Howdy, Stranger!

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

Suddenly the betting money goes on Michelle Obama – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 11,002
edited February 12 in General
imageSuddenly the betting money goes on Michelle Obama – politicalbetting.com

One of the big developments in the WH2024 race is the growing interest in Michelle Obama being the Democratic nominee.

Read the full story here

«13456789

Comments

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,311
    Would only happen if Biden dropped out and transferred his delegates to her at the convention which seems unlikely and she shows little interest in running either
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,311
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,676
    Hmm
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,420
    There's actually been a poll by Atlas Intel that shows Michelle Obama beating Trump.

    https://twitter.com/atlas_intel/status/1756113410427687180

    image
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 2,316
    On topic: It's curious. I read the WaPo nearly every day, the NYT once a week, the Seattle Times once a week, and many other US news sources.

    I can not think, offhand, of any time, in recent months, that I have seen any of them mention Michelle Obama as a candidate for president. And that, I supppose, is because she has no interest in taking on such a thankless job, though she clearly enjoys being a celebrity.

    I suppose part of the difference between the views on Michelle here and there in the UK is that more people here understand that Barack Obama was not an outstanding success as president (or, in any of the other offices he has held).
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,243
    edited February 12
    Has Michelle Obama ever been elected to any sort of office so far?
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 2,316
    Andy_JS - No. She did serve in the Chicago government (machine) at a fairly high level.

    (It's been a while since I have paid attention to such matters, but I believe her father had a low-level patronage job in the old Daley machine.)
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,506
    HYUFD said:

    Would only happen if Biden dropped out and transferred his delegates to her at the convention which seems unlikely and she shows little interest in running either

    Here's the scenario:

    A week before the convention, Biden suffers a stroke. He is - clearly - not going to be running for President, and he's incapable of nominating a successor.

    Normally, Harris - as VP - would be a shoo in, but the polling is horrendous. She's going to lose by ten points to Trump.

    Michelle Obama, by contrast, leads Trump by five points.

    After a fractious convention, Obama (M) becomes nominee.

    I'd want more than 11-1, mind. Probably more like 111-1.

    I have a much, much better idea.

    Trump is obsessed with Obama. He wants to beat Obama.

    There's time to repeal the 22nd Amendment, and then the world can have a Trump-Obama showdown.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 60,485
    Huge call by Shanahan.
    I'd have taken the field goal.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 60,485
    Chiefs looking ominous.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 60,485
    Opinion | The Republican Fantasy that Democrats Will Replace Joe Biden
    No, Michelle Obama is not going to be the nominee.
    https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/02/09/republicans-joe-biden-nominee-swap-00140209
  • OT GB News website is partially paywalled. Who knew?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 60,485
    The deep state has engineered overtime.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,126
    edited February 12
    It's not suddenly, she's been at these silly numbers for ages on Polymarket which is the only place with any volume. If Betfair or wherever has only just caught up then it was probably just a matter of somebody getting around to making a Betfair account so they can arb the 25p or whatever is available there.

    Republicans are pushing these stories because they make Joe Biden look weak and Kamala Harris look useless. Biden should just come out and make it clear that if he had a medical emergency his delegates would back Kamala Harris. That's almost definitely what would happen, and if he doesn't say it the media will be chasing various shiny things all the way up to the convention.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,243
    If I were feeling generous, I would say whatever idiot negotiated our PFI contracts should be shot.

    If I were feeling ungenerous, I would say they should be forced to listen to Trump’s speeches on a loop for 24 hours first.

    Schools in budget crisis as PFI charges soar
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-68207051
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,126

    On topic: It's curious. I read the WaPo nearly every day, the NYT once a week, the Seattle Times once a week, and many other US news sources.

    I can not think, offhand, of any time, in recent months, that I have seen any of them mention Michelle Obama as a candidate for president. And that, I supppose, is because she has no interest in taking on such a thankless job, though she clearly enjoys being a celebrity.

    I suppose part of the difference between the views on Michelle here and there in the UK is that more people here understand that Barack Obama was not an outstanding success as president (or, in any of the other offices he has held).

    There was some media but it was the gossip columnist for the New York Post claiming she'd said she was running at a meeting of "big hedge funds" or some shit like that.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 4,526

    On topic: It's curious. I read the WaPo nearly every day, the NYT once a week, the Seattle Times once a week, and many other US news sources.

    I can not think, offhand, of any time, in recent months, that I have seen any of them mention Michelle Obama as a candidate for president. And that, I supppose, is because she has no interest in taking on such a thankless job, though she clearly enjoys being a celebrity.

    I suppose part of the difference between the views on Michelle here and there in the UK is that more people here understand that Barack Obama was not an outstanding success as president (or, in any of the other offices he has held).

    But ... but ... he won the Nobel Peace Prize for not being George W Bush.

    And he could bullshit endlessly on TV, looking like he meant it, at least when his teleprompter was working.

    Surely that makes him the greatest President ever, even though he achieved basically nothing?
  • ydoethur said:

    If I were feeling generous, I would say whatever idiot negotiated our PFI contracts should be shot.

    If I were feeling ungenerous, I would say they should be forced to listen to Trump’s speeches on a loop for 24 hours first.

    Schools in budget crisis as PFI charges soar
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-68207051

    Gordon Brown should be excoriated over PFI (not falsely blamed for the GFC). However, in this story it looks like the real flaw is automatic price rises with RPI inflation, the sort of thing everyone is familiar with on their phone contracts.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,243

    ydoethur said:

    If I were feeling generous, I would say whatever idiot negotiated our PFI contracts should be shot.

    If I were feeling ungenerous, I would say they should be forced to listen to Trump’s speeches on a loop for 24 hours first.

    Schools in budget crisis as PFI charges soar
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-68207051

    Gordon Brown should be excoriated over PFI (not falsely blamed for the GFC). However, in this story it looks like the real flaw is automatic price rises with RPI inflation, the sort of thing everyone is familiar with on their phone contracts.
    That’s one flaw.

    The number of things included in the contract is another.

    The poor quality of the buildings which mean half of them are already falling down is a third.

    The penalty clauses for exiting with the lack of penalty clauses for a company failing to honour its obligations is a fourth.

    The original prices which were far too high are a fifth.

    Using a measure of inflation the government didn’t use elsewhere is a sixth.

    So - using somebody who was clearly not a trained lawyer or possessed of a functioning brain to negotiate them was insanity.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 6,632
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    If I were feeling generous, I would say whatever idiot negotiated our PFI contracts should be shot.

    If I were feeling ungenerous, I would say they should be forced to listen to Trump’s speeches on a loop for 24 hours first.

    Schools in budget crisis as PFI charges soar
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-68207051

    Gordon Brown should be excoriated over PFI (not falsely blamed for the GFC). However, in this story it looks like the real flaw is automatic price rises with RPI inflation, the sort of thing everyone is familiar with on their phone contracts.
    That’s one flaw.

    The number of things included in the contract is another.

    The poor quality of the buildings which mean half of them are already falling down is a third.

    The penalty clauses for exiting with the lack of penalty clauses for a company failing to honour its obligations is a fourth.

    The original prices which were far too high are a fifth.

    Using a measure of inflation the government didn’t use elsewhere is a sixth.

    So - using somebody who was clearly not a trained lawyer or possessed of a functioning brain to negotiate them was insanity.
    The government was focused on laying all the risk and the off balance sheet accounting. They achieved those.

    Just because you think it is a bad deal doesn’t mean the negotiation was bad of the objectives were achieved.

    It means the objectoves were bad - and that is the fault of politicians not negotiators
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,243

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    If I were feeling generous, I would say whatever idiot negotiated our PFI contracts should be shot.

    If I were feeling ungenerous, I would say they should be forced to listen to Trump’s speeches on a loop for 24 hours first.

    Schools in budget crisis as PFI charges soar
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-68207051

    Gordon Brown should be excoriated over PFI (not falsely blamed for the GFC). However, in this story it looks like the real flaw is automatic price rises with RPI inflation, the sort of thing everyone is familiar with on their phone contracts.
    That’s one flaw.

    The number of things included in the contract is another.

    The poor quality of the buildings which mean half of them are already falling down is a third.

    The penalty clauses for exiting with the lack of penalty clauses for a company failing to honour its obligations is a fourth.

    The original prices which were far too high are a fifth.

    Using a measure of inflation the government didn’t use elsewhere is a sixth.

    So - using somebody who was clearly not a trained lawyer or possessed of a functioning brain to negotiate them was insanity.
    The government was focused on laying all the risk and the off balance sheet accounting. They achieved those.

    Just because you think it is a bad deal doesn’t mean the negotiation was bad of the objectives were achieved.

    It means the objectoves were bad - and that is the fault of politicians not negotiators
    Nice try.

    Let’s go over again who came up with penalty clauses which only work one way, and using the wrong measure of inflation…
  • ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    If I were feeling generous, I would say whatever idiot negotiated our PFI contracts should be shot.

    If I were feeling ungenerous, I would say they should be forced to listen to Trump’s speeches on a loop for 24 hours first.

    Schools in budget crisis as PFI charges soar
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-68207051

    Gordon Brown should be excoriated over PFI (not falsely blamed for the GFC). However, in this story it looks like the real flaw is automatic price rises with RPI inflation, the sort of thing everyone is familiar with on their phone contracts.
    That’s one flaw.

    The number of things included in the contract is another.

    The poor quality of the buildings which mean half of them are already falling down is a third.

    The penalty clauses for exiting with the lack of penalty clauses for a company failing to honour its obligations is a fourth.

    The original prices which were far too high are a fifth.

    Using a measure of inflation the government didn’t use elsewhere is a sixth.

    So - using somebody who was clearly not a trained lawyer or possessed of a functioning brain to negotiate them was insanity.
    The government was focused on laying all the risk and the off balance sheet accounting. They achieved those.

    Just because you think it is a bad deal doesn’t mean the negotiation was bad of the objectives were achieved.

    It means the objectoves were bad - and that is the fault of politicians not negotiators
    Negotiation was bad. In general, service companies who negotiate lots of contracts were up against naive first-timers.

    The reasoning was partly to avoid government borrowing but more than that, a magical belief in the power of the private sector.
  • Israel says two hostages rescued in Rafah as strikes reported
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-68271340

    Good news, albeit tempered by ongoing deaths and injuries.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 60,485
    edited February 12
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    If I were feeling generous, I would say whatever idiot negotiated our PFI contracts should be shot.

    If I were feeling ungenerous, I would say they should be forced to listen to Trump’s speeches on a loop for 24 hours first.

    Schools in budget crisis as PFI charges soar
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-68207051

    Gordon Brown should be excoriated over PFI (not falsely blamed for the GFC). However, in this story it looks like the real flaw is automatic price rises with RPI inflation, the sort of thing everyone is familiar with on their phone contracts.
    That’s one flaw.

    The number of things included in the contract is another.

    The poor quality of the buildings which mean half of them are already falling down is a third.

    The penalty clauses for exiting with the lack of penalty clauses for a company failing to honour its obligations is a fourth.

    The original prices which were far too high are a fifth.

    Using a measure of inflation the government didn’t use elsewhere is a sixth.

    So - using somebody who was clearly not a trained lawyer or possessed of a functioning brain to negotiate them was insanity.
    I said half a decade ago that government ought to have legislated to set aside contracts which were manifestly unfair.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 60,485

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    If I were feeling generous, I would say whatever idiot negotiated our PFI contracts should be shot.

    If I were feeling ungenerous, I would say they should be forced to listen to Trump’s speeches on a loop for 24 hours first.

    Schools in budget crisis as PFI charges soar
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-68207051

    Gordon Brown should be excoriated over PFI (not falsely blamed for the GFC). However, in this story it looks like the real flaw is automatic price rises with RPI inflation, the sort of thing everyone is familiar with on their phone contracts.
    That’s one flaw.

    The number of things included in the contract is another.

    The poor quality of the buildings which mean half of them are already falling down is a third.

    The penalty clauses for exiting with the lack of penalty clauses for a company failing to honour its obligations is a fourth.

    The original prices which were far too high are a fifth.

    Using a measure of inflation the government didn’t use elsewhere is a sixth.

    So - using somebody who was clearly not a trained lawyer or possessed of a functioning brain to negotiate them was insanity.
    The government was focused on laying all the risk and the off balance sheet accounting. They achieved those.

    Just because you think it is a bad deal doesn’t mean the negotiation was bad of the objectives were achieved.

    It means the objectoves were bad - and that is the fault of politicians not negotiators
    Negotiation was bad. In general, service companies who negotiate lots of contracts were up against naive first-timers.

    The reasoning was partly to avoid government borrowing but more than that, a magical belief in the power of the private sector.
    The private sector is indeed better at negotiating contracts.
  • TazTaz Posts: 10,339
    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    If I were feeling generous, I would say whatever idiot negotiated our PFI contracts should be shot.

    If I were feeling ungenerous, I would say they should be forced to listen to Trump’s speeches on a loop for 24 hours first.

    Schools in budget crisis as PFI charges soar
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-68207051

    Gordon Brown should be excoriated over PFI (not falsely blamed for the GFC). However, in this story it looks like the real flaw is automatic price rises with RPI inflation, the sort of thing everyone is familiar with on their phone contracts.
    That’s one flaw.

    The number of things included in the contract is another.

    The poor quality of the buildings which mean half of them are already falling down is a third.

    The penalty clauses for exiting with the lack of penalty clauses for a company failing to honour its obligations is a fourth.

    The original prices which were far too high are a fifth.

    Using a measure of inflation the government didn’t use elsewhere is a sixth.

    So - using somebody who was clearly not a trained lawyer or possessed of a functioning brain to negotiate them was insanity.
    I said hair a decade ago that government ought to have legislated to set aside contracts which were manifestly unfair.
    It will only be some terms in the contract that would be unfair.

    There is already legislation in place to deal with unfair contract terms.

    https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1977/50
  • TazTaz Posts: 10,339

    OT GB News website is partially paywalled. Who knew?

    An article about Sir Alan of Partridge came up in my feed the other day. Clicked it. It was GB News. Paywalled.

    It’s a no from me.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 60,485
    RFG Jnr seems to be a liar as well as a grifter.

    RFKJ apologizes to his family for a super PAC ad that is his pinned tweet
    https://twitter.com/SollenbergerRC/status/1756903979475161550
  • TazTaz Posts: 10,339
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    If I were feeling generous, I would say whatever idiot negotiated our PFI contracts should be shot.

    If I were feeling ungenerous, I would say they should be forced to listen to Trump’s speeches on a loop for 24 hours first.

    Schools in budget crisis as PFI charges soar
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-68207051

    Gordon Brown should be excoriated over PFI (not falsely blamed for the GFC). However, in this story it looks like the real flaw is automatic price rises with RPI inflation, the sort of thing everyone is familiar with on their phone contracts.
    That’s one flaw.

    The number of things included in the contract is another.

    The poor quality of the buildings which mean half of them are already falling down is a third.

    The penalty clauses for exiting with the lack of penalty clauses for a company failing to honour its obligations is a fourth.

    The original prices which were far too high are a fifth.

    Using a measure of inflation the government didn’t use elsewhere is a sixth.

    So - using somebody who was clearly not a trained lawyer or possessed of a functioning brain to negotiate them was insanity.
    The government was focused on laying all the risk and the off balance sheet accounting. They achieved those.

    Just because you think it is a bad deal doesn’t mean the negotiation was bad of the objectives were achieved.

    It means the objectoves were bad - and that is the fault of politicians not negotiators
    Nice try.

    Let’s go over again who came up with penalty clauses which only work one way, and using the wrong measure of inflation…
    How do you know the liquidated damages clauses only work one way ?

    What is the wording of them ?

    Would be interesting to see.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,190
    Fishing said:

    On topic: It's curious. I read the WaPo nearly every day, the NYT once a week, the Seattle Times once a week, and many other US news sources.

    I can not think, offhand, of any time, in recent months, that I have seen any of them mention Michelle Obama as a candidate for president. And that, I supppose, is because she has no interest in taking on such a thankless job, though she clearly enjoys being a celebrity.

    I suppose part of the difference between the views on Michelle here and there in the UK is that more people here understand that Barack Obama was not an outstanding success as president (or, in any of the other offices he has held).

    But ... but ... he won the Nobel Peace Prize for not being George W Bush.

    And he could bullshit endlessly on TV, looking like he meant it, at least when his teleprompter was working.

    Surely that makes him the greatest President ever, even though he achieved basically nothing?
    He killed bin laden, that was pretty rad
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,399
    Nigelb said:

    The deep state has engineered overtime.

    The MAGA babies do not seem to be talking Taylor Swift's win very well...
  • At least 50 killed in Gaza airstrikes as Israeli rescues two hostages
    https://www.itv.com/news/2024-02-12/at-least-50-killed-in-gaza-airstrikes-as-israeli-rescues-two-hostages

    The brutal calculus of war, or whatever this is.
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 5,954
    Taz said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    If I were feeling generous, I would say whatever idiot negotiated our PFI contracts should be shot.

    If I were feeling ungenerous, I would say they should be forced to listen to Trump’s speeches on a loop for 24 hours first.

    Schools in budget crisis as PFI charges soar
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-68207051

    Gordon Brown should be excoriated over PFI (not falsely blamed for the GFC). However, in this story it looks like the real flaw is automatic price rises with RPI inflation, the sort of thing everyone is familiar with on their phone contracts.
    That’s one flaw.

    The number of things included in the contract is another.

    The poor quality of the buildings which mean half of them are already falling down is a third.

    The penalty clauses for exiting with the lack of penalty clauses for a company failing to honour its obligations is a fourth.

    The original prices which were far too high are a fifth.

    Using a measure of inflation the government didn’t use elsewhere is a sixth.

    So - using somebody who was clearly not a trained lawyer or possessed of a functioning brain to negotiate them was insanity.
    The government was focused on laying all the risk and the off balance sheet accounting. They achieved those.

    Just because you think it is a bad deal doesn’t mean the negotiation was bad of the objectives were achieved.

    It means the objectoves were bad - and that is the fault of politicians not negotiators
    Nice try.

    Let’s go over again who came up with penalty clauses which only work one way, and using the wrong measure of inflation…
    How do you know the liquidated damages clauses only work one way ?

    What is the wording of them ?

    Would be interesting to see.
    If a company builds a building that is subsequently found to be too expensive to maintain, it should go bankrupt. The risk should be on the shareholder.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,243
    edited February 12
    Taz said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    If I were feeling generous, I would say whatever idiot negotiated our PFI contracts should be shot.

    If I were feeling ungenerous, I would say they should be forced to listen to Trump’s speeches on a loop for 24 hours first.

    Schools in budget crisis as PFI charges soar
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-68207051

    Gordon Brown should be excoriated over PFI (not falsely blamed for the GFC). However, in this story it looks like the real flaw is automatic price rises with RPI inflation, the sort of thing everyone is familiar with on their phone contracts.
    That’s one flaw.

    The number of things included in the contract is another.

    The poor quality of the buildings which mean half of them are already falling down is a third.

    The penalty clauses for exiting with the lack of penalty clauses for a company failing to honour its obligations is a fourth.

    The original prices which were far too high are a fifth.

    Using a measure of inflation the government didn’t use elsewhere is a sixth.

    So - using somebody who was clearly not a trained lawyer or possessed of a functioning brain to negotiate them was insanity.
    The government was focused on laying all the risk and the off balance sheet accounting. They achieved those.

    Just because you think it is a bad deal doesn’t mean the negotiation was bad of the objectives were achieved.

    It means the objectoves were bad - and that is the fault of politicians not negotiators
    Nice try.

    Let’s go over again who came up with penalty clauses which only work one way, and using the wrong measure of inflation…
    How do you know the liquidated damages clauses only work one way ?

    What is the wording of them ?

    Would be interesting to see.
    Because I’ve worked in one of them. Didn’t see the words, but the Finance Officer was eloquent on the subject.

    And that was because - and you may not believe this, and frankly I wouldn’t blame you, but it’s true - one of the things the company was supposed to provide was toilet paper. And they were not doing so. Which as you can imagine was causing colossal amounts of trouble.

    It also explained why lights were not being fixed, the heating was constantly failing and the computer system was such a mess.

    £26 million of public money had been paid for that building. And nothing worked while the company concerned was making a fortune.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 60,485
    Scott_xP said:

    Nigelb said:

    The deep state has engineered overtime.

    The MAGA babies do not seem to be talking Taylor Swift's win very well...
    https://twitter.com/JoeBiden/status/1756888470599967000
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,704
    edited February 12
    Friend of mine (!) says that Biden has the classic "Alzheimer's gait".

    @Foxy - any thoughts?
  • Andy_JS said:

    Has Michelle Obama ever been elected to any sort of office so far?

    As many elected offices as Donald Trump before he became POTUS.
  • On topic, I have been laying Michelle Obama for the Dem nomination/Presidency than I laid Donald Trump for the GOP nom/Presidency in late 2015/early 2016.
  • Taz said:

    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    If I were feeling generous, I would say whatever idiot negotiated our PFI contracts should be shot.

    If I were feeling ungenerous, I would say they should be forced to listen to Trump’s speeches on a loop for 24 hours first.

    Schools in budget crisis as PFI charges soar
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-68207051

    Gordon Brown should be excoriated over PFI (not falsely blamed for the GFC). However, in this story it looks like the real flaw is automatic price rises with RPI inflation, the sort of thing everyone is familiar with on their phone contracts.
    That’s one flaw.

    The number of things included in the contract is another.

    The poor quality of the buildings which mean half of them are already falling down is a third.

    The penalty clauses for exiting with the lack of penalty clauses for a company failing to honour its obligations is a fourth.

    The original prices which were far too high are a fifth.

    Using a measure of inflation the government didn’t use elsewhere is a sixth.

    So - using somebody who was clearly not a trained lawyer or possessed of a functioning brain to negotiate them was insanity.
    I said hair a decade ago that government ought to have legislated to set aside contracts which were manifestly unfair.
    It will only be some terms in the contract that would be unfair.

    There is already legislation in place to deal with unfair contract terms.

    https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1977/50
    That has limited application to commercial contracts such as PFI. In broad terms, it only applies when one party is doing business with the other party on its standard terms of business. That is not the case for PFI contracts.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 6,751
    TOPPING said:

    Friend of mine (!) says that Biden has the classic "Alzheimer's gait".

    @Foxy - any thoughts?

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/twitter-reacts-to-viral-photo-of-trump-toe-pads/ar-AA1lWJYg
  • I wonder what could have triggered this?

    Rishi Sunak’s Conservative party faces a collapse of support in the “rural wall” akin to Labour’s rout in its heartlands in 2019, according to a group of farmers, landowners and businesses.

    Three cabinet ministers would be among those to lose their seats, according to the Country Land and Business Association (CLA), which represents 26,000 farmers, landowners and businesses across rural England and Wales...

    ...Polling on behalf of the CLA by Survation found that Labour has regained its foothold in the countryside — with 37 per cent of adults in the 100 most rural seats saying they plan to vote Labour, a rise of 17 per cent compared with the 2019 election result.

    Meanwhile, the Conservatives have slipped 25 per cent and are narrowly behind in second place, with 34 per cent of support. The Liberal Democrats are on 14 per cent, trailed by Reform on 9 per cent, the Green party on 4 per cent and 9 per cent of voters backing other parties.

    Of the most rural seats, Labour is poised to take 51 with the Tories falling back to 43.

    MPs who face being ousted at the next election include three cabinet ministers, Jeremy Hunt, Mel Stride and Mark Harper, and six others, including Jacob Rees-Mogg, Liam Fox and Bill Cash, the polling suggests.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/tories-face-collapse-in-rural-areas-warn-farmers-jwgx32dqc
  • British Jobs For British Workers vibe here.

    Michael Gove: It’s time for Britons to come first for housing

    The housing secretary is lobbying for a tax on homes bought by foreigners and has promised to ban no-fault evictions by the next election


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/michael-gove-tax-foreign-buyers-housing-secretary-nnlsvxt6c
  • Ouch.

    Voters think Rishi Sunak cares less than the rest of the Tories

    Even Conservative MPs are uncomfortable about the prime minister’s ability to relate to voters




    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/voters-think-rishi-sunak-cares-less-than-the-rest-of-the-tories-k7w76kf96
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,399

    British Jobs For British Workers vibe here.

    Michael Gove: It’s time for Britons to come first for housing

    The housing secretary is lobbying for a tax on homes bought by foreigners and has promised to ban no-fault evictions by the next election


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/michael-gove-tax-foreign-buyers-housing-secretary-nnlsvxt6c

    ...
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,399

    Ouch.

    Voters think Rishi Sunak cares less than the rest of the Tories

    Even Conservative MPs are uncomfortable about the prime minister’s ability to relate to voters

    Good thing he isn't planning an entire campaign based on meeting the people he doesn't care about face to face.

    Oh, wait...
  • Ouch.

    Voters think Rishi Sunak cares less than the rest of the Tories

    Even Conservative MPs are uncomfortable about the prime minister’s ability to relate to voters




    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/voters-think-rishi-sunak-cares-less-than-the-rest-of-the-tories-k7w76kf96

    Even more ouch.


  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,243

    Ouch.

    Voters think Rishi Sunak cares less than the rest of the Tories

    Even Conservative MPs are uncomfortable about the prime minister’s ability to relate to voters




    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/voters-think-rishi-sunak-cares-less-than-the-rest-of-the-tories-k7w76kf96

    Even more ouch.


    Perhaps their answer merely expressed indifference.

    'What do you think Rishi Sunak feels about people like you?'

    'Who cares?'
  • ydoethur said:

    Ouch.

    Voters think Rishi Sunak cares less than the rest of the Tories

    Even Conservative MPs are uncomfortable about the prime minister’s ability to relate to voters




    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/voters-think-rishi-sunak-cares-less-than-the-rest-of-the-tories-k7w76kf96

    Even more ouch.


    Perhaps their answer merely expressed indifference.

    'What do you think Rishi Sunak feels about people like you?'

    'Who cares?'
    It's the politics of envy, the fucking plebs cannot cope that the children/grandchildren of humble immigrants have done better than them.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 60,485
    ydoethur said:

    Ouch.

    Voters think Rishi Sunak cares less than the rest of the Tories

    Even Conservative MPs are uncomfortable about the prime minister’s ability to relate to voters




    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/voters-think-rishi-sunak-cares-less-than-the-rest-of-the-tories-k7w76kf96

    Even more ouch.


    Perhaps their answer merely expressed indifference.

    'What do you think Rishi Sunak feels about people like you?'

    'Who cares?'
    "Rishi doesn't."
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,399

    ydoethur said:

    Ouch.

    Voters think Rishi Sunak cares less than the rest of the Tories

    Even Conservative MPs are uncomfortable about the prime minister’s ability to relate to voters




    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/voters-think-rishi-sunak-cares-less-than-the-rest-of-the-tories-k7w76kf96

    Even more ouch.


    Perhaps their answer merely expressed indifference.

    'What do you think Rishi Sunak feels about people like you?'

    'Who cares?'
    It's the politics of envy, the fucking plebs cannot cope that the children/grandchildren of humble immigrants have done better than them.
    @sturdyAlex

    The "politics of envy" accusation is essentially that you, too, would love to have stepped on a few throats to make millions, and you'd be clinging on to it just as fiercely.

    The idea of people who just seek the dignity of a modest living, but a useful one, doesn't even compute.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,591

    There's actually been a poll by Atlas Intel that shows Michelle Obama beating Trump.

    https://twitter.com/atlas_intel/status/1756113410427687180

    image

    Good Poll for Cornel West whoever he/she is
  • TazTaz Posts: 10,339
    edited February 12

    Taz said:

    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    If I were feeling generous, I would say whatever idiot negotiated our PFI contracts should be shot.

    If I were feeling ungenerous, I would say they should be forced to listen to Trump’s speeches on a loop for 24 hours first.

    Schools in budget crisis as PFI charges soar
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-68207051

    Gordon Brown should be excoriated over PFI (not falsely blamed for the GFC). However, in this story it looks like the real flaw is automatic price rises with RPI inflation, the sort of thing everyone is familiar with on their phone contracts.
    That’s one flaw.

    The number of things included in the contract is another.

    The poor quality of the buildings which mean half of them are already falling down is a third.

    The penalty clauses for exiting with the lack of penalty clauses for a company failing to honour its obligations is a fourth.

    The original prices which were far too high are a fifth.

    Using a measure of inflation the government didn’t use elsewhere is a sixth.

    So - using somebody who was clearly not a trained lawyer or possessed of a functioning brain to negotiate them was insanity.
    I said hair a decade ago that government ought to have legislated to set aside contracts which were manifestly unfair.
    It will only be some terms in the contract that would be unfair.

    There is already legislation in place to deal with unfair contract terms.

    https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1977/50
    That has limited application to commercial contracts such as PFI. In broad terms, it only applies when one party is doing business with the other party on its standard terms of business. That is not the case for PFI contracts.

    It still has application to commercial contracts, and there is other law available too.

    So what do we do, as Nigel proposes, the govt enables a law to allow them to set aside contracts they willingly entered into but now regret ?

    How are these PFI contracts, many which have been in place for many years, now "unfair" exactly ?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 42,837

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    If I were feeling generous, I would say whatever idiot negotiated our PFI contracts should be shot.

    If I were feeling ungenerous, I would say they should be forced to listen to Trump’s speeches on a loop for 24 hours first.

    Schools in budget crisis as PFI charges soar
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-68207051

    Gordon Brown should be excoriated over PFI (not falsely blamed for the GFC). However, in this story it looks like the real flaw is automatic price rises with RPI inflation, the sort of thing everyone is familiar with on their phone contracts.
    That’s one flaw.

    The number of things included in the contract is another.

    The poor quality of the buildings which mean half of them are already falling down is a third.

    The penalty clauses for exiting with the lack of penalty clauses for a company failing to honour its obligations is a fourth.

    The original prices which were far too high are a fifth.

    Using a measure of inflation the government didn’t use elsewhere is a sixth.

    So - using somebody who was clearly not a trained lawyer or possessed of a functioning brain to negotiate them was insanity.
    The government was focused on laying all the risk and the off balance sheet accounting. They achieved those.

    Just because you think it is a bad deal doesn’t mean the negotiation was bad of the objectives were achieved.

    It means the objectoves were bad - and that is the fault of politicians not negotiators
    Brown had form for that

    When mobile phone frequencies were being auctioned, he demanded the maximum possible price. He was warned that negotiating for price only was a mistake.

    When this caused phone companies to drop out of the bidding, the government was reduced to threatening to back shareholder lawsuits.
  • Well.

    For Israel’s sake, Netanyahu must go now

    The Gaza war is the fault of Hamas, but the innocent are dying and it is beyond time for the killing to end


    n January 29, the Palestinian emergency services received a call from a six-year old girl called Hind Rajab, who said she was trapped in a car with her family and a tank was rolling towards them. “Will you come and get me?” she asked. “I’m so scared.”

    It took nearly two weeks for officials to reach the area, sealed off as an active combat zone, to find Hind dead along with several members of her family. Their car was riddled with bullets. Nearby were the burnt-out remains of an ambulance sent to help.

    When Israel was attacked on October 7, all people of sanity and compassion condemned it as a modern-day pogrom. Israel had to restore its security and get its hostages back.

    But the conflict is now in its fifth month; the outcome is desperately uncertain. The mortality figures from the Hamas-run authority might be disputed, but when you invade a territory of 2.3 million people crowded into 139 square miles, it’s easy to believe that around 25,000 will die – and what journalists can’t report because we’re mostly barred from entry, we can see on footage uploaded on the internet. Houses, shops, mosques flattened; bodies crushed beneath rubble.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/02/11/for-israels-sake-netanyahu-must-go-now/
  • TazTaz Posts: 10,339
    edited February 12

    Taz said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    If I were feeling generous, I would say whatever idiot negotiated our PFI contracts should be shot.

    If I were feeling ungenerous, I would say they should be forced to listen to Trump’s speeches on a loop for 24 hours first.

    Schools in budget crisis as PFI charges soar
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-68207051

    Gordon Brown should be excoriated over PFI (not falsely blamed for the GFC). However, in this story it looks like the real flaw is automatic price rises with RPI inflation, the sort of thing everyone is familiar with on their phone contracts.
    That’s one flaw.

    The number of things included in the contract is another.

    The poor quality of the buildings which mean half of them are already falling down is a third.

    The penalty clauses for exiting with the lack of penalty clauses for a company failing to honour its obligations is a fourth.

    The original prices which were far too high are a fifth.

    Using a measure of inflation the government didn’t use elsewhere is a sixth.

    So - using somebody who was clearly not a trained lawyer or possessed of a functioning brain to negotiate them was insanity.
    The government was focused on laying all the risk and the off balance sheet accounting. They achieved those.

    Just because you think it is a bad deal doesn’t mean the negotiation was bad of the objectives were achieved.

    It means the objectoves were bad - and that is the fault of politicians not negotiators
    Nice try.

    Let’s go over again who came up with penalty clauses which only work one way, and using the wrong measure of inflation…
    How do you know the liquidated damages clauses only work one way ?

    What is the wording of them ?

    Would be interesting to see.
    If a company builds a building that is subsequently found to be too expensive to maintain, it should go bankrupt. The risk should be on the shareholder.
    Remind me what happened to Jarvis, Carillion and Metronet. All beneficiaries of PFI contracts ?

    There are risks on both sides as there are with any contracts, as there are obligations on both sides.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,504
    edited February 12
    Scott_xP said:

    ydoethur said:

    Ouch.

    Voters think Rishi Sunak cares less than the rest of the Tories

    Even Conservative MPs are uncomfortable about the prime minister’s ability to relate to voters




    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/voters-think-rishi-sunak-cares-less-than-the-rest-of-the-tories-k7w76kf96

    Even more ouch.


    Perhaps their answer merely expressed indifference.

    'What do you think Rishi Sunak feels about people like you?'

    'Who cares?'
    It's the politics of envy, the fucking plebs cannot cope that the children/grandchildren of humble immigrants have done better than them.
    @sturdyAlex

    The "politics of envy" accusation is essentially that you, too, would love to have stepped on a few throats to make millions, and you'd be clinging on to it just as fiercely.

    The idea of people who just seek the dignity of a modest living, but a useful one, doesn't even compute.
    I've experienced the politics of envy, I've never stepped on the throat of anyone.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 15,382
    Scott_xP said:

    ydoethur said:

    Ouch.

    Voters think Rishi Sunak cares less than the rest of the Tories

    Even Conservative MPs are uncomfortable about the prime minister’s ability to relate to voters




    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/voters-think-rishi-sunak-cares-less-than-the-rest-of-the-tories-k7w76kf96

    Even more ouch.


    Perhaps their answer merely expressed indifference.

    'What do you think Rishi Sunak feels about people like you?'

    'Who cares?'
    It's the politics of envy, the fucking plebs cannot cope that the children/grandchildren of humble immigrants have done better than them.
    @sturdyAlex

    The "politics of envy" accusation is essentially that you, too, would love to have stepped on a few throats to make millions, and you'd be clinging on to it just as fiercely.

    The idea of people who just seek the dignity of a modest living, but a useful one, doesn't even compute.
    They fancy it to be the "politics of envy" when it's actually the "politics of repugnance"
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,704
    FF43 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    ydoethur said:

    Ouch.

    Voters think Rishi Sunak cares less than the rest of the Tories

    Even Conservative MPs are uncomfortable about the prime minister’s ability to relate to voters




    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/voters-think-rishi-sunak-cares-less-than-the-rest-of-the-tories-k7w76kf96

    Even more ouch.


    Perhaps their answer merely expressed indifference.

    'What do you think Rishi Sunak feels about people like you?'

    'Who cares?'
    It's the politics of envy, the fucking plebs cannot cope that the children/grandchildren of humble immigrants have done better than them.
    @sturdyAlex

    The "politics of envy" accusation is essentially that you, too, would love to have stepped on a few throats to make millions, and you'd be clinging on to it just as fiercely.

    The idea of people who just seek the dignity of a modest living, but a useful one, doesn't even compute.
    They fancy it to be the "politics of envy" when it's actually the "politics of repugnance"
    I'm not 100% sure how many people really just "seek the dignity of a modest living".
  • kamskikamski Posts: 4,129

    Scott_xP said:

    ydoethur said:

    Ouch.

    Voters think Rishi Sunak cares less than the rest of the Tories

    Even Conservative MPs are uncomfortable about the prime minister’s ability to relate to voters




    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/voters-think-rishi-sunak-cares-less-than-the-rest-of-the-tories-k7w76kf96

    Even more ouch.


    Perhaps their answer merely expressed indifference.

    'What do you think Rishi Sunak feels about people like you?'

    'Who cares?'
    It's the politics of envy, the fucking plebs cannot cope that the children/grandchildren of humble immigrants have done better than them.
    @sturdyAlex

    The "politics of envy" accusation is essentially that you, too, would love to have stepped on a few throats to make millions, and you'd be clinging on to it just as fiercely.

    The idea of people who just seek the dignity of a modest living, but a useful one, doesn't even compute.
    I've experienced the politics of envy, I've never stepped on the throat of anyone.
    If people don't like Sunak because he's the son of immigrants isn't that the politics of racism?

    -"It looks like the rich are running the country in the interests of the rich"
    -"That's the politics of envy"
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 42,837
    TOPPING said:

    FF43 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    ydoethur said:

    Ouch.

    Voters think Rishi Sunak cares less than the rest of the Tories

    Even Conservative MPs are uncomfortable about the prime minister’s ability to relate to voters




    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/voters-think-rishi-sunak-cares-less-than-the-rest-of-the-tories-k7w76kf96

    Even more ouch.


    Perhaps their answer merely expressed indifference.

    'What do you think Rishi Sunak feels about people like you?'

    'Who cares?'
    It's the politics of envy, the fucking plebs cannot cope that the children/grandchildren of humble immigrants have done better than them.
    @sturdyAlex

    The "politics of envy" accusation is essentially that you, too, would love to have stepped on a few throats to make millions, and you'd be clinging on to it just as fiercely.

    The idea of people who just seek the dignity of a modest living, but a useful one, doesn't even compute.
    They fancy it to be the "politics of envy" when it's actually the "politics of repugnance"
    I'm not 100% sure how many people really just "seek the dignity of a modest living".
    It’s quite simple - it’s by being paid a modest amount.

    The scale for modest amounts is calibrated against @TSE’s modesty.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 15,382
    edited February 12
    TOPPING said:

    FF43 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    ydoethur said:

    Ouch.

    Voters think Rishi Sunak cares less than the rest of the Tories

    Even Conservative MPs are uncomfortable about the prime minister’s ability to relate to voters




    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/voters-think-rishi-sunak-cares-less-than-the-rest-of-the-tories-k7w76kf96

    Even more ouch.


    Perhaps their answer merely expressed indifference.

    'What do you think Rishi Sunak feels about people like you?'

    'Who cares?'
    It's the politics of envy, the fucking plebs cannot cope that the children/grandchildren of humble immigrants have done better than them.
    @sturdyAlex

    The "politics of envy" accusation is essentially that you, too, would love to have stepped on a few throats to make millions, and you'd be clinging on to it just as fiercely.

    The idea of people who just seek the dignity of a modest living, but a useful one, doesn't even compute.
    They fancy it to be the "politics of envy" when it's actually the "politics of repugnance"
    I'm not 100% sure how many people really just "seek the dignity of a modest living".
    It's the easy assumption that people must envy you. Actually they just despise you. What they are saying is what they think.
  • kamski said:

    Scott_xP said:

    ydoethur said:

    Ouch.

    Voters think Rishi Sunak cares less than the rest of the Tories

    Even Conservative MPs are uncomfortable about the prime minister’s ability to relate to voters




    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/voters-think-rishi-sunak-cares-less-than-the-rest-of-the-tories-k7w76kf96

    Even more ouch.


    Perhaps their answer merely expressed indifference.

    'What do you think Rishi Sunak feels about people like you?'

    'Who cares?'
    It's the politics of envy, the fucking plebs cannot cope that the children/grandchildren of humble immigrants have done better than them.
    @sturdyAlex

    The "politics of envy" accusation is essentially that you, too, would love to have stepped on a few throats to make millions, and you'd be clinging on to it just as fiercely.

    The idea of people who just seek the dignity of a modest living, but a useful one, doesn't even compute.
    I've experienced the politics of envy, I've never stepped on the throat of anyone.
    If people don't like Sunak because he's the son of immigrants isn't that the politics of racism?

    -"It looks like the rich are running the country in the interests of the rich"
    -"That's the politics of envy"
    It could be both.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,529

    ydoethur said:

    Ouch.

    Voters think Rishi Sunak cares less than the rest of the Tories

    Even Conservative MPs are uncomfortable about the prime minister’s ability to relate to voters




    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/voters-think-rishi-sunak-cares-less-than-the-rest-of-the-tories-k7w76kf96

    Even more ouch.


    Perhaps their answer merely expressed indifference.

    'What do you think Rishi Sunak feels about people like you?'

    'Who cares?'
    It's the politics of envy, the fucking plebs cannot cope that the children/grandchildren of humble immigrants have done better than them.
    I don’t think that Rishi Sunak parents could be described as humble. Reasonably well off middle class would be a better description.
    To be fair, I don’t know about his grandparents!

    And good morning to everybody!
  • kamskikamski Posts: 4,129

    There's actually been a poll by Atlas Intel that shows Michelle Obama beating Trump.

    https://twitter.com/atlas_intel/status/1756113410427687180

    image

    Good Poll for Cornel West whoever he/she is
    Same pollster has Biden beating Haley by 18. And Trump beating Biden by 2.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,796
    edited February 12

    Well.

    For Israel’s sake, Netanyahu must go now

    The Gaza war is the fault of Hamas, but the innocent are dying and it is beyond time for the killing to end


    n January 29, the Palestinian emergency services received a call from a six-year old girl called Hind Rajab, who said she was trapped in a car with her family and a tank was rolling towards them. “Will you come and get me?” she asked. “I’m so scared.”

    It took nearly two weeks for officials to reach the area, sealed off as an active combat zone, to find Hind dead along with several members of her family. Their car was riddled with bullets. Nearby were the burnt-out remains of an ambulance sent to help.

    When Israel was attacked on October 7, all people of sanity and compassion condemned it as a modern-day pogrom. Israel had to restore its security and get its hostages back.

    But the conflict is now in its fifth month; the outcome is desperately uncertain. The mortality figures from the Hamas-run authority might be disputed, but when you invade a territory of 2.3 million people crowded into 139 square miles, it’s easy to believe that around 25,000 will die – and what journalists can’t report because we’re mostly barred from entry, we can see on footage uploaded on the internet. Houses, shops, mosques flattened; bodies crushed beneath rubble.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/02/11/for-israels-sake-netanyahu-must-go-now/

    Meanwhile Netanyahu's new besty enjoys a lunch with Zippy and friends

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E985ukCaIRs
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,591

    Scott_xP said:

    ydoethur said:

    Ouch.

    Voters think Rishi Sunak cares less than the rest of the Tories

    Even Conservative MPs are uncomfortable about the prime minister’s ability to relate to voters




    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/voters-think-rishi-sunak-cares-less-than-the-rest-of-the-tories-k7w76kf96

    Even more ouch.


    Perhaps their answer merely expressed indifference.

    'What do you think Rishi Sunak feels about people like you?'

    'Who cares?'
    It's the politics of envy, the fucking plebs cannot cope that the children/grandchildren of humble immigrants have done better than them.
    @sturdyAlex

    The "politics of envy" accusation is essentially that you, too, would love to have stepped on a few throats to make millions, and you'd be clinging on to it just as fiercely.

    The idea of people who just seek the dignity of a modest living, but a useful one, doesn't even compute.
    I've experienced the politics of envy, I've never stepped on the throat of anyone.
    Don't want to ruin your shoes?
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,591

    ydoethur said:

    Ouch.

    Voters think Rishi Sunak cares less than the rest of the Tories

    Even Conservative MPs are uncomfortable about the prime minister’s ability to relate to voters




    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/voters-think-rishi-sunak-cares-less-than-the-rest-of-the-tories-k7w76kf96

    Even more ouch.


    Perhaps their answer merely expressed indifference.

    'What do you think Rishi Sunak feels about people like you?'

    'Who cares?'
    It's the politics of envy, the fucking plebs cannot cope that the children/grandchildren of humble immigrants have done better than them.
    I don’t think that Rishi Sunak parents could be described as humble. Reasonably well off middle class would be a better description.
    To be fair, I don’t know about his grandparents!

    And good morning to everybody!
    Is it not pronounced umble?
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,399
    @aljwhite

    Extraordinary by product of ministerial churn: the immigration minister - back when he was solicitor general - raised concerns the Rwanda plan would break international law

    https://x.com/aljwhite/status/1756955947031761029?s=20
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,591
    Cornel West is a prominent and provocative democratic intellectual. He is the Dietrich Bonhoeffer Professor of Philosophy and Christian Practice at Union Theological Seminary.

    And Biden and Trump are trouncing him.

    Shocking
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 46,805
    edited February 12
    HYUFD said:
    Ferguson writes for effect, rather than from analysis (who does that remind us of?), but the central arguments of his piece - that we underestimate the extent to which most people go along with occupation, we underestimate the chance of geopolitical events snowballing into a major crisis, and that the memory of occupation or threat of invasion colours how that and the following generation perceive things for many decades afterwards, are all sound.

    The scenario of China making a move (itself or by proxy) and the US backing down and retreating into isolationism is certainly credible. But the final leap in his article, to some foreign (Russian, is implied) occupation of the US is neither credible nor explained. More likely, assuming the series of events he posits came to pass, is that the US falls into the same sort of position that the UK found itself during WWII. The question then being whether it gives up on the rest of the world, as fortress America, or seeks to rescue it (us).
  • TheValiantTheValiant Posts: 1,653
    Taz said:

    Taz said:

    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    If I were feeling generous, I would say whatever idiot negotiated our PFI contracts should be shot.

    If I were feeling ungenerous, I would say they should be forced to listen to Trump’s speeches on a loop for 24 hours first.

    Schools in budget crisis as PFI charges soar
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-68207051

    Gordon Brown should be excoriated over PFI (not falsely blamed for the GFC). However, in this story it looks like the real flaw is automatic price rises with RPI inflation, the sort of thing everyone is familiar with on their phone contracts.
    That’s one flaw.

    The number of things included in the contract is another.

    The poor quality of the buildings which mean half of them are already falling down is a third.

    The penalty clauses for exiting with the lack of penalty clauses for a company failing to honour its obligations is a fourth.

    The original prices which were far too high are a fifth.

    Using a measure of inflation the government didn’t use elsewhere is a sixth.

    So - using somebody who was clearly not a trained lawyer or possessed of a functioning brain to negotiate them was insanity.
    I said hair a decade ago that government ought to have legislated to set aside contracts which were manifestly unfair.
    It will only be some terms in the contract that would be unfair.

    There is already legislation in place to deal with unfair contract terms.

    https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1977/50
    That has limited application to commercial contracts such as PFI. In broad terms, it only applies when one party is doing business with the other party on its standard terms of business. That is not the case for PFI contracts.

    It still has application to commercial contracts, and there is other law available too.

    So what do we do, as Nigel proposes, the govt enables a law to allow them to set aside contracts they willingly entered into but now regret ?

    How are these PFI contracts, many which have been in place for many years, now "unfair" exactly ?
    Andrew Marr's book, I think it was 'A History of Modern Britain' published about 2006 or so commented on these.

    He said that a future chancellor, probably now in Primary school, would have to face the horrendously bad terms that Major and Blair had negotiated.

    Reeves wasn't in Primary school in the late 1990s, early 00s, but Marr wasn't wrong.
    PFI contracts were being warned about when they being signed, but of course with 25-30 year shelf lifes, the two things you can guarantee about them is:
    1. They're going to go wrong for someone (probably the government); and
    2. The current political class at the time of signing them will be long gone.

    Probably hence why the government agreed to them.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 39,532
    ..

  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,704
    FF43 said:

    TOPPING said:

    FF43 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    ydoethur said:

    Ouch.

    Voters think Rishi Sunak cares less than the rest of the Tories

    Even Conservative MPs are uncomfortable about the prime minister’s ability to relate to voters




    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/voters-think-rishi-sunak-cares-less-than-the-rest-of-the-tories-k7w76kf96

    Even more ouch.


    Perhaps their answer merely expressed indifference.

    'What do you think Rishi Sunak feels about people like you?'

    'Who cares?'
    It's the politics of envy, the fucking plebs cannot cope that the children/grandchildren of humble immigrants have done better than them.
    @sturdyAlex

    The "politics of envy" accusation is essentially that you, too, would love to have stepped on a few throats to make millions, and you'd be clinging on to it just as fiercely.

    The idea of people who just seek the dignity of a modest living, but a useful one, doesn't even compute.
    They fancy it to be the "politics of envy" when it's actually the "politics of repugnance"
    I'm not 100% sure how many people really just "seek the dignity of a modest living".
    It's the easy assumption that people must envy you. Actually they just despise you. What they are saying is what they think.
    And they probably despise you because they envy you.

    Do/did you in your career settle for "the dignity of a modest living"?
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,075

    Well.

    For Israel’s sake, Netanyahu must go now

    The Gaza war is the fault of Hamas, but the innocent are dying and it is beyond time for the killing to end


    n January 29, the Palestinian emergency services received a call from a six-year old girl called Hind Rajab, who said she was trapped in a car with her family and a tank was rolling towards them. “Will you come and get me?” she asked. “I’m so scared.”

    It took nearly two weeks for officials to reach the area, sealed off as an active combat zone, to find Hind dead along with several members of her family. Their car was riddled with bullets. Nearby were the burnt-out remains of an ambulance sent to help.

    When Israel was attacked on October 7, all people of sanity and compassion condemned it as a modern-day pogrom. Israel had to restore its security and get its hostages back.

    But the conflict is now in its fifth month; the outcome is desperately uncertain. The mortality figures from the Hamas-run authority might be disputed, but when you invade a territory of 2.3 million people crowded into 139 square miles, it’s easy to believe that around 25,000 will die – and what journalists can’t report because we’re mostly barred from entry, we can see on footage uploaded on the internet. Houses, shops, mosques flattened; bodies crushed beneath rubble.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/02/11/for-israels-sake-netanyahu-must-go-now/



    I don't support either side, and like the rest of humanity am 100% on the side of 6 year old girls with no exceptions. Would it not have been a good idea, rather before this happened, for Hamas to surrender, and for Palestinians to allow a group of reasonably honest brokers (all politics is relative) - Saudis, EU, Turkey, USA, Norway, Jordan, Egypt for example, to assist in a comprehensive negotiation.

    I cannot see what the non surrender of Hamas is now achieving for Palestinians. It would be different if their allies had fully joined in - they have plenty - but critically they have not.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,704
    I'm guessing (cf tax, etc) that most people think they could settle for a modest living and that the salary level of a modest living lies somewhere just above their current salary level.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 4,129
    Isn't it a bit of a myth that Democrats coalesced on Biden last time because they thought he was the best (or only) person to defeat Trump? As I remember, everyone else gave up and endorsed Biden because they didn't want Sanders to win the nomination. Sanders was also too old and, like Biden, shouldn't have been running in 2020. We're in a mess because of the egos of people in their seventies who should have made way for younger people (with less name recognition of course), and the weakness of political parties in the USA.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,796

    Well.

    For Israel’s sake, Netanyahu must go now

    The Gaza war is the fault of Hamas, but the innocent are dying and it is beyond time for the killing to end


    n January 29, the Palestinian emergency services received a call from a six-year old girl called Hind Rajab, who said she was trapped in a car with her family and a tank was rolling towards them. “Will you come and get me?” she asked. “I’m so scared.”

    It took nearly two weeks for officials to reach the area, sealed off as an active combat zone, to find Hind dead along with several members of her family. Their car was riddled with bullets. Nearby were the burnt-out remains of an ambulance sent to help.

    When Israel was attacked on October 7, all people of sanity and compassion condemned it as a modern-day pogrom. Israel had to restore its security and get its hostages back.

    But the conflict is now in its fifth month; the outcome is desperately uncertain. The mortality figures from the Hamas-run authority might be disputed, but when you invade a territory of 2.3 million people crowded into 139 square miles, it’s easy to believe that around 25,000 will die – and what journalists can’t report because we’re mostly barred from entry, we can see on footage uploaded on the internet. Houses, shops, mosques flattened; bodies crushed beneath rubble.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/02/11/for-israels-sake-netanyahu-must-go-now/

    The story of Hind Rabab has been running on the BBC and elswhere for several days now. The tape is seriously heartbreaking. It even managed to silence Ayon Levy.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 14,712
    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:
    Ferguson writes for effect, rather than from analysis (who does that remind us of?), but the central arguments of his piece - that we underestimate the extent to which most people go along with occupation, we underestimate the chance of geopolitical events snowballing into a major crisis, and that the memory of occupation or threat of invasion colours how that and the following generation perceive things for many decades afterwards, are all sound.

    The scenario of China making a move (itself or by proxy) and the US backing down and retreating into isolationism is certainly credible. But the final leap in his article, to some foreign (Russian, is implied) occupation of the US is neither credible nor explained. More likely, assuming the series of events he posits came to pass, is that the US falls into the same sort of position that the UK found itself during WWII. The question then being whether it gives up on the rest of the world, as fortress America, or seeks to rescue it (us).
    Yes, a successful Chinese annexation of Taiwan would not have the same effect on us here as a successful Nazi invasion of Britain would have done. To claim otherwise seems an odd argument from a historian.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,704

    TOPPING said:

    FF43 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    ydoethur said:

    Ouch.

    Voters think Rishi Sunak cares less than the rest of the Tories

    Even Conservative MPs are uncomfortable about the prime minister’s ability to relate to voters




    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/voters-think-rishi-sunak-cares-less-than-the-rest-of-the-tories-k7w76kf96

    Even more ouch.


    Perhaps their answer merely expressed indifference.

    'What do you think Rishi Sunak feels about people like you?'

    'Who cares?'
    It's the politics of envy, the fucking plebs cannot cope that the children/grandchildren of humble immigrants have done better than them.
    @sturdyAlex

    The "politics of envy" accusation is essentially that you, too, would love to have stepped on a few throats to make millions, and you'd be clinging on to it just as fiercely.

    The idea of people who just seek the dignity of a modest living, but a useful one, doesn't even compute.
    They fancy it to be the "politics of envy" when it's actually the "politics of repugnance"
    I'm not 100% sure how many people really just "seek the dignity of a modest living".
    Depends on how you define "modest", I guess.

    But the sort of jobs that we normally class as vocations, in the grey area from charities to public services, have traditionally worked on the assumption that there are people willing to work for less money and more meaning.

    And a lot of those are rather collapsing right now. Partly because "less money" has morphed intro "taking the piss money". And partly because of changes in the cost of living (just build more bloody houses, beyond the point where it's commercially wise to do so) mean that it's harder to have a good life with less money.

    But there is also a values thing. The older model acknowledged something of a trade-off between cash and worth. (There's a genuinely poignant bit in PJ O'Rourke's book 'Eat the Rich' where anonymous Wall St types admit that no, there's no real justification for their enormous pay and bonuses.)

    If the attitude to the teacher, the preacher, the social worker, the nurse, the doctor becomes "serves you right for not becoming a hotshot lawyer of financier", then don't be surprised that you can't find enough people to do those things.

    See also the recently binned attempt to introduce Performance Pay in education. Many reasons it didn't work. But an important, unremarked one is that many teachers weren't really motivated by that. They valued stability and not having to think about it more.
    Yeah whatever.

    If you asked 100 people across all occupations if they are happy with their salary I'm guessing upwards of 98% would say no.

    The original quote assumed that there is a cohort of people out there who happily get on with their lives on their "modest livings" and want for nothing more.

    I dispute this.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,529

    TOPPING said:

    FF43 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    ydoethur said:

    Ouch.

    Voters think Rishi Sunak cares less than the rest of the Tories

    Even Conservative MPs are uncomfortable about the prime minister’s ability to relate to voters




    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/voters-think-rishi-sunak-cares-less-than-the-rest-of-the-tories-k7w76kf96

    Even more ouch.


    Perhaps their answer merely expressed indifference.

    'What do you think Rishi Sunak feels about people like you?'

    'Who cares?'
    It's the politics of envy, the fucking plebs cannot cope that the children/grandchildren of humble immigrants have done better than them.
    @sturdyAlex

    The "politics of envy" accusation is essentially that you, too, would love to have stepped on a few throats to make millions, and you'd be clinging on to it just as fiercely.

    The idea of people who just seek the dignity of a modest living, but a useful one, doesn't even compute.
    They fancy it to be the "politics of envy" when it's actually the "politics of repugnance"
    I'm not 100% sure how many people really just "seek the dignity of a modest living".
    Depends on how you define "modest", I guess.

    But the sort of jobs that we normally class as vocations, in the grey area from charities to public services, have traditionally worked on the assumption that there are people willing to work for less money and more meaning.

    And a lot of those are rather collapsing right now. Partly because "less money" has morphed intro "taking the piss money". And partly because of changes in the cost of living (just build more bloody houses, beyond the point where it's commercially wise to do so) mean that it's harder to have a good life with less money.

    But there is also a values thing. The older model acknowledged something of a trade-off between cash and worth. (There's a genuinely poignant bit in PJ O'Rourke's book 'Eat the Rich' where anonymous Wall St types admit that no, there's no real justification for their enormous pay and bonuses.)

    If the attitude to the teacher, the preacher, the social worker, the nurse, the doctor becomes "serves you right for not becoming a hotshot lawyer of financier", then don't be surprised that you can't find enough people to do those things.

    See also the recently binned attempt to introduce Performance Pay in education. Many reasons it didn't work. But an important, unremarked one is that many teachers weren't really motivated by that. They valued stability and not having to think about it more.
    One of the features of Mrs Thatcher’s time was that ‘making money’ was treated as the most desirable of activities, much more so than ‘public service’.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 24,196
    algarkirk said:

    Well.

    For Israel’s sake, Netanyahu must go now

    The Gaza war is the fault of Hamas, but the innocent are dying and it is beyond time for the killing to end


    n January 29, the Palestinian emergency services received a call from a six-year old girl called Hind Rajab, who said she was trapped in a car with her family and a tank was rolling towards them. “Will you come and get me?” she asked. “I’m so scared.”

    It took nearly two weeks for officials to reach the area, sealed off as an active combat zone, to find Hind dead along with several members of her family. Their car was riddled with bullets. Nearby were the burnt-out remains of an ambulance sent to help.

    When Israel was attacked on October 7, all people of sanity and compassion condemned it as a modern-day pogrom. Israel had to restore its security and get its hostages back.

    But the conflict is now in its fifth month; the outcome is desperately uncertain. The mortality figures from the Hamas-run authority might be disputed, but when you invade a territory of 2.3 million people crowded into 139 square miles, it’s easy to believe that around 25,000 will die – and what journalists can’t report because we’re mostly barred from entry, we can see on footage uploaded on the internet. Houses, shops, mosques flattened; bodies crushed beneath rubble.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/02/11/for-israels-sake-netanyahu-must-go-now/



    I don't support either side, and like the rest of humanity am 100% on the side of 6 year old girls with no exceptions. Would it not have been a good idea, rather before this happened, for Hamas to surrender, and for Palestinians to allow a group of reasonably honest brokers (all politics is relative) - Saudis, EU, Turkey, USA, Norway, Jordan, Egypt for example, to assist in a comprehensive negotiation.

    I cannot see what the non surrender of Hamas is now achieving for Palestinians. It would be different if their allies had fully joined in - they have plenty - but critically they have not.
    Hamas are a death cult. They have no morality, they are not reasonable people.

    The fact that Bibi has decided to play by their rules of engagement to the detriment of tens of thousands of people including a 6 year old Palestinian girl suggests HE (Bibi) is no better than Hamas.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,075
    TOPPING said:

    FF43 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    ydoethur said:

    Ouch.

    Voters think Rishi Sunak cares less than the rest of the Tories

    Even Conservative MPs are uncomfortable about the prime minister’s ability to relate to voters




    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/voters-think-rishi-sunak-cares-less-than-the-rest-of-the-tories-k7w76kf96

    Even more ouch.


    Perhaps their answer merely expressed indifference.

    'What do you think Rishi Sunak feels about people like you?'

    'Who cares?'
    It's the politics of envy, the fucking plebs cannot cope that the children/grandchildren of humble immigrants have done better than them.
    @sturdyAlex

    The "politics of envy" accusation is essentially that you, too, would love to have stepped on a few throats to make millions, and you'd be clinging on to it just as fiercely.

    The idea of people who just seek the dignity of a modest living, but a useful one, doesn't even compute.
    They fancy it to be the "politics of envy" when it's actually the "politics of repugnance"
    I'm not 100% sure how many people really just "seek the dignity of a modest living".
    From the perspective of where I live - 300 miles from London, largest town in the county is below 100,000 - "a people who just seek the dignity of a modest living, but a useful one" describes our daily reality and much of the human condition very well.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,704
    algarkirk said:

    TOPPING said:

    FF43 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    ydoethur said:

    Ouch.

    Voters think Rishi Sunak cares less than the rest of the Tories

    Even Conservative MPs are uncomfortable about the prime minister’s ability to relate to voters




    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/voters-think-rishi-sunak-cares-less-than-the-rest-of-the-tories-k7w76kf96

    Even more ouch.


    Perhaps their answer merely expressed indifference.

    'What do you think Rishi Sunak feels about people like you?'

    'Who cares?'
    It's the politics of envy, the fucking plebs cannot cope that the children/grandchildren of humble immigrants have done better than them.
    @sturdyAlex

    The "politics of envy" accusation is essentially that you, too, would love to have stepped on a few throats to make millions, and you'd be clinging on to it just as fiercely.

    The idea of people who just seek the dignity of a modest living, but a useful one, doesn't even compute.
    They fancy it to be the "politics of envy" when it's actually the "politics of repugnance"
    I'm not 100% sure how many people really just "seek the dignity of a modest living".
    From the perspective of where I live - 300 miles from London, largest town in the county is below 100,000 - "a people who just seek the dignity of a modest living, but a useful one" describes our daily reality and much of the human condition very well.
    As I said, I seriously dispute that. But we'll never know the stats unless you head out with your clipboard.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,704

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    FF43 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    ydoethur said:

    Ouch.

    Voters think Rishi Sunak cares less than the rest of the Tories

    Even Conservative MPs are uncomfortable about the prime minister’s ability to relate to voters




    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/voters-think-rishi-sunak-cares-less-than-the-rest-of-the-tories-k7w76kf96

    Even more ouch.


    Perhaps their answer merely expressed indifference.

    'What do you think Rishi Sunak feels about people like you?'

    'Who cares?'
    It's the politics of envy, the fucking plebs cannot cope that the children/grandchildren of humble immigrants have done better than them.
    @sturdyAlex

    The "politics of envy" accusation is essentially that you, too, would love to have stepped on a few throats to make millions, and you'd be clinging on to it just as fiercely.

    The idea of people who just seek the dignity of a modest living, but a useful one, doesn't even compute.
    They fancy it to be the "politics of envy" when it's actually the "politics of repugnance"
    I'm not 100% sure how many people really just "seek the dignity of a modest living".
    Depends on how you define "modest", I guess.

    But the sort of jobs that we normally class as vocations, in the grey area from charities to public services, have traditionally worked on the assumption that there are people willing to work for less money and more meaning.

    And a lot of those are rather collapsing right now. Partly because "less money" has morphed intro "taking the piss money". And partly because of changes in the cost of living (just build more bloody houses, beyond the point where it's commercially wise to do so) mean that it's harder to have a good life with less money.

    But there is also a values thing. The older model acknowledged something of a trade-off between cash and worth. (There's a genuinely poignant bit in PJ O'Rourke's book 'Eat the Rich' where anonymous Wall St types admit that no, there's no real justification for their enormous pay and bonuses.)

    If the attitude to the teacher, the preacher, the social worker, the nurse, the doctor becomes "serves you right for not becoming a hotshot lawyer of financier", then don't be surprised that you can't find enough people to do those things.

    See also the recently binned attempt to introduce Performance Pay in education. Many reasons it didn't work. But an important, unremarked one is that many teachers weren't really motivated by that. They valued stability and not having to think about it more.
    Yeah whatever.

    If you asked 100 people across all occupations if they are happy with their salary I'm guessing upwards of 98% would say no.

    The original quote assumed that there is a cohort of people out there who happily get on with their lives on their "modest livings" and want for nothing more.

    I dispute this.
    I don't know, my parents were kind of like this. My dad never earned a huge amount of money and my mum mostly didn't work at all but they got by and we always had enough for the things we needed even if we didn't have a very extravagant lifestyle, no big foreign holidays, no car etc. They cut their clothes to fit their cloth, rather than grasping for more. Of course this was a time when a single salary earner on average earnings could afford to buy a 4 bedroom house so that's a big difference compared to now.
    As you correctly note, it is a different age now.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,075

    algarkirk said:

    Well.

    For Israel’s sake, Netanyahu must go now

    The Gaza war is the fault of Hamas, but the innocent are dying and it is beyond time for the killing to end


    n January 29, the Palestinian emergency services received a call from a six-year old girl called Hind Rajab, who said she was trapped in a car with her family and a tank was rolling towards them. “Will you come and get me?” she asked. “I’m so scared.”

    It took nearly two weeks for officials to reach the area, sealed off as an active combat zone, to find Hind dead along with several members of her family. Their car was riddled with bullets. Nearby were the burnt-out remains of an ambulance sent to help.

    When Israel was attacked on October 7, all people of sanity and compassion condemned it as a modern-day pogrom. Israel had to restore its security and get its hostages back.

    But the conflict is now in its fifth month; the outcome is desperately uncertain. The mortality figures from the Hamas-run authority might be disputed, but when you invade a territory of 2.3 million people crowded into 139 square miles, it’s easy to believe that around 25,000 will die – and what journalists can’t report because we’re mostly barred from entry, we can see on footage uploaded on the internet. Houses, shops, mosques flattened; bodies crushed beneath rubble.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/02/11/for-israels-sake-netanyahu-must-go-now/



    I don't support either side, and like the rest of humanity am 100% on the side of 6 year old girls with no exceptions. Would it not have been a good idea, rather before this happened, for Hamas to surrender, and for Palestinians to allow a group of reasonably honest brokers (all politics is relative) - Saudis, EU, Turkey, USA, Norway, Jordan, Egypt for example, to assist in a comprehensive negotiation.

    I cannot see what the non surrender of Hamas is now achieving for Palestinians. It would be different if their allies had fully joined in - they have plenty - but critically they have not.
    Hamas are a death cult. They have no morality, they are not reasonable people.

    The fact that Bibi has decided to play by their rules of engagement to the detriment of tens of thousands of people including a 6 year old Palestinian girl suggests HE (Bibi) is no better than Hamas.
    Yes. But lots of war leaders are unreasonable. However wars come to an end. From where we are now, the Palestinians best position is one sided ceasefire and negotiation. If Iran, Russia, a number of Arab states etc had decided to go all out militarily in support of Hamas it would be different, but their allies are not especially decent people.

    At this moment there is a uniquely strong world wide sense that the Palestinians deserve better than either Hamas or Israel can offer alone. Negotiation, back by USA, EU and others is the best next step to take in support of other 6 year old girls.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,126
    edited February 12
    kamski said:

    Isn't it a bit of a myth that Democrats coalesced on Biden last time because they thought he was the best (or only) person to defeat Trump? As I remember, everyone else gave up and endorsed Biden because they didn't want Sanders to win the nomination. Sanders was also too old and, like Biden, shouldn't have been running in 2020. We're in a mess because of the egos of people in their seventies who should have made way for younger people (with less name recognition of course), and the weakness of political parties in the USA.

    What happened was that there were a load of moderate candidates none of whom got an overwhelming lead in Iowa and NH, and then they got to the first state with black people and they overwhelmingly went for Biden. You can't win a Democratic primary with just white moderates because there aren't enough of them, so all the other moderates dropped out and backed Biden. Bernie Sanders never had a strategy to reach more than 1/3 of the primary electorate so that was that.

    Part of his appeal with the primary voters was probably that they thought he'd be good at attracting the elderly white people they needed to beat Trump, but the party could have coalesced around any other of the moderate candidates if they'd managed to get clearly out in front of the pack.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,075
    TOPPING said:

    algarkirk said:

    TOPPING said:

    FF43 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    ydoethur said:

    Ouch.

    Voters think Rishi Sunak cares less than the rest of the Tories

    Even Conservative MPs are uncomfortable about the prime minister’s ability to relate to voters




    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/voters-think-rishi-sunak-cares-less-than-the-rest-of-the-tories-k7w76kf96

    Even more ouch.


    Perhaps their answer merely expressed indifference.

    'What do you think Rishi Sunak feels about people like you?'

    'Who cares?'
    It's the politics of envy, the fucking plebs cannot cope that the children/grandchildren of humble immigrants have done better than them.
    @sturdyAlex

    The "politics of envy" accusation is essentially that you, too, would love to have stepped on a few throats to make millions, and you'd be clinging on to it just as fiercely.

    The idea of people who just seek the dignity of a modest living, but a useful one, doesn't even compute.
    They fancy it to be the "politics of envy" when it's actually the "politics of repugnance"
    I'm not 100% sure how many people really just "seek the dignity of a modest living".
    From the perspective of where I live - 300 miles from London, largest town in the county is below 100,000 - "a people who just seek the dignity of a modest living, but a useful one" describes our daily reality and much of the human condition very well.
    As I said, I seriously dispute that. But we'll never know the stats unless you head out with your clipboard.
    Thanks. In this case (though not all) I think the qualitative analysis of an anthropologist would give a better picture than a clip board. Sometimes careful observation of how people live gives a better picture than their answers to abstract questions.
  • TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    FF43 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    ydoethur said:

    Ouch.

    Voters think Rishi Sunak cares less than the rest of the Tories

    Even Conservative MPs are uncomfortable about the prime minister’s ability to relate to voters




    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/voters-think-rishi-sunak-cares-less-than-the-rest-of-the-tories-k7w76kf96

    Even more ouch.


    Perhaps their answer merely expressed indifference.

    'What do you think Rishi Sunak feels about people like you?'

    'Who cares?'
    It's the politics of envy, the fucking plebs cannot cope that the children/grandchildren of humble immigrants have done better than them.
    @sturdyAlex

    The "politics of envy" accusation is essentially that you, too, would love to have stepped on a few throats to make millions, and you'd be clinging on to it just as fiercely.

    The idea of people who just seek the dignity of a modest living, but a useful one, doesn't even compute.
    They fancy it to be the "politics of envy" when it's actually the "politics of repugnance"
    I'm not 100% sure how many people really just "seek the dignity of a modest living".
    Depends on how you define "modest", I guess.

    But the sort of jobs that we normally class as vocations, in the grey area from charities to public services, have traditionally worked on the assumption that there are people willing to work for less money and more meaning.

    And a lot of those are rather collapsing right now. Partly because "less money" has morphed intro "taking the piss money". And partly because of changes in the cost of living (just build more bloody houses, beyond the point where it's commercially wise to do so) mean that it's harder to have a good life with less money.

    But there is also a values thing. The older model acknowledged something of a trade-off between cash and worth. (There's a genuinely poignant bit in PJ O'Rourke's book 'Eat the Rich' where anonymous Wall St types admit that no, there's no real justification for their enormous pay and bonuses.)

    If the attitude to the teacher, the preacher, the social worker, the nurse, the doctor becomes "serves you right for not becoming a hotshot lawyer of financier", then don't be surprised that you can't find enough people to do those things.

    See also the recently binned attempt to introduce Performance Pay in education. Many reasons it didn't work. But an important, unremarked one is that many teachers weren't really motivated by that. They valued stability and not having to think about it more.
    Yeah whatever.

    If you asked 100 people across all occupations if they are happy with their salary I'm guessing upwards of 98% would say no.

    The original quote assumed that there is a cohort of people out there who happily get on with their lives on their "modest livings" and want for nothing more.

    I dispute this.
    If you're taking about a pay rise with nothing else changing, then yes.

    But there's a different effect, which is the one I'm thinking of. There are lots of sectors - education is the one I know about, but broadly anything that has "vocation" attached to it applies- where it's not financially rational for anyone to do it. Every maths teacher could make more in finance. Every TA could make more and experience less hassle, in a supermarket.

    Such people used to be considered good, valuable people. It's not entirely selfless, it's also how individuals balance the tangible and intangible rewards of work. But a combination of a decade plus pay squeeze and broader cultural stuff means that balance isn't working any more.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 24,196
    edited February 12
    algarkirk said:

    algarkirk said:

    Well.

    For Israel’s sake, Netanyahu must go now

    The Gaza war is the fault of Hamas, but the innocent are dying and it is beyond time for the killing to end


    n January 29, the Palestinian emergency services received a call from a six-year old girl called Hind Rajab, who said she was trapped in a car with her family and a tank was rolling towards them. “Will you come and get me?” she asked. “I’m so scared.”

    It took nearly two weeks for officials to reach the area, sealed off as an active combat zone, to find Hind dead along with several members of her family. Their car was riddled with bullets. Nearby were the burnt-out remains of an ambulance sent to help.

    When Israel was attacked on October 7, all people of sanity and compassion condemned it as a modern-day pogrom. Israel had to restore its security and get its hostages back.

    But the conflict is now in its fifth month; the outcome is desperately uncertain. The mortality figures from the Hamas-run authority might be disputed, but when you invade a territory of 2.3 million people crowded into 139 square miles, it’s easy to believe that around 25,000 will die – and what journalists can’t report because we’re mostly barred from entry, we can see on footage uploaded on the internet. Houses, shops, mosques flattened; bodies crushed beneath rubble.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/02/11/for-israels-sake-netanyahu-must-go-now/



    I don't support either side, and like the rest of humanity am 100% on the side of 6 year old girls with no exceptions. Would it not have been a good idea, rather before this happened, for Hamas to surrender, and for Palestinians to allow a group of reasonably honest brokers (all politics is relative) - Saudis, EU, Turkey, USA, Norway, Jordan, Egypt for example, to assist in a comprehensive negotiation.

    I cannot see what the non surrender of Hamas is now achieving for Palestinians. It would be different if their allies had fully joined in - they have plenty - but critically they have not.
    Hamas are a death cult. They have no morality, they are not reasonable people.

    The fact that Bibi has decided to play by their rules of engagement to the detriment of tens of thousands of people including a 6 year old Palestinian girl suggests HE (Bibi) is no better than Hamas.
    Yes. But lots of war leaders are unreasonable. However wars come to an end. From where we are now, the Palestinians best position is one sided ceasefire and negotiation. If Iran, Russia, a number of Arab states etc had decided to go all out militarily in support of Hamas it would be different, but their allies are not especially decent people.

    At this moment there is a uniquely strong world wide sense that the Palestinians deserve better than either Hamas or Israel can offer alone. Negotiation, back by USA, EU and others is the best next step to take in support of other 6 year old girls.
    You did not understand what I wrote. So I'll explain again.

    Hamas "officials" except perhaps those living in luxury condominiums in Doha (they are living the life of Riley) don't give a f*** about how many Gazans die, including themselves. Israel's Prime Minister has an instinctive hatred of all Arabs (see Max Hastings's analysis) which is why he also couldn't care less how many Gazans die. That situation from both perspectives is unsustainable, but quite what the world grandees can do when neither Hamas, nor Bibi are listening means that chaos continues.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,529

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    FF43 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    ydoethur said:

    Ouch.

    Voters think Rishi Sunak cares less than the rest of the Tories

    Even Conservative MPs are uncomfortable about the prime minister’s ability to relate to voters




    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/voters-think-rishi-sunak-cares-less-than-the-rest-of-the-tories-k7w76kf96

    Even more ouch.


    Perhaps their answer merely expressed indifference.

    'What do you think Rishi Sunak feels about people like you?'

    'Who cares?'
    It's the politics of envy, the fucking plebs cannot cope that the children/grandchildren of humble immigrants have done better than them.
    @sturdyAlex

    The "politics of envy" accusation is essentially that you, too, would love to have stepped on a few throats to make millions, and you'd be clinging on to it just as fiercely.

    The idea of people who just seek the dignity of a modest living, but a useful one, doesn't even compute.
    They fancy it to be the "politics of envy" when it's actually the "politics of repugnance"
    I'm not 100% sure how many people really just "seek the dignity of a modest living".
    Depends on how you define "modest", I guess.

    But the sort of jobs that we normally class as vocations, in the grey area from charities to public services, have traditionally worked on the assumption that there are people willing to work for less money and more meaning.

    And a lot of those are rather collapsing right now. Partly because "less money" has morphed intro "taking the piss money". And partly because of changes in the cost of living (just build more bloody houses, beyond the point where it's commercially wise to do so) mean that it's harder to have a good life with less money.

    But there is also a values thing. The older model acknowledged something of a trade-off between cash and worth. (There's a genuinely poignant bit in PJ O'Rourke's book 'Eat the Rich' where anonymous Wall St types admit that no, there's no real justification for their enormous pay and bonuses.)

    If the attitude to the teacher, the preacher, the social worker, the nurse, the doctor becomes "serves you right for not becoming a hotshot lawyer of financier", then don't be surprised that you can't find enough people to do those things.

    See also the recently binned attempt to introduce Performance Pay in education. Many reasons it didn't work. But an important, unremarked one is that many teachers weren't really motivated by that. They valued stability and not having to think about it more.
    Yeah whatever.

    If you asked 100 people across all occupations if they are happy with their salary I'm guessing upwards of 98% would say no.

    The original quote assumed that there is a cohort of people out there who happily get on with their lives on their "modest livings" and want for nothing more.

    I dispute this.
    If you're taking about a pay rise with nothing else changing, then yes.

    But there's a different effect, which is the one I'm thinking of. There are lots of sectors - education is the one I know about, but broadly anything that has "vocation" attached to it applies- where it's not financially rational for anyone to do it. Every maths teacher could make more in finance. Every TA could make more and experience less hassle, in a supermarket.

    Such people used to be considered good, valuable people. It's not entirely selfless, it's also how individuals balance the tangible and intangible rewards of work. But a combination of a decade plus pay squeeze and broader cultural stuff means that balance isn't working any more.
    As I posted upthread, Thatcherism.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,075
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    FF43 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    ydoethur said:

    Ouch.

    Voters think Rishi Sunak cares less than the rest of the Tories

    Even Conservative MPs are uncomfortable about the prime minister’s ability to relate to voters




    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/voters-think-rishi-sunak-cares-less-than-the-rest-of-the-tories-k7w76kf96

    Even more ouch.


    Perhaps their answer merely expressed indifference.

    'What do you think Rishi Sunak feels about people like you?'

    'Who cares?'
    It's the politics of envy, the fucking plebs cannot cope that the children/grandchildren of humble immigrants have done better than them.
    @sturdyAlex

    The "politics of envy" accusation is essentially that you, too, would love to have stepped on a few throats to make millions, and you'd be clinging on to it just as fiercely.

    The idea of people who just seek the dignity of a modest living, but a useful one, doesn't even compute.
    They fancy it to be the "politics of envy" when it's actually the "politics of repugnance"
    I'm not 100% sure how many people really just "seek the dignity of a modest living".
    Depends on how you define "modest", I guess.

    But the sort of jobs that we normally class as vocations, in the grey area from charities to public services, have traditionally worked on the assumption that there are people willing to work for less money and more meaning.

    And a lot of those are rather collapsing right now. Partly because "less money" has morphed intro "taking the piss money". And partly because of changes in the cost of living (just build more bloody houses, beyond the point where it's commercially wise to do so) mean that it's harder to have a good life with less money.

    But there is also a values thing. The older model acknowledged something of a trade-off between cash and worth. (There's a genuinely poignant bit in PJ O'Rourke's book 'Eat the Rich' where anonymous Wall St types admit that no, there's no real justification for their enormous pay and bonuses.)

    If the attitude to the teacher, the preacher, the social worker, the nurse, the doctor becomes "serves you right for not becoming a hotshot lawyer of financier", then don't be surprised that you can't find enough people to do those things.

    See also the recently binned attempt to introduce Performance Pay in education. Many reasons it didn't work. But an important, unremarked one is that many teachers weren't really motivated by that. They valued stability and not having to think about it more.
    Yeah whatever.

    If you asked 100 people across all occupations if they are happy with their salary I'm guessing upwards of 98% would say no.

    The original quote assumed that there is a cohort of people out there who happily get on with their lives on their "modest livings" and want for nothing more.

    I dispute this.
    People are mostly decent, not martyrs or monks. Decent people will generally take any honest cash that is going - by inheritance, by laying Arsenal for the Premiership, the zillion to one chance of a big lottery win, by doing an extra job for people at the weekend, and also by being paid more. This is all entirely consistent 'with just seeking the dignity of a modest living, but a useful one'. People live and they also dream.

    BTW huge numbers of people do not want or seek to be promoted beyond a certain level, even though that is where the money is. Watch human behaviour; it's all obvious if you look.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,075

    algarkirk said:

    algarkirk said:

    Well.

    For Israel’s sake, Netanyahu must go now

    The Gaza war is the fault of Hamas, but the innocent are dying and it is beyond time for the killing to end


    n January 29, the Palestinian emergency services received a call from a six-year old girl called Hind Rajab, who said she was trapped in a car with her family and a tank was rolling towards them. “Will you come and get me?” she asked. “I’m so scared.”

    It took nearly two weeks for officials to reach the area, sealed off as an active combat zone, to find Hind dead along with several members of her family. Their car was riddled with bullets. Nearby were the burnt-out remains of an ambulance sent to help.

    When Israel was attacked on October 7, all people of sanity and compassion condemned it as a modern-day pogrom. Israel had to restore its security and get its hostages back.

    But the conflict is now in its fifth month; the outcome is desperately uncertain. The mortality figures from the Hamas-run authority might be disputed, but when you invade a territory of 2.3 million people crowded into 139 square miles, it’s easy to believe that around 25,000 will die – and what journalists can’t report because we’re mostly barred from entry, we can see on footage uploaded on the internet. Houses, shops, mosques flattened; bodies crushed beneath rubble.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/02/11/for-israels-sake-netanyahu-must-go-now/



    I don't support either side, and like the rest of humanity am 100% on the side of 6 year old girls with no exceptions. Would it not have been a good idea, rather before this happened, for Hamas to surrender, and for Palestinians to allow a group of reasonably honest brokers (all politics is relative) - Saudis, EU, Turkey, USA, Norway, Jordan, Egypt for example, to assist in a comprehensive negotiation.

    I cannot see what the non surrender of Hamas is now achieving for Palestinians. It would be different if their allies had fully joined in - they have plenty - but critically they have not.
    Hamas are a death cult. They have no morality, they are not reasonable people.

    The fact that Bibi has decided to play by their rules of engagement to the detriment of tens of thousands of people including a 6 year old Palestinian girl suggests HE (Bibi) is no better than Hamas.
    Yes. But lots of war leaders are unreasonable. However wars come to an end. From where we are now, the Palestinians best position is one sided ceasefire and negotiation. If Iran, Russia, a number of Arab states etc had decided to go all out militarily in support of Hamas it would be different, but their allies are not especially decent people.

    At this moment there is a uniquely strong world wide sense that the Palestinians deserve better than either Hamas or Israel can offer alone. Negotiation, back by USA, EU and others is the best next step to take in support of other 6 year old girls.
    You did not understand what I wrote. So I'll explain again.

    Hamas "officials" except perhaps those living in luxury condominiums in Doha (they are living the life of Riley) don't give a f*** about how many Gazans die, including themselves. Israel's Prime Minister has an instinctive hatred of all Arabs (see Max Hastings's analysis) which is why he also couldn't care less how many Gazans die. That situation from both perspectives is unsustainable, but quite what the world grandees can do when neither Hamas, nor Bibi are listening means that chaos continues.
    I agree with you. We are both right. I support neither side. You point out the leaders of various sides are bad people. Yes. Wars end. I would like this one to.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 4,129

    kamski said:

    Isn't it a bit of a myth that Democrats coalesced on Biden last time because they thought he was the best (or only) person to defeat Trump? As I remember, everyone else gave up and endorsed Biden because they didn't want Sanders to win the nomination. Sanders was also too old and, like Biden, shouldn't have been running in 2020. We're in a mess because of the egos of people in their seventies who should have made way for younger people (with less name recognition of course), and the weakness of political parties in the USA.

    What happened was that there were a load of moderate candidates none of whom got an overwhelming lead in Iowa and NH, and then they got to the first state with black people and they overwhelmingly went for Biden. You can't win a Democratic primary with just white moderates because there aren't enough of them, so all the other moderates dropped out and backed Biden. Bernie Sanders never had a strategy to reach more than 1/3 of the primary electorate so that was that.

    Part of his appeal with the primary voters was probably that they thought he'd be good at attracting the elderly white people they needed to beat Trump, but the party could have coalesced around any other of the moderate candidates if they'd managed to get clearly out in front of the pack.
    The other candidates dropped out before Super Tuesday because Sanders was leading the polls in most Super Tuesday states. Biden was chosen as the "stop Sanders" candidate rather than the stop Trump candidate.

    A younger candidate would have been better as a stop Trump candidate. A candidate who offered a clearcut contrast to Trump's nepotism would have made a better stop Trump candidate.
  • Taz said:

    Taz said:

    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    If I were feeling generous, I would say whatever idiot negotiated our PFI contracts should be shot.

    If I were feeling ungenerous, I would say they should be forced to listen to Trump’s speeches on a loop for 24 hours first.

    Schools in budget crisis as PFI charges soar
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-68207051

    Gordon Brown should be excoriated over PFI (not falsely blamed for the GFC). However, in this story it looks like the real flaw is automatic price rises with RPI inflation, the sort of thing everyone is familiar with on their phone contracts.
    That’s one flaw.

    The number of things included in the contract is another.

    The poor quality of the buildings which mean half of them are already falling down is a third.

    The penalty clauses for exiting with the lack of penalty clauses for a company failing to honour its obligations is a fourth.

    The original prices which were far too high are a fifth.

    Using a measure of inflation the government didn’t use elsewhere is a sixth.

    So - using somebody who was clearly not a trained lawyer or possessed of a functioning brain to negotiate them was insanity.
    I said hair a decade ago that government ought to have legislated to set aside contracts which were manifestly unfair.
    It will only be some terms in the contract that would be unfair.

    There is already legislation in place to deal with unfair contract terms.

    https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1977/50
    That has limited application to commercial contracts such as PFI. In broad terms, it only applies when one party is doing business with the other party on its standard terms of business. That is not the case for PFI contracts.

    It still has application to commercial contracts, and there is other law available too.

    So what do we do, as Nigel proposes, the govt enables a law to allow them to set aside contracts they willingly entered into but now regret ?

    How are these PFI contracts, many which have been in place for many years, now "unfair" exactly ?
    Its application to PFI contracts is limited to preventing either party escaping liability for death or injury caused by negligence. Not particularly helpful in terms of what is being discussed here.

    The government passing a law that allowed it to set aside or alter contracts it had willingly entered into would undermine the whole basis of contract law. Even if such a law survived legal challenge, it would dramatically increase the cost of the government - commercial entities will want greater rewards to compensate for the possibility that the government might unilaterally change or void the contract.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,529
    algarkirk said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    FF43 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    ydoethur said:

    Ouch.

    Voters think Rishi Sunak cares less than the rest of the Tories

    Even Conservative MPs are uncomfortable about the prime minister’s ability to relate to voters




    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/voters-think-rishi-sunak-cares-less-than-the-rest-of-the-tories-k7w76kf96

    Even more ouch.


    Perhaps their answer merely expressed indifference.

    'What do you think Rishi Sunak feels about people like you?'

    'Who cares?'
    It's the politics of envy, the fucking plebs cannot cope that the children/grandchildren of humble immigrants have done better than them.
    @sturdyAlex

    The "politics of envy" accusation is essentially that you, too, would love to have stepped on a few throats to make millions, and you'd be clinging on to it just as fiercely.

    The idea of people who just seek the dignity of a modest living, but a useful one, doesn't even compute.
    They fancy it to be the "politics of envy" when it's actually the "politics of repugnance"
    I'm not 100% sure how many people really just "seek the dignity of a modest living".
    Depends on how you define "modest", I guess.

    But the sort of jobs that we normally class as vocations, in the grey area from charities to public services, have traditionally worked on the assumption that there are people willing to work for less money and more meaning.

    And a lot of those are rather collapsing right now. Partly because "less money" has morphed intro "taking the piss money". And partly because of changes in the cost of living (just build more bloody houses, beyond the point where it's commercially wise to do so) mean that it's harder to have a good life with less money.

    But there is also a values thing. The older model acknowledged something of a trade-off between cash and worth. (There's a genuinely poignant bit in PJ O'Rourke's book 'Eat the Rich' where anonymous Wall St types admit that no, there's no real justification for their enormous pay and bonuses.)

    If the attitude to the teacher, the preacher, the social worker, the nurse, the doctor becomes "serves you right for not becoming a hotshot lawyer of financier", then don't be surprised that you can't find enough people to do those things.

    See also the recently binned attempt to introduce Performance Pay in education. Many reasons it didn't work. But an important, unremarked one is that many teachers weren't really motivated by that. They valued stability and not having to think about it more.
    Yeah whatever.

    If you asked 100 people across all occupations if they are happy with their salary I'm guessing upwards of 98% would say no.

    The original quote assumed that there is a cohort of people out there who happily get on with their lives on their "modest livings" and want for nothing more.

    I dispute this.
    People are mostly decent, not martyrs or monks. Decent people will generally take any honest cash that is going - by inheritance, by laying Arsenal for the Premiership, the zillion to one chance of a big lottery win, by doing an extra job for people at the weekend, and also by being paid more. This is all entirely consistent 'with just seeking the dignity of a modest living, but a useful one'. People live and they also dream.

    BTW huge numbers of people do not want or seek to be promoted beyond a certain level, even though that is where the money is. Watch human behaviour; it's all obvious if you look.
    That is all true, especially the second paragraph. However too often ‘public opinion’ was directed supportively towards the ‘successful’ rather than the ‘useful’.
  • Whenever wages or the cost of living get mentioned, the right get all huffy. We're no longer in the age of hair shirts - unless you are in the bottom decide (and we'll come back to them in a minute).

    For so many people in so many decently paid and well respected jobs, it doesn't matter how hard they work. Money remains a concern. For most of the people in the jobs we claim are vital for society (lets take TAs as one example), wages and conditions are genuinely insulting.

    We then conflate multiple issues together. Wages are low and the cost of living high, so we need women to go back to work after having a child. But childcare costs too much. After much complaining the government announces free childcare, but refuses to pay for it.

    Thats the majority of people in the middle. At the bottom, that 10% is truly screwed. They pay a poverty tax - everything costs more (rent, electricity) with a very steep marginal tax rate to get through if they are able to try and work they way out of that decile.
Sign In or Register to comment.