and ULEZ. - Stop the boats. - A helipad in every neighbourhood.
Abandoning HS2 only makes sense if he's given up all hope of winning seats in the north.
Northerners use roads not railways.
That would surprise anyone using the Tyneside metro, or the Sheffield trams.
Over 80% of journeys are made by car, proportionally even more so outside London.
On public transport more journeys are made by bus than rail.
From that source, the 80%+ figure is "passenger km", not "journeys" (or "trips" as they call them).
When counted in "trips" the "trips by car" share falls to around 60-65%.
But that has nothing to do with the current arguments, which are about short local trips of just a few miles, and whether people living in a housing area are to be forced to endure rat-runners driving at dangerously high speed down their residential streets, or not.
The Government are doubling down on this, and sod the human cost - what do a few thousand extra dead people from road kill or chronic conditions matter if it saves the Government's political skin?
From the Guardian piece linked earlier:
Downing Street is reportedly considering a ban on councils introducing new LTNs (although government sources described this as “speculation”), as well as denying local authorities access to the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency database, making the zones unenforceable.
This follows an announcement earlier this year that LTNs would no longer be able to be created using government money. For cash-strapped councils already struggling to make ends meet, the decision may lead to them scrapping their plans altogether. This has prompted questions as to whether we are seeing the end of LTNs nationally.
What does "all new LTNs" mean? Pretty much all new housing developments are LTNs - mandatory arterial routes through residential areas?
Banning access to the DVLA database is silly because it will push councils towards rising bollards, which is in practice a much better way to keep people safe from unregistered drivers who wouldn't care about a fine anyway.
I assume it will cause problems for other types of enforcement like parking too.
They would let commercial firms have access to the database but not LAs, out of sheer spite and political extremism?
Just read that the Americans paid a huge economic price for independence: per capita income collapsed by 46% between 1774 and 1790, and as late as 1805 per capita wealth was still around 14% lower than it had been in 1774.
Of course, it had all paid off about a century later but breaking up integrated empires and trading blocs does come at a price - sometimes for many decades.
Your issue is that a recent departure from a “trading bloc” was not sold as such. Economic benefits, or at least the no diminution in economic prosperity, were promised by your band or merry charlatans. The American Revolutionaries were absolutely upfront about it.
In other words -
“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.” - Samuel Adams
vs
"There will be no non-tariff barriers to trade" — Boris Johnson (or “There will be no downside to Brexit, only a considerable upside.” - David Davis. Others are available on request).
Though the American revolution had as a spark a refusal to pay taxes.
WTF has that got to do with this specific discussion?
Paying fewer taxes, especially to an overseas government, means you keep the money for yourself.
I'm confident that there were plenty of American revolutionaries who thought they would become richer if they could exploit the continent without the restrictions Britain placed on them.
Debatable and in any event nothing to do with the point that CR or I were discussing.
Given that the UK hasn't had a 46% fall in per capita income as the early USA did then the relevance of comparing Samuel Adams to David Davis is more than dubious.
In reality the working class Leave block which voted for immigration control, higher wages and more spending on the NHS has got what it wanted.
While the middle class extremists, on both sides, the 'go global' Brexiteers and the 'job losses and pension cuts' Remainers are both disappointed.
People who use the NHS couldn't give a monkey's whether more money is spent on it or less. They're not accountants or public administration wonks. What they want is the standard of service to improve...or in many cases to re-enter existence. There are many who have been waiting years for proper treatment. Of course they haven't got what they wanted.
Who cares about Brexit? Just another bunch of broken promises by politician c***s - that's how many see it, and indeed rightly.
I wonder how many who voted all those years ago in 2014 in the EU membership referendum even remember which option they voted for. A significantly smaller proportion than the proportion of PB contributors and readers who remember.
"Brexiteers" and "Remainers" .... you're fighting the last war.
Given the size and stability of Labour's lead in the polls, I'd have thought the best bet for Starmer is simply to carry on doing what he is doing for now. There's no point pissing anyone off or tying his own hands with specific policy announcements when he doesn't need to. No big promises, and hope to surprise on the upside once in power.
That is clearly the plan, but I do think the current Labour front bench policy of timidity and fear will be so ingrained that they won't be able to campaign positively when the time comes.
A Starmer government will benefit from a return to growth though, as the current economic flatlining and retrenchment ends. The last 18 months of the Sunak government are going to get most of the economic misery as debt laden individuals and companies fail. The economic cycle will turn, as it always does, and that timing will be good for Starmer and Reeves.
I will be voting LD or Green though, depending on the local situation in my constituency.
Will also get nicer subsidised restaurants according to Starmer , “Somebody needs to set up a really nice sort of restaurant or takeaway in the House of Commons". He has his priorities right.
Just read that the Americans paid a huge economic price for independence: per capita income collapsed by 46% between 1774 and 1790, and as late as 1805 per capita wealth was still around 14% lower than it had been in 1774.
Of course, it had all paid off about a century later but breaking up integrated empires and trading blocs does come at a price - sometimes for many decades.
Your issue is that a recent departure from a “trading bloc” was not sold as such. Economic benefits, or at least the no diminution in economic prosperity, were promised by your band or merry charlatans. The American Revolutionaries were absolutely upfront about it.
In other words -
“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.” - Samuel Adams
vs
"There will be no non-tariff barriers to trade" — Boris Johnson (or “There will be no downside to Brexit, only a considerable upside.” - David Davis. Others are available on request).
Though the American revolution had as a spark a refusal to pay taxes.
WTF has that got to do with this specific discussion?
Paying fewer taxes, especially to an overseas government, means you keep the money for yourself.
I'm confident that there were plenty of American revolutionaries who thought they would become richer if they could exploit the continent without the restrictions Britain placed on them.
Debatable and in any event nothing to do with the point that CR or I were discussing.
Given that the UK hasn't had a 46% fall in per capita income as the early USA did then the relevance of comparing Samuel Adams to David Davis is more than dubious.
In reality the working class Leave block which voted for immigration control, higher wages and more spending on the NHS has got what it wanted.
While the middle class extremists, on both sides, the 'go global' Brexiteers and the 'job losses and pension cuts' Remainers are both disappointed.
But they haven't have they? No immigration control, it's even worse than before. Some signs of higher wages at first but subsequently overtaken by inflation. No obvious signs of extra money in the NHS, and waiting lists are worse due to the government's stubbornness on pay. SO that's 0/3 for much of the Working Class Leave block too.
Comments
I suppose that part of the problem is that the sort of person who might have good ideas about producitivty is unlikely to get anywhere in politics where promising that we can have our cake and eat it is de rigueur.
On public transport more journeys are made by bus than rail.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/870647/tsgb-2019.pdf
Notice how much politicians, the media and PB talk about trains compared with buses ?
Trains are a male middle class obsession.
Memories of the Rocket and Mallard when Britain led the world.
Plus childhood Hornby railways.
Brief but pointed analysis in the header, which seems logical.
Mr Starmer needs to start talking about his policies, rather than Hiding in a Grey Cloak like a Hobbit Walking to Mordor.
If Sir Bland waltzes off on his anti-Brexit crusade he;s simply going to wake the sleeping dogs and then youll have a bigger problem.
Local media reports inaccurately claimed that a second trial of a livable neighbourhood in south Bristol had been paused, with Alexander confirming to the Observer that this was not the case.
“It was always intended that the East Bristol Liveable Neighbourhood scheme would be a pilot to inform future schemes,” he said.
Step 1, have Truss/Sunak/JRM on the opposition benches.
Lest we forget, Starmer is a proven lawyer, and lawyers know not to ask questions until they are sure what the answer is.
But the first step is getting the nutters out of office. Something in which the nutters are proving surprisingly co-operative.
Also, more arguably, the thirteen years since 2010 have seen four governments: a coalition for five years, Conservative without a working majority for two years, Conservative minority for two more years, then Conservative with an overall majority only since 2019 (and even then, with two years of the pandemic and without a serious opposition and with a barely functioning Parliament, it was a bit like a wartime national government during that strange time). Very different from the three working majority terms that Mrs Thatcher and Blair had, for instance.
Plenty of us on here admitted there would be a short-term economic cost to Brexit and its nothing like what the Irish or Americans had to pay for their independence. So your comparison is both defensive, disingenuous and highly selective - all at the same time.
More broadly, you are easily the poster easiest to provoke on this subject on here: you come in ever so slightly behind Scott_xP for pure invective hyperbole.
I'm confident that there were plenty of American revolutionaries who thought they would become richer if they could exploit the continent without the restrictions Britain placed on them.
Your so called "nutters" are only behaving themselves since they are the government. Once outside its gloves off. The Remainers are simply getting an easy time atm because nobody is running with daily guff which comes from the EU bureaucracy machine, We had a glimpse of how things might go on the vaccine spat when being outside was suddenly seen as a good thing. That will be the norm of and the popularity of the EU will reverse if the stay outs have a free hand,
Maybe we should have done what the Patriots did to the Loyalists: burned and seized all their property, and chased them out the country
Not seen the 'national government' variation of it for awhile.
I'm perfectly happy with Brexit.
Are you really a lawyer ?
The Lib Dems have a track record of proposing policies which then Labour adopts (and sometimes the Tories). They’re not the best at crowing about them but it does at least mean they get some influence.
I don't think it was until the 1860s/1870s that the USA overtook the UK, probably delayed by the civil war too.
Remainers havent had the big downside they forecast
Leavers havent produced the big upside they forecast
Scoreless draw.
However changing the status quo simply opens the can of worms. Going back in requires sacrifices for indeterminate benefits. The polls will quickly change.
When counted in "trips" the "trips by car" share falls to around 60-65%.
But that has nothing to do with the current arguments, which are about short local trips of just a few miles, and whether people living in a housing area are to be forced to endure rat-runners driving at dangerously high speed down their residential streets, or not.
The Government are doubling down on this, and sod the human cost - what do a few thousand extra dead people from road kill or chronic conditions matter if it saves the Government's political skin?
From the Guardian piece linked earlier:
Downing Street is reportedly considering a ban on councils introducing new LTNs (although government sources described this as “speculation”), as well as denying local authorities access to the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency database, making the zones unenforceable.
This follows an announcement earlier this year that LTNs would no longer be able to be created using government money. For cash-strapped councils already struggling to make ends meet, the decision may lead to them scrapping their plans altogether. This has prompted questions as to whether we are seeing the end of LTNs nationally.
In reality the working class Leave block which voted for immigration control, higher wages and more spending on the NHS has got what it wanted.
While the middle class extremists, on both sides, the 'go global' Brexiteers and the 'job losses and pension cuts' Remainers are both disappointed.
Anyway thrilling as this is I now have to go out and buy Sunday lunch,
And I shall reflect on the words of @CR to you just down thread
"It's remarkable how instantly you lose you shit the second you think Brexit has come up as a subject. Quite quite deranged."
He has a point.
https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/news/local-news/bus-firm-says-100-villages-8135355
Corbyn was mocked for asking about buses at PMQs, but he was right about them being a lifeline for many.
Given his alleged multiple identities, I'm not sure that he's the ideal poster boy for this particular campaign.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/11/23/failed-control-borders-suella-braverman-admits/
“Higher wages”. (LOL)
https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/earningsandworkinghours/articles/professionalandscientificindustrytheonlyonewherepaycontinuestomatchrisingprices/2022-11-23
“More spending on the NHS”. (PMSL)
https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/sites/default/files/2023-04/Rise_and_Decline_of_the_NHS_April_2023.pdf
They wouldn't let us back in any time soon, and certainly not on the terms which we once had.
A Starmer government will benefit from a return to growth though, as the current economic flatlining and retrenchment ends. The last 18 months of the Sunak government are going to get most of the economic misery as debt laden individuals and companies fail. The economic cycle will turn, as it always does, and that timing will be good for Starmer and Reeves.
I will be voting LD or Green though, depending on the local situation in my constituency.
Though walking does tend to be alongside roads.
As to the effects of driving then that, of course, varies depending on the location.
And inner urban driving is certainly very different to that in conurbation sprawls and rural areas.
Personally I'd say such decisions tend to be better decided locally but few politicians can resist imposing their prejudices.
For instance, the problems caused in Lancashire by the American Civil War.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lancashire_Cotton_Famine
If you're not that into their policies then you're less, not more, likely not to be disappointed. If your expectations aren't high, Labour aren't going to let you down.
So it might turn out the opposite of what people like Casino Royale hope. Indeed, it's entirely plausible that with a low bar of expectation, Labour exceed them.
Might be that rare example of a party increasing its majority the second time election after their historic win, especially if the Conservatives have continued their lurch into the wilderness Right.
Banning access to the DVLA database is silly because it will push councils towards rising bollards, which is in practice a much better way to keep people safe from unregistered drivers who wouldn't care about a fine anyway.
I assume it will cause problems for other types of enforcement like parking too.
Michael Tarling says he would ‘happily fill the room with carbon monoxide’ in response to post about meeting against new zone"
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/07/29/lib-dem-suggests-he-would-gas-anti-ulez-campaigners/
Only ever seen a couple of FE races. Quite good, though if they don't have to change cars any more that's removing some of the amusing silliness.
http://archive.spectator.co.uk/article/13th-august-1864/19/the-facts-of-the-cotton-famine
Starmer’s best plan if he wants to reinforce the look of a government in waiting is to get the focus on to the other shadow cabinet members and their respective briefs. As indeed he seems to be doing.
The Lib Dems should propose a slew of interesting new policies, in a think tanky sort of way. To prod Labour a bit.
1. Labour hasn't got much of a winning positive message, unlike in 1997 and 2017 - and indeed in 2019 when it was crushed.
2. Starmer is not an attractive figure. Can we imagine at Glastonbury, "Oooooh, Sir Keir!"
3. There's nothing yet like the sleaze stories of the final months of the Major administration, which was the time of the Blair sunrise, and no rerun of sleaze may be around the corner either. (Nice it would be, sure, but nice doesn't always happen.)
4. A little bit of a Tory recovery will do wonders for Tory morale, given that Tories are basically a bunch of whingeing crybaby herdthinkers who wet their expensive underwear at whatever is said in that day's poll, and who fear big strong foreign orcs coming round their places and removing their right to inherit wealth, but who are bound to believe that all is right in the world once again as soon as the Heil or the Torygraph tell them on their front pages that Labour have started to lose points in the polls to Reform, and that the Con->Lab segment has started to shrink. And what's that I hear? Oh there's been a skirmish or a bit of brushfire action for "our boys" in the Baltic Sea or somewhere else, or somebody whoopsadaisy sank a refugee boat and oh dear how the liberals and lefties and wokers complained, it was like music to our ears, let's show support for our side...
Anybody who thinks the Tories will be 20pp behind Labour in the next election is a moron.
IMO the Tories will win most seats and may well win a majority.
a) rattled
and
b) rather an unpleasant person
The exodus of often wealthy Loyalists to what is now Canada, the West Indies and back to GB must have significantly contributed to loss of both economic and social capital.
What are the anti-Ulez campaigners, should they be successful, likely to tacitly do to the babies of London?
And many are doing very well for themselves.
Is it a 'land of milk and honey' ? Certainly not but anyone who expected it to be so was fooling themselves. Likewise anyone who expected a Corbyn government to bring the New Jerusalem or expects a Starmer government to lead to an earthly paradise are fooling themselves.
Because the world has fundamental problems, the western world has fundamental problems, this country has fundamental problems, most areas have fundamental problems and many individuals have fundamental problems.
And few of those problems will disappear, or indeed did disappear, by changes in government or to international trading relationships.
Who cares about Brexit? Just another bunch of broken promises by politician c***s - that's how many see it, and indeed rightly.
I wonder how many who voted all those years ago in 2014 in the EU membership referendum even remember which option they voted for. A significantly smaller proportion than the proportion of PB contributors and readers who remember.
"Brexiteers" and "Remainers" .... you're fighting the last war.