PB tories hate every single tax increase but yet their lads left public finances in dire straits. Fuck off, you broke it. The money has to come from somewhere and if business owners have to take some money from profits to pay NI then so what. Deal with it.
There are Santa's little helpers, like you and Foxy too, but you don't have quite the same histrionics that they do, even though you both get off on Wokery, Self-Flagellation and Reparations.
We need a concerted effort to get these insurrectionists out of our echo chamber. Let's boycott these bastards - wait, what's my name doing on your list?
🔺 NEW: Sir Keir Starmer has been forced to promise Commonwealth countries that Britain will discuss reparations for slavery next year as he failed to quash an official call for damages
As I said before, I think he's actually a traitor. He loathes this country and can't wait to destroy it.
Agreed. It can only be that.
If he’s not a traitor he is the worst politician in history who always ends up with the worst possible deal for this country. Remember he’s the guy who not only gave away the Chagos to China but AGREED A DEAL WHERE WE PAY FOR THAT
He (i.e., we) will be ripped apart by China, the EU, Spain, the Commonwealth and the USA in any trade deal or geopolitical negotiation over the next 4 years. It's going to cost us a fortune. Some of it permanently, I'm afraid.
I just hope the Tories can unpick it all when they reset and get back in office 🙏
I would suggest the damage from this is predominantly domestic. It is red meat for Reform.
Those budget requests to the Tory government weren't politically driven at all, not a chance. I fucking hate this mayor. He's so openly shit but because of London demographics we can never get rid of him.
Never say never- if Boris could do it, if Andy Street could do it in Greater Birmingham, it's not impossible.
But if the Conservatives insist on putting up nobodies who would rather still be in Middlesex/Surrey/Kent/Essex, they will keep losing. Putting Hall up was an insult to London, and thingy who had been a senior Spad would have little better.
Maybe James Cleverly- definitely a big character, probably about to be semi-detached from where the party is headed, connections to London- can be persuaded for 2028.
Yes they need an Andy Street from London.
Charlie Mullins would have been a great one a decade ago, but he’s now 70 and retired with his money.
Cleverly is a good idea, it needs to be someone who’s already a household name in the city.
Michael Gove would also be a good pick, he’s lived there for decades and has possibly the best record of the last government at actually chalking up achievements. Not that he’s about to quit his very cushy new job at the Spectator any time soon.
Gove's also not a bad spot; he was having the right ideas about planning and development before his MPs thwarted him, and they could work as his big idea for London.
Possibly a bit too linked to the last government on the public's mind- the capital is different to the rest of the nation, and a Conservative who wants to win there probably needs to lean into that.
But the Conservatives could, and probably will, do a lot worse.
🔺 NEW: Sir Keir Starmer has been forced to promise Commonwealth countries that Britain will discuss reparations for slavery next year as he failed to quash an official call for damages
Oh God, he's such a Twat.
"Been forced": it's a voluntary body, with no teeth or binding decision-making ability; they just sensed weakness and pushed him till he folded.
Get him out of office. We can't afford 4 1/2 years of British interests being sold out worldwide.
I would be happy if the UK resigned from the Commonwealth. Sorry, Charlie Three, I know your Mum was passionate about it, but times change.
Has there ever been any polling about the UK and the Commonwealth?
I'm old enough to remember when the closer ties with the Commonwealth were being touted by the right as an alternative to EU membership.
Those budget requests to the Tory government weren't politically driven at all, not a chance. I fucking hate this mayor. He's so openly shit but because of London demographics we can never get rid of him.
Never say never- if Boris could do it, if Andy Street could do it in Greater Birmingham, it's not impossible.
But if the Conservatives insist on putting up nobodies who would rather still be in Middlesex/Surrey/Kent/Essex, they will keep losing. Putting Hall up was an insult to London, and thingy who had been a senior Spad would have little better.
Maybe James Cleverly- definitely a big character, probably about to be semi-detached from where the party is headed, connections to London- can be persuaded for 2028.
Perhaps ick a candidate who isn't obviously rubbish. The results show that London is happy with Khan's administration.
🔺 NEW: Sir Keir Starmer has been forced to promise Commonwealth countries that Britain will discuss reparations for slavery next year as he failed to quash an official call for damages
As I said before, I think he's actually a traitor. He loathes this country and can't wait to destroy it.
He's a word that would get me banned.
But I hope I don't bump into him next Tuesday.
Starmer, during his short term in office, has proved himself to be a very weak man.
Not only will he not defend his country's own interests, he probably doesn't even think he ought to defend his country's own interests.
I wonder if Starmer has similar views to those reportedly of Gus O'Donnell's
O'Donnell supports a liberal immigration policy, saying in 2011 that "When I was at the Treasury I argued for the most open door possible to immigration … I think it's my job to maximise global welfare not national welfare." He has repeated this view in a milder form in newspaper articles, and thinks that his views about immigration are in the interests of the average British person, notwithstanding some short-term losers.
It's interesting to me that Blair and Brown were absolutely determined, during their first term, to give the Conservatives no opening to claw their way back.
Stamer, on the other hand, is giving them endless openings.
How much higher do you think immigration will go over the course of, say, the next year?
It should fall, because of changes already made to the law. What legal changes this government will make, I have no idea, at this point.
I’d love to know who had the bright idea of giving visas to dependents of students. 400,000 of them in 2022, who all had to live somewhere.
From 2019. "Written" by Liam Fox and Damian Hinds. May PM.
"increase the total number of international students choosing to study in the UK higher education system each year to 600,000 by 2030"
"The government’s 2018 immigration white paper, The UK’s Future Skills-Based Immigration System, sets out a number of positive changes to the visa offer for international students."
"This will include the whole of government promoting our visa offer, highlighting that there is no limit on the number of international students that can study in the UK and that we are improving our post-study offer."
It’s not a bad idea by itself, but the problem (as ever) is housing.
I’d let as many students in on visas as the university can accommodate themselves - which gives a large incentive to start building more halls of residence on campus or in their city. Overseas students are absolutely a good thing for UK plc.
Its a good thing as long as the govt can be at least kind of consistent on it. Yoyo-ing between telling the universities to expand rapidly then restricting it when they see the completely obvious impact on net migration was more harmful than doing nothing.
Just take students out of the migration figures and improve our balance of payments. And build not just near universities but everywhere where homes are needed.
My god, it gets worse, Starmer actually SIGNED that communique committing us to a discussion about trillions in reparations
Though if the "discussions" are conducted in the same manner as a Government planning enquiry, you and I will have long since met our Maker before a single penny is handed over.
We might even have re-joined the European Union by then.....something to which you can look forward.
🔺 NEW: Sir Keir Starmer has been forced to promise Commonwealth countries that Britain will discuss reparations for slavery next year as he failed to quash an official call for damages
Oh God, he's such a Twat.
"Been forced": it's a voluntary body, with no teeth or binding decision-making ability; they just sensed weakness and pushed him till he folded.
Get him out of office. We can't afford 4 1/2 years of British interests being sold out worldwide.
I would be happy if the UK resigned from the Commonwealth. Sorry, Charlie Three, I know your Mum was passionate about it, but times change.
Has there ever been any polling about the UK and the Commonwealth?
I'm old enough to remember when the closer ties with the Commonwealth were being touted by the right as an alternative to EU membership.
Starmer might have just inadvertently destroyed the Commonwealth.
China would have viewed it as a win-win. Either make Britain a cuck, whilst still keeping its Caribbean vassals in check, or sow the wind for its destruction.
A future right-wing government is simply going to rip this up, and totally disengage.
She may have been a bat-crap crazy kinkster but I never doubted that she was patriotic and actually wanted the best for British people and Britain, she just had mistimed ideas
Starmer wants what’s best for 1 his personal vanity and 2 anyone APART from the British especially if they are from “the global south”
She may have been a bat-crap crazy kinkster but I never doubted that she was patriotic and actually wanted the best for British people and Britain, she just had mistimed ideas
Starmer wants what’s best for 1 his personal vanity and 2 anyone APART from the British especially if they are from “the global south”
Didn't you get the memo...Global South...can't use that...tis racist....Global Majority, please.
🔺 NEW: Sir Keir Starmer has been forced to promise Commonwealth countries that Britain will discuss reparations for slavery next year as he failed to quash an official call for damages
As I said before, I think he's actually a traitor. He loathes this country and can't wait to destroy it.
Agreed. It can only be that.
If he’s not a traitor he is the worst politician in history who always ends up with the worst possible deal for this country. Remember he’s the guy who not only gave away the Chagos to China but AGREED A DEAL WHERE WE PAY FOR THAT
He (i.e., we) will be ripped apart by China, the EU, Spain, the Commonwealth and the USA in any trade deal or geopolitical negotiation over the next 4 years. It's going to cost us a fortune. Some of it permanently, I'm afraid.
I just hope the Tories can unpick it all when they reset and get back in office 🙏
He is a traitorous c*nt
Remember that one of the “reasons” for the Chagos Surrender was that it would “increase our influence and soft power”. Instead everyone has laughed at Starmer and Labour for being such a weak bunch of fucking cucks and now they are demanding the UK pay seven trillion quid and forcing Starmer to sign this communique
WANKERS
He's surely empowered Putin too. How long before Russian tanks are in Sevenoaks because the great big girl's blouse is too scared to use Trident?
Reading some of today’s comments, I’m worried that some on here would prefer Putin to Starmer. I’m thinking I’ve accidentally logged onto Con Home.
She may have been a bat-crap crazy kinkster but I never doubted that she was patriotic and actually wanted the best for British people and Britain, she just had mistimed ideas
Starmer wants what’s best for 1 his personal vanity and 2 anyone APART from the British especially if they are from “the global south”
Liz Truss was the one that started the whole Chagos Islands surrender plan. She's as stupid as Starmer.
She may have been a bat-crap crazy kinkster but I never doubted that she was patriotic and actually wanted the best for British people and Britain, she just had mistimed ideas
Starmer wants what’s best for 1 his personal vanity and 2 anyone APART from the British especially if they are from “the global south”
Liz Truss was the one that started the whole Chagos Islands surrender plan. She's as stupid as Starmer.
She may have been a bat-crap crazy kinkster but I never doubted that she was patriotic and actually wanted the best for British people and Britain, she just had mistimed ideas
Starmer wants what’s best for 1 his personal vanity and 2 anyone APART from the British especially if they are from “the global south”
Liz Truss was the one that started the whole Chagos Islands surrender plan. She's as stupid as Starmer.
In reality, we have had a series of utterly terrible leaders, not sure the word leader is the correct one, as most weren't leaders.
She may have been a bat-crap crazy kinkster but I never doubted that she was patriotic and actually wanted the best for British people and Britain, she just had mistimed ideas
Starmer wants what’s best for 1 his personal vanity and 2 anyone APART from the British especially if they are from “the global south”
Liz Truss was the one that started the whole Chagos Islands surrender plan. She's as stupid as Starmer.
In reality, we have had a series of utterly terrible leaders.
Arguably Boris was the last PM who was up to the job.
She may have been a bat-crap crazy kinkster but I never doubted that she was patriotic and actually wanted the best for British people and Britain, she just had mistimed ideas
Starmer wants what’s best for 1 his personal vanity and 2 anyone APART from the British especially if they are from “the global south”
Liz Truss was the one that started the whole Chagos Islands surrender plan. She's as stupid as Starmer.
I’ve read disputing reports on that. With some plausible arguments that it had nothing to do with her
She may have been a bat-crap crazy kinkster but I never doubted that she was patriotic and actually wanted the best for British people and Britain, she just had mistimed ideas
Starmer wants what’s best for 1 his personal vanity and 2 anyone APART from the British especially if they are from “the global south”
He really is a typical creature of the public sector. Relentlessly woke, very weak but also with a nasty streak.
🔺 NEW: Sir Keir Starmer has been forced to promise Commonwealth countries that Britain will discuss reparations for slavery next year as he failed to quash an official call for damages
As I said before, I think he's actually a traitor. He loathes this country and can't wait to destroy it.
Agreed. It can only be that.
If he’s not a traitor he is the worst politician in history who always ends up with the worst possible deal for this country. Remember he’s the guy who not only gave away the Chagos to China but AGREED A DEAL WHERE WE PAY FOR THAT
He (i.e., we) will be ripped apart by China, the EU, Spain, the Commonwealth and the USA in any trade deal or geopolitical negotiation over the next 4 years. It's going to cost us a fortune. Some of it permanently, I'm afraid.
I just hope the Tories can unpick it all when they reset and get back in office 🙏
He is a traitorous c*nt
Remember that one of the “reasons” for the Chagos Surrender was that it would “increase our influence and soft power”. Instead everyone has laughed at Starmer and Labour for being such a weak bunch of fucking cucks and now they are demanding the UK pay seven trillion quid and forcing Starmer to sign this communique
WANKERS
He's surely empowered Putin too. How long before Russian tanks are in Sevenoaks because the great big girl's blouse is too scared to use Trident?
Reading some of today’s comments, I’m worried that some on here would prefer Putin to Starmer. I’m thinking I’ve accidentally logged onto Con Home.
It would be surprising if some don't. 46% of the UK want "a strong leader who doesn't have to bother with parliament/elections". Very close to Trumps numbers in the US.
She may have been a bat-crap crazy kinkster but I never doubted that she was patriotic and actually wanted the best for British people and Britain, she just had mistimed ideas
Starmer wants what’s best for 1 his personal vanity and 2 anyone APART from the British especially if they are from “the global south”
He really is a typical creature of the public sector. Relentlessly woke, very weak but also with a nasty streak.
We now see why he was willing to deftly lick Corbyn's A-hole for so long.
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
If the pictures coming out of today’s Georgian election are accurate and not staged, then it’s…looking like a Government win. Another domino falls to the authoritarians.
It's not just Ukraine. It's Belarus. It's Georgia. It's Moldova. It's countless other places where Russia still seeks to meddle using thuggery intimidation and violence. It bewilders me my the west still prefers some kind of detente with Russia.
She may have been a bat-crap crazy kinkster but I never doubted that she was patriotic and actually wanted the best for British people and Britain, she just had mistimed ideas
Starmer wants what’s best for 1 his personal vanity and 2 anyone APART from the British especially if they are from “the global south”
Liz Truss was the one that started the whole Chagos Islands surrender plan. She's as stupid as Starmer.
I’ve read disputing reports on that. With some plausible arguments that it had nothing to do with her
The civil service landed it in her in tray after years of being blocked by Boris and she just said yes let's open negotiations. It's the kind of thing the civil service like to spring on inexperienced PMs and she fell for it.
🔺 NEW: Sir Keir Starmer has been forced to promise Commonwealth countries that Britain will discuss reparations for slavery next year as he failed to quash an official call for damages
As I said before, I think he's actually a traitor. He loathes this country and can't wait to destroy it.
Agreed. It can only be that.
If he’s not a traitor he is the worst politician in history who always ends up with the worst possible deal for this country. Remember he’s the guy who not only gave away the Chagos to China but AGREED A DEAL WHERE WE PAY FOR THAT
He (i.e., we) will be ripped apart by China, the EU, Spain, the Commonwealth and the USA in any trade deal or geopolitical negotiation over the next 4 years. It's going to cost us a fortune. Some of it permanently, I'm afraid.
I just hope the Tories can unpick it all when they reset and get back in office 🙏
He is a traitorous c*nt
Remember that one of the “reasons” for the Chagos Surrender was that it would “increase our influence and soft power”. Instead everyone has laughed at Starmer and Labour for being such a weak bunch of fucking cucks and now they are demanding the UK pay seven trillion quid and forcing Starmer to sign this communique
WANKERS
He's surely empowered Putin too. How long before Russian tanks are in Sevenoaks because the great big girl's blouse is too scared to use Trident?
Reading some of today’s comments, I’m worried that some on here would prefer Putin to Starmer. I’m thinking I’ve accidentally logged onto Con Home.
It would be surprising if some don't. 46% of the UK want "a strong leader who doesn't have to bother with parliament/elections". Very close to Trumps numbers in the US.
Yes and as shown in the usa now young women highly desire a strong man leader now the idea of which likely makes them moist.
🔺 NEW: Sir Keir Starmer has been forced to promise Commonwealth countries that Britain will discuss reparations for slavery next year as he failed to quash an official call for damages
As I said before, I think he's actually a traitor. He loathes this country and can't wait to destroy it.
He's a word that would get me banned.
But I hope I don't bump into him next Tuesday.
Starmer, during his short term in office, has proved himself to be a very weak man.
Not only will he not defend his country's own interests, he probably doesn't even think he ought to defend his country's own interests.
I wonder if Starmer has similar views to those reportedly of Gus O'Donnell's
O'Donnell supports a liberal immigration policy, saying in 2011 that "When I was at the Treasury I argued for the most open door possible to immigration … I think it's my job to maximise global welfare not national welfare." He has repeated this view in a milder form in newspaper articles, and thinks that his views about immigration are in the interests of the average British person, notwithstanding some short-term losers.
It's interesting to me that Blair and Brown were absolutely determined, during their first term, to give the Conservatives no opening to claw their way back.
Stamer, on the other hand, is giving them endless openings.
How much higher do you think immigration will go over the course of, say, the next year?
It should fall, because of changes already made to the law. What legal changes this government will make, I have no idea, at this point.
I’d love to know who had the bright idea of giving visas to dependents of students. 400,000 of them in 2022, who all had to live somewhere.
From 2019. "Written" by Liam Fox and Damian Hinds. May PM.
"increase the total number of international students choosing to study in the UK higher education system each year to 600,000 by 2030"
"The government’s 2018 immigration white paper, The UK’s Future Skills-Based Immigration System, sets out a number of positive changes to the visa offer for international students."
"This will include the whole of government promoting our visa offer, highlighting that there is no limit on the number of international students that can study in the UK and that we are improving our post-study offer."
It’s not a bad idea by itself, but the problem (as ever) is housing.
I’d let as many students in on visas as the university can accommodate themselves - which gives a large incentive to start building more halls of residence on campus or in their city. Overseas students are absolutely a good thing for UK plc.
Its a good thing as long as the govt can be at least kind of consistent on it. Yoyo-ing between telling the universities to expand rapidly then restricting it when they see the completely obvious impact on net migration was more harmful than doing nothing.
Just take students out of the migration figures and improve our balance of payments. And build not just near universities but everywhere where homes are needed.
Yes the consistency is important. The crux of my point is that we should allow the universities to expand as much as they wish in terms of international students (and dependents), but constrained by their own building of new accommodation.
I’d totally remove planning constraints for campus universities, let them build what they want where they want. More difficult for city-based unis, but there should be a presumption in favour of expanding housing when proposed.
They also need to note that accommodation for family groups looks quite different from accomodation for large numbers of singles.
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
The question to ask with anything like this is - what do we get in return? Avoid embarrassing legal decisions at the ICC?
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
🔺 NEW: Sir Keir Starmer has been forced to promise Commonwealth countries that Britain will discuss reparations for slavery next year as he failed to quash an official call for damages
As I said before, I think he's actually a traitor. He loathes this country and can't wait to destroy it.
Agreed. It can only be that.
If he’s not a traitor he is the worst politician in history who always ends up with the worst possible deal for this country. Remember he’s the guy who not only gave away the Chagos to China but AGREED A DEAL WHERE WE PAY FOR THAT
He (i.e., we) will be ripped apart by China, the EU, Spain, the Commonwealth and the USA in any trade deal or geopolitical negotiation over the next 4 years. It's going to cost us a fortune. Some of it permanently, I'm afraid.
I just hope the Tories can unpick it all when they reset and get back in office 🙏
He is a traitorous c*nt
Remember that one of the “reasons” for the Chagos Surrender was that it would “increase our influence and soft power”. Instead everyone has laughed at Starmer and Labour for being such a weak bunch of fucking cucks and now they are demanding the UK pay seven trillion quid and forcing Starmer to sign this communique
WANKERS
He's surely empowered Putin too. How long before Russian tanks are in Sevenoaks because the great big girl's blouse is too scared to use Trident?
Reading some of today’s comments, I’m worried that some on here would prefer Putin to Starmer. I’m thinking I’ve accidentally logged onto Con Home.
It's like we've turned into the cigar room in some Mayfair den in the 70s.
Chaps cussing the reds and working themselves up into a right old lather.
If the pictures coming out of today’s Georgian election are accurate and not staged, then it’s…looking like a Government win. Another domino falls to the authoritarians.
The disappointing thing is how easy it is for democracy to be subverted and it's usually from the inside. We are so fortunate in having a system which is largely free and fair and a transfer of power which, although ruthless, works quite well (apart from those supporters of the old Government who are still angry four months later).
The checks and balances of a democratic system aren't just about elections and voting - we see even in countries like Poland how the judiciary and the broadcast media cease to be independent of the Government and become supine servants.
IF, for example, the current Government banned the Daily Mail and shut down GB News, that would be considered by many to be anti-democratic. Being a supporter of democracy means tolerating opposition and dissent (within the law of course) and resisting the temptation to counter. Some Governments, either through insecurity, fear or simply because they like having the power, can't or don't resist.
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
You were right.
The whole world now will view Starmer as meek prey, because he is.
Watch out for him offering everything to Spain on Gibraltar. They won't be able to believe their luck.
If the pictures coming out of today’s Georgian election are accurate and not staged, then it’s…looking like a Government win. Another domino falls to the authoritarians.
It's not just Ukraine. It's Belarus. It's Georgia. It's Moldova. It's countless other places where Russia still seeks to meddle using thuggery intimidation and violence. It bewilders me my the west still prefers some kind of detente with Russia.
We are moving into a world where might makes right.
"Trinny and Susannah’s daughters say pair ‘would be cancelled’ if show made now
Lyla Elichaoff and Esme Bertelsen tell Tatler they have never watched What Not to Wear, with Elichaoff saying: ‘you can’t really speak to people like that now’"
She may have been a bat-crap crazy kinkster but I never doubted that she was patriotic and actually wanted the best for British people and Britain, she just had mistimed ideas
Starmer wants what’s best for 1 his personal vanity and 2 anyone APART from the British especially if they are from “the global south”
Liz Truss was the one that started the whole Chagos Islands surrender plan. She's as stupid as Starmer.
I’ve read disputing reports on that. With some plausible arguments that it had nothing to do with her
The civil service landed it in her in tray after years of being blocked by Boris and she just said yes let's open negotiations. It's the kind of thing the civil service like to spring on inexperienced PMs and she fell for it.
The discussion here is incredibly childish and repetitive today. And frankly has been since the election result to varying degrees.
I can totally see why so many people have quietly left or stopped posting when the debate is at the level of calling politicians the c word.
I come to this site to discuss with people that don’t share my views as I think it’s important that I get a perspective which isn’t “leftie centrist dad”. But at this point I do begin to question if there might be better places to discuss opposing views to mine in a productive and interesting way.
Hopefully it is just a phase and this is the inevitable result of a government changing and over time we will go back to discussing issues in a more mature way. For now though I think I will leave others to it.
The discussion here is incredibly childish and repetitive today. And frankly has been since the election result to varying degrees.
I can totally see why so many people have quietly left or stopped posting when the debate is at the level of calling politicians the c word.
I come to this site to discuss with people that don’t share my views as I think it’s important that I get a perspective which isn’t “leftie centrist dad”. But at this point I do begin to question if there might be better places to discuss opposing views to mine in a productive and interesting way.
Hopefully it is just a phase and this is the inevitable result of a government changing and over time we will go back to discussing issues in a more mature way.
Your only jealous because you didn't make Casino's persona non grata list.
If the pictures coming out of today’s Georgian election are accurate and not staged, then it’s…looking like a Government win. Another domino falls to the authoritarians.
The disappointing thing is how easy it is for democracy to be subverted and it's usually from the inside. We are so fortunate in having a system which is largely free and fair and a transfer of power which, although ruthless, works quite well (apart from those supporters of the old Government who are still angry four months later).
The checks and balances of a democratic system aren't just about elections and voting - we see even in countries like Poland how the judiciary and the broadcast media cease to be independent of the Government and become supine servants.
IF, for example, the current Government banned the Daily Mail and shut down GB News, that would be considered by many to be anti-democratic. Being a supporter of democracy means tolerating opposition and dissent (within the law of course) and resisting the temptation to counter. Some Governments, either through insecurity, fear or simply because they like having the power, can't or don't resist.
There is the thorny subject of regulating online media and 'misinformation'.
If the pictures coming out of today’s Georgian election are accurate and not staged, then it’s…looking like a Government win. Another domino falls to the authoritarians.
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
She may have been a bat-crap crazy kinkster but I never doubted that she was patriotic and actually wanted the best for British people and Britain, she just had mistimed ideas
Starmer wants what’s best for 1 his personal vanity and 2 anyone APART from the British especially if they are from “the global south”
Liz Truss was the one that started the whole Chagos Islands surrender plan. She's as stupid as Starmer.
I’ve read disputing reports on that. With some plausible arguments that it had nothing to do with her
The civil service landed it in her in tray after years of being blocked by Boris and she just said yes let's open negotiations. It's the kind of thing the civil service like to spring on inexperienced PMs and she fell for it.
Just behind ID cards on the senior CS wish list then.
She may have been a bat-crap crazy kinkster but I never doubted that she was patriotic and actually wanted the best for British people and Britain, she just had mistimed ideas
Starmer wants what’s best for 1 his personal vanity and 2 anyone APART from the British especially if they are from “the global south”
Liz Truss was the one that started the whole Chagos Islands surrender plan. She's as stupid as Starmer.
I’ve read disputing reports on that. With some plausible arguments that it had nothing to do with her
The civil service landed it in her in tray after years of being blocked by Boris and she just said yes let's open negotiations. It's the kind of thing the civil service like to spring on inexperienced PMs and she fell for it.
Just behind ID cards on the senior CS wish list then.
The discussion here is incredibly childish and repetitive today. And frankly has been since the election result to varying degrees.
I can totally see why so many people have quietly left or stopped posting when the debate is at the level of calling politicians the c word.
I come to this site to discuss with people that don’t share my views as I think it’s important that I get a perspective which isn’t “leftie centrist dad”. But at this point I do begin to question if there might be better places to discuss opposing views to mine in a productive and interesting way.
Hopefully it is just a phase and this is the inevitable result of a government changing and over time we will go back to discussing issues in a more mature way. For now though I think I will leave others to it.
People are angry because we have a traitorous government intent on destroying the economy for “reasons”
Interesting piece by Max, I'd like to see real food cooking taught in all schools, national cooking/cookery campaigns, and more visits to farmers/farms at all levels of education.
One thing: I get leaflets through the door every other week from Dominos and PapaJohns, both of which I hate. Yes, they can post what they like - and no doubt this is part of an aggressive marketing campaign - but things like this combined with JustEat and Deliveroo make it very very easy to eat shit.
How do we make it easier to eat well?
And this is where the nannying definitely comes in, it might be dispiriting for people like us to contemplate advertising and leafleting bans for unhealthy foods and takeaways but the situation is only getting worse.
On healthy eating, it is already easy to do so, people just don't know how. I actually think we don't need to tackle cooking at school age, we need to do it for parents in their 30s and 40s who never learned. Make it part of eligibility for benefits to attend mandatory cooking classes, give people basic cooking equipment when they sign on and, frankly, be more intrusive about their spending. As I said any solution on healthy eating is going to feel like and be nannying, I think we need to get on board with this or there is no end to the tax rises, the £20bn salvo Labour are planning right now will look like child's play when we win in 2029 if action isn't taken.
Nannying for me is telling people what to do or stopping them doing what they want to do. And patronising them at the same time like they're children.
I don't have a problem regulating harmful adverts or supplements that do us real damage.
I agree with you on cooking. One small example, last night I looked at a chicken curry and thought.. I'd quite like something else with that. There were dried red lentils and a tin of tomatoes in the cupboard. I baulked at it, thinking I'd screw it up and it'd be shit, but a BBC receipe and 30 minutes later I had an amazing lentil curry, that we both polished off.
I agree with cooking classes for those on benefits. In fact, I think in general the government should fund and promote this. (As long as it's not captured by leftwing activists, who'll want to push "sustainability", veganism and non-dairy)
Then people can choose what to cook themselves. Not nannying.
Lentils ?
Where is Casino, and what have you done with him ??
I know this is a gentle troll, but I've always done a meat curry and a vegetable curry. My objection is to the ideology of Veganism being inflicted on us to the exclusion of everything else, not the value of vegetables and fruits period.
It's called a balanced diet.
Agreed. I’ve always seen Vegan as a cuisine not a lifestyle
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
And that's the difference between him and Blair. Blair would have just laughed the whole discussion off and told the commonwealth nations to get back in their box because he fundamentally loved this country. Starmer very clearly doesn't, he sees us as part of the evil colonialist axis as so many lefties were indoctrinated to believe when they went to university by Marxist professors.
🔺 NEW: Sir Keir Starmer has been forced to promise Commonwealth countries that Britain will discuss reparations for slavery next year as he failed to quash an official call for damages
This really is a nice easy bowl for Kemi to hit. It is perfect for her that will give her airtime and good culture war territory she loves.
I've just voted for her, and donated £100.
Oh dear. Metaphysics in action - never stop moaning about the wokification of our institutions and the moribund nature of our economy, then take an action that makes it more likely to continue.
Your dogmatic take on which Tory leaders are "sound" and which are secret wets, and the tribal ad-hominem it triggers, is deeply weird.
How on earth you reach the conclusion that she's pro-Woke I don't know.
With the exception of trans, Kemi is comfortable with legislation underpinning speech suppression and non-UK oversight, and indeed expanded it via the Online Safety Act. Her words in the leadership campaign expanded her thoughts to cover things like benefits to single mothers and carefully unspecified immigrant groups, but that's pretty much it. Further (IIUC) she did not specify action to suppress immigration, and indeed specified that the EHRC will not be left. I assume from this that she will talk hard and be confrontational but not take significant action to deconstruct woke (again, with the exception of trans). This is why, again IIUC, Goodwin thinks she is pro-woke.
She may have been a bat-crap crazy kinkster but I never doubted that she was patriotic and actually wanted the best for British people and Britain, she just had mistimed ideas
Starmer wants what’s best for 1 his personal vanity and 2 anyone APART from the British especially if they are from “the global south”
Liz Truss was the one that started the whole Chagos Islands surrender plan. She's as stupid as Starmer.
I’ve read disputing reports on that. With some plausible arguments that it had nothing to do with her
The civil service landed it in her in tray after years of being blocked by Boris and she just said yes let's open negotiations. It's the kind of thing the civil service like to spring on inexperienced PMs and she fell for it.
Then to hell with her
You've got to bear in mind Truss enjoyed being fucked.
The move would cap the level of monthly deductions to individuals’ universal credit standard allowance at 15%, rather than the current 25%. It would help 1.2m households, including 700,000 families with children, who now see between about a sixth and a quarter of their monthly universal credit payments clawed back.
Benefit deductions are taken automatically for a range of debts, including Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) benefit advances, historical child tax credit overpayments, rent and council tax arrears, and water and utility bill debts.
The move would in effect allow claimants to repay debts over a longer period. It is unclear how much this will cost the Treasury.
The discussion here is incredibly childish and repetitive today. And frankly has been since the election result to varying degrees.
I can totally see why so many people have quietly left or stopped posting when the debate is at the level of calling politicians the c word.
I come to this site to discuss with people that don’t share my views as I think it’s important that I get a perspective which isn’t “leftie centrist dad”. But at this point I do begin to question if there might be better places to discuss opposing views to mine in a productive and interesting way.
Hopefully it is just a phase and this is the inevitable result of a government changing and over time we will go back to discussing issues in a more mature way.
Your only jealous because you didn't make Casino's persona non grata list.
I also think it's the difference between going to Cambridge and Oxford. I find that graduates from the latter, at least until recently, really loved the country while Cambridge graduates were much more likely to not.
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
And that's the difference between him and Blair. Blair would have just laughed the whole discussion off and told the commonwealth nations to get back in their box because he fundamentally loved this country. Starmer very clearly doesn't, he sees us as part of the evil colonialist axis as so many lefties were indoctrinated to believe when they went to university by Marxist professors.
My god yes. Tony Blair seems like a titanic figure compared to these intellectual midgets running Labour now, and that despite his awful mistake on Iraq
They are all so….. STUPID. Blair was clearly very bright
I see no sign of any significant intellect in Labour whatsoever. None. Lammy is an actual fool who thinks Henry VII came after Henry VIII and that Marie Antoinette discovered radioactivity. Starmer and Reeves are polytechnic lecturers, and not especially good ones
Who, on the Labour benches, has real intellectual heft?
She may have been a bat-crap crazy kinkster but I never doubted that she was patriotic and actually wanted the best for British people and Britain, she just had mistimed ideas
Starmer wants what’s best for 1 his personal vanity and 2 anyone APART from the British especially if they are from “the global south”
Liz Truss was the one that started the whole Chagos Islands surrender plan. She's as stupid as Starmer.
I’ve read disputing reports on that. With some plausible arguments that it had nothing to do with her
The civil service landed it in her in tray after years of being blocked by Boris and she just said yes let's open negotiations. It's the kind of thing the civil service like to spring on inexperienced PMs and she fell for it.
Then to hell with her
For someone who lives an Ian Fleming or Len Deighton lifestyle your narrative style on here is more Nadine Dorries or Edwina Curry.
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
And that's the difference between him and Blair. Blair would have just laughed the whole discussion off and told the commonwealth nations to get back in their box because he fundamentally loved this country. Starmer very clearly doesn't, he sees us as part of the evil colonialist axis as so many lefties were indoctrinated to believe when they went to university by Marxist professors.
Blair gave away half the Rebate because it was easier to do so than be the odd man out at the EU dinner.
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
And that's the difference between him and Blair. Blair would have just laughed the whole discussion off and told the commonwealth nations to get back in their box because he fundamentally loved this country. Starmer very clearly doesn't, he sees us as part of the evil colonialist axis as so many lefties were indoctrinated to believe when they went to university by Marxist professors.
Might there also be a difference between QEII and KCIII?
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
And that's the difference between him and Blair. Blair would have just laughed the whole discussion off and told the commonwealth nations to get back in their box because he fundamentally loved this country. Starmer very clearly doesn't, he sees us as part of the evil colonialist axis as so many lefties were indoctrinated to believe when they went to university by Marxist professors.
Might there also be a difference between QEII and KCIII?
She may have been a bat-crap crazy kinkster but I never doubted that she was patriotic and actually wanted the best for British people and Britain, she just had mistimed ideas
Starmer wants what’s best for 1 his personal vanity and 2 anyone APART from the British especially if they are from “the global south”
Liz Truss was the one that started the whole Chagos Islands surrender plan. She's as stupid as Starmer.
I’ve read disputing reports on that. With some plausible arguments that it had nothing to do with her
The civil service landed it in her in tray after years of being blocked by Boris and she just said yes let's open negotiations. It's the kind of thing the civil service like to spring on inexperienced PMs and she fell for it.
Then to hell with her
You've got to bear in mind Truss enjoyed being fucked.
You don't know that. She might only have consummated her marriage twice for all you can tell from fact. You only believe her to be an S and M sex monster because Leon told you. How the f*** does he know from a necklace.
She may have been a bat-crap crazy kinkster but I never doubted that she was patriotic and actually wanted the best for British people and Britain, she just had mistimed ideas
Starmer wants what’s best for 1 his personal vanity and 2 anyone APART from the British especially if they are from “the global south”
Liz Truss was the one that started the whole Chagos Islands surrender plan. She's as stupid as Starmer.
I’ve read disputing reports on that. With some plausible arguments that it had nothing to do with her
The civil service landed it in her in tray after years of being blocked by Boris and she just said yes let's open negotiations. It's the kind of thing the civil service like to spring on inexperienced PMs and she fell for it.
Then to hell with her
For someone who lives an Ian Fleming or Len Deighton lifestyle your narrative style on here is more Nadine Dorries or Edwina Curry.
What utter nonsense. I travel a lot more than Ian Fleming ever did
Interesting piece by Max, I'd like to see real food cooking taught in all schools, national cooking/cookery campaigns, and more visits to farmers/farms at all levels of education.
One thing: I get leaflets through the door every other week from Dominos and PapaJohns, both of which I hate. Yes, they can post what they like - and no doubt this is part of an aggressive marketing campaign - but things like this combined with JustEat and Deliveroo make it very very easy to eat shit.
How do we make it easier to eat well?
And this is where the nannying definitely comes in, it might be dispiriting for people like us to contemplate advertising and leafleting bans for unhealthy foods and takeaways but the situation is only getting worse.
On healthy eating, it is already easy to do so, people just don't know how. I actually think we don't need to tackle cooking at school age, we need to do it for parents in their 30s and 40s who never learned. Make it part of eligibility for benefits to attend mandatory cooking classes, give people basic cooking equipment when they sign on and, frankly, be more intrusive about their spending. As I said any solution on healthy eating is going to feel like and be nannying, I think we need to get on board with this or there is no end to the tax rises, the £20bn salvo Labour are planning right now will look like child's play when we win in 2029 if action isn't taken.
I think the problem is not that people cannot cook, it's that they don't want to. It's too much hassle, which is why so many live off takeaways and ready meals.
Basically, humans are like all animals lazy and greedy. If they can ride they will not walk, and if they can eat high energy foods without cooking then they will do so. In order to choose healthy lifestyles we have to actively use intellect and deferred gratification over base instinct. That's why the fat jabs are such an appeal, we can become slim without effort.
No, I think you'd be shocked as to how lacking people are with culinary skills these days, people in their 30s and 40s who never learned. One of our friends managed to both overboil and burn her pasta when she had us over for dinner. It was inedible so we got a deliveroo instead. The thing without someone to teach her there is no resource for people like that to learn, they need to be spoonfed the basics of how to boil rice/pasta etc... until they've got that figured out, or how to replace sauce from a jar with sauce that's made fresh. She's even said to us that when her and her husband come to visit us she thinks being able to turn ingredients into amazing food is like magic but doesn't know where to start.
She's also not alone, there's millions of adults who just never learned to cook, even the basics, and now don't know where or how to start so subsist on microwave and frozen food.
Remember when Delia Smith published a book starting with how to boil an egg?
All kinds of bizarre reactions - a queue of idiot politicians claiming it was demeaning or something. Diane Abbott especially vocal, IIRC
On publication day, queues round the block, from every walk of life….
She may have been a bat-crap crazy kinkster but I never doubted that she was patriotic and actually wanted the best for British people and Britain, she just had mistimed ideas
Starmer wants what’s best for 1 his personal vanity and 2 anyone APART from the British especially if they are from “the global south”
Liz Truss was the one that started the whole Chagos Islands surrender plan. She's as stupid as Starmer.
I’ve read disputing reports on that. With some plausible arguments that it had nothing to do with her
The civil service landed it in her in tray after years of being blocked by Boris and she just said yes let's open negotiations. It's the kind of thing the civil service like to spring on inexperienced PMs and she fell for it.
Then to hell with her
You've got to bear in mind Truss enjoyed being fucked.
You don't know that. She might only have consummated her marriage twice for all you can tell from fact. You only believe her to be an S and M sex monster because Leon told you. How the f*** does he know from a necklace.
How often do you have to be told this? It has been confirmed multiple times and in different ways
Tho I demur at the word “monster”, that’s out of order. So she likes a bit of spicy sex, good luck to her, it probably makes her more interesting. It is not “monstrous”
Interesting piece by Max, I'd like to see real food cooking taught in all schools, national cooking/cookery campaigns, and more visits to farmers/farms at all levels of education.
One thing: I get leaflets through the door every other week from Dominos and PapaJohns, both of which I hate. Yes, they can post what they like - and no doubt this is part of an aggressive marketing campaign - but things like this combined with JustEat and Deliveroo make it very very easy to eat shit.
How do we make it easier to eat well?
And this is where the nannying definitely comes in, it might be dispiriting for people like us to contemplate advertising and leafleting bans for unhealthy foods and takeaways but the situation is only getting worse.
On healthy eating, it is already easy to do so, people just don't know how. I actually think we don't need to tackle cooking at school age, we need to do it for parents in their 30s and 40s who never learned. Make it part of eligibility for benefits to attend mandatory cooking classes, give people basic cooking equipment when they sign on and, frankly, be more intrusive about their spending. As I said any solution on healthy eating is going to feel like and be nannying, I think we need to get on board with this or there is no end to the tax rises, the £20bn salvo Labour are planning right now will look like child's play when we win in 2029 if action isn't taken.
I think the problem is not that people cannot cook, it's that they don't want to. It's too much hassle, which is why so many live off takeaways and ready meals.
Basically, humans are like all animals lazy and greedy. If they can ride they will not walk, and if they can eat high energy foods without cooking then they will do so. In order to choose healthy lifestyles we have to actively use intellect and deferred gratification over base instinct. That's why the fat jabs are such an appeal, we can become slim without effort.
No, I think you'd be shocked as to how lacking people are with culinary skills these days, people in their 30s and 40s who never learned. One of our friends managed to both overboil and burn her pasta when she had us over for dinner. It was inedible so we got a deliveroo instead. The thing without someone to teach her there is no resource for people like that to learn, they need to be spoonfed the basics of how to boil rice/pasta etc... until they've got that figured out, or how to replace sauce from a jar with sauce that's made fresh. She's even said to us that when her and her husband come to visit us she thinks being able to turn ingredients into amazing food is like magic but doesn't know where to start.
She's also not alone, there's millions of adults who just never learned to cook, even the basics, and now don't know where or how to start so subsist on microwave and frozen food.
That’s basic stupidity. Anyone with an iq over 100 who can read can learn to cook
Doing something for the first time, with no training, can be pretty daunting…,
Interesting piece by Max, I'd like to see real food cooking taught in all schools, national cooking/cookery campaigns, and more visits to farmers/farms at all levels of education.
One thing: I get leaflets through the door every other week from Dominos and PapaJohns, both of which I hate. Yes, they can post what they like - and no doubt this is part of an aggressive marketing campaign - but things like this combined with JustEat and Deliveroo make it very very easy to eat shit.
How do we make it easier to eat well?
And this is where the nannying definitely comes in, it might be dispiriting for people like us to contemplate advertising and leafleting bans for unhealthy foods and takeaways but the situation is only getting worse.
On healthy eating, it is already easy to do so, people just don't know how. I actually think we don't need to tackle cooking at school age, we need to do it for parents in their 30s and 40s who never learned. Make it part of eligibility for benefits to attend mandatory cooking classes, give people basic cooking equipment when they sign on and, frankly, be more intrusive about their spending. As I said any solution on healthy eating is going to feel like and be nannying, I think we need to get on board with this or there is no end to the tax rises, the £20bn salvo Labour are planning right now will look like child's play when we win in 2029 if action isn't taken.
I think the problem is not that people cannot cook, it's that they don't want to. It's too much hassle, which is why so many live off takeaways and ready meals.
Basically, humans are like all animals lazy and greedy. If they can ride they will not walk, and if they can eat high energy foods without cooking then they will do so. In order to choose healthy lifestyles we have to actively use intellect and deferred gratification over base instinct. That's why the fat jabs are such an appeal, we can become slim without effort.
No, I think you'd be shocked as to how lacking people are with culinary skills these days, people in their 30s and 40s who never learned. One of our friends managed to both overboil and burn her pasta when she had us over for dinner. It was inedible so we got a deliveroo instead. The thing without someone to teach her there is no resource for people like that to learn, they need to be spoonfed the basics of how to boil rice/pasta etc... until they've got that figured out, or how to replace sauce from a jar with sauce that's made fresh. She's even said to us that when her and her husband come to visit us she thinks being able to turn ingredients into amazing food is like magic but doesn't know where to start.
She's also not alone, there's millions of adults who just never learned to cook, even the basics, and now don't know where or how to start so subsist on microwave and frozen food.
Remember when Delia Smith published a book starting with how to boil an egg?
All kinds of bizarre reactions - a queue of idiot politicians claiming it was demeaning or something. Diane Abbott especially vocal, IIRC
On publication day, queues round the block, from every walk of life….
Didn’t something silly like 50% of first-year university students receive a copy of that book from relatives?
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
You voted for him.
And you have no excuses - he's your MP and you know full well that type of person.
And you still want to destroy the Conservative party even though they're the only was to remove Labour from government.
Have some people been at the lagershed very early today?
I'm looking forward to the aggressive flameout(s) this evening.
I'm looking forward to the Budget. It is going to be hilarious here. Almost makes tax rises worthwhile and good value for money. Let's hope Reeves has the imagination to make some heads explode.
She may have been a bat-crap crazy kinkster but I never doubted that she was patriotic and actually wanted the best for British people and Britain, she just had mistimed ideas
Starmer wants what’s best for 1 his personal vanity and 2 anyone APART from the British especially if they are from “the global south”
Liz Truss was the one that started the whole Chagos Islands surrender plan. She's as stupid as Starmer.
I’ve read disputing reports on that. With some plausible arguments that it had nothing to do with her
The civil service landed it in her in tray after years of being blocked by Boris and she just said yes let's open negotiations. It's the kind of thing the civil service like to spring on inexperienced PMs and she fell for it.
Then to hell with her
For someone who lives an Ian Fleming or Len Deighton lifestyle your narrative style on here is more Nadine Dorries or Edwina Curry.
What utter nonsense. I travel a lot more than Ian Fleming ever did
Ian Fleming's book "Thrilling Cities" is a masterpiece. It's James Bond meets Alan Whicker.
If only you knew a travel writer who could revisit in his footsteps. I'll try that Simon Calder. Do reckon I'll get a commission?
Interesting piece by Max, I'd like to see real food cooking taught in all schools, national cooking/cookery campaigns, and more visits to farmers/farms at all levels of education.
One thing: I get leaflets through the door every other week from Dominos and PapaJohns, both of which I hate. Yes, they can post what they like - and no doubt this is part of an aggressive marketing campaign - but things like this combined with JustEat and Deliveroo make it very very easy to eat shit.
How do we make it easier to eat well?
And this is where the nannying definitely comes in, it might be dispiriting for people like us to contemplate advertising and leafleting bans for unhealthy foods and takeaways but the situation is only getting worse.
On healthy eating, it is already easy to do so, people just don't know how. I actually think we don't need to tackle cooking at school age, we need to do it for parents in their 30s and 40s who never learned. Make it part of eligibility for benefits to attend mandatory cooking classes, give people basic cooking equipment when they sign on and, frankly, be more intrusive about their spending. As I said any solution on healthy eating is going to feel like and be nannying, I think we need to get on board with this or there is no end to the tax rises, the £20bn salvo Labour are planning right now will look like child's play when we win in 2029 if action isn't taken.
I think the problem is not that people cannot cook, it's that they don't want to. It's too much hassle, which is why so many live off takeaways and ready meals.
Basically, humans are like all animals lazy and greedy. If they can ride they will not walk, and if they can eat high energy foods without cooking then they will do so. In order to choose healthy lifestyles we have to actively use intellect and deferred gratification over base instinct. That's why the fat jabs are such an appeal, we can become slim without effort.
No, I think you'd be shocked as to how lacking people are with culinary skills these days, people in their 30s and 40s who never learned. One of our friends managed to both overboil and burn her pasta when she had us over for dinner. It was inedible so we got a deliveroo instead. The thing without someone to teach her there is no resource for people like that to learn, they need to be spoonfed the basics of how to boil rice/pasta etc... until they've got that figured out, or how to replace sauce from a jar with sauce that's made fresh. She's even said to us that when her and her husband come to visit us she thinks being able to turn ingredients into amazing food is like magic but doesn't know where to start.
She's also not alone, there's millions of adults who just never learned to cook, even the basics, and now don't know where or how to start so subsist on microwave and frozen food.
Remember when Delia Smith published a book starting with how to boil an egg?
All kinds of bizarre reactions - a queue of idiot politicians claiming it was demeaning or something. Diane Abbott especially vocal, IIRC
On publication day, queues round the block, from every walk of life….
Didn’t something silly like 50% of first-year university students receive a copy of that book from relatives?
Those budget requests to the Tory government weren't politically driven at all, not a chance. I fucking hate this mayor. He's so openly shit but because of London demographics we can never get rid of him.
Never say never- if Boris could do it, if Andy Street could do it in Greater Birmingham, it's not impossible.
But if the Conservatives insist on putting up nobodies who would rather still be in Middlesex/Surrey/Kent/Essex, they will keep losing. Putting Hall up was an insult to London, and thingy who had been a senior Spad would have little better.
Maybe James Cleverly- definitely a big character, probably about to be semi-detached from where the party is headed, connections to London- can be persuaded for 2028.
I agree Cleverly would be a pretty good candidate. I don’t think he's a terribly competent administrator, but I don't think Boris is either, and he seemed to do fine.
Interesting piece by Max, I'd like to see real food cooking taught in all schools, national cooking/cookery campaigns, and more visits to farmers/farms at all levels of education.
One thing: I get leaflets through the door every other week from Dominos and PapaJohns, both of which I hate. Yes, they can post what they like - and no doubt this is part of an aggressive marketing campaign - but things like this combined with JustEat and Deliveroo make it very very easy to eat shit.
How do we make it easier to eat well?
And this is where the nannying definitely comes in, it might be dispiriting for people like us to contemplate advertising and leafleting bans for unhealthy foods and takeaways but the situation is only getting worse.
On healthy eating, it is already easy to do so, people just don't know how. I actually think we don't need to tackle cooking at school age, we need to do it for parents in their 30s and 40s who never learned. Make it part of eligibility for benefits to attend mandatory cooking classes, give people basic cooking equipment when they sign on and, frankly, be more intrusive about their spending. As I said any solution on healthy eating is going to feel like and be nannying, I think we need to get on board with this or there is no end to the tax rises, the £20bn salvo Labour are planning right now will look like child's play when we win in 2029 if action isn't taken.
I think the problem is not that people cannot cook, it's that they don't want to. It's too much hassle, which is why so many live off takeaways and ready meals.
Basically, humans are like all animals lazy and greedy. If they can ride they will not walk, and if they can eat high energy foods without cooking then they will do so. In order to choose healthy lifestyles we have to actively use intellect and deferred gratification over base instinct. That's why the fat jabs are such an appeal, we can become slim without effort.
No, I think you'd be shocked as to how lacking people are with culinary skills these days, people in their 30s and 40s who never learned. One of our friends managed to both overboil and burn her pasta when she had us over for dinner. It was inedible so we got a deliveroo instead. The thing without someone to teach her there is no resource for people like that to learn, they need to be spoonfed the basics of how to boil rice/pasta etc... until they've got that figured out, or how to replace sauce from a jar with sauce that's made fresh. She's even said to us that when her and her husband come to visit us she thinks being able to turn ingredients into amazing food is like magic but doesn't know where to start.
She's also not alone, there's millions of adults who just never learned to cook, even the basics, and now don't know where or how to start so subsist on microwave and frozen food.
That’s basic stupidity. Anyone with an iq over 100 who can read can learn to cook
Doing something for the first time, with no training, can be pretty daunting…,
Ripley: "This girl survived longer than that with no weapons and no training!"
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
And that's the difference between him and Blair. Blair would have just laughed the whole discussion off and told the commonwealth nations to get back in their box because he fundamentally loved this country. Starmer very clearly doesn't, he sees us as part of the evil colonialist axis as so many lefties were indoctrinated to believe when they went to university by Marxist professors.
Might there also be a difference between QEII and KCIII?
Charles is a Cambridge graduate, after all...
Oh, forgot to tell everyone, when I was in Cambridge earlier this week, I saw that the local buses display the message "THIS BUS IS A SAFE SPACE", alternating with the route number/destination!
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
You voted for him.
And you have no excuses - he's your MP and you know full well that type of person.
And you still want to destroy the Conservative party even though they're the only was to remove Labour from government.
We're now finding out precisely why the Conservatives were the best option on the table
She may have been a bat-crap crazy kinkster but I never doubted that she was patriotic and actually wanted the best for British people and Britain, she just had mistimed ideas
Starmer wants what’s best for 1 his personal vanity and 2 anyone APART from the British especially if they are from “the global south”
Liz Truss was the one that started the whole Chagos Islands surrender plan. She's as stupid as Starmer.
I’ve read disputing reports on that. With some plausible arguments that it had nothing to do with her
The civil service landed it in her in tray after years of being blocked by Boris and she just said yes let's open negotiations. It's the kind of thing the civil service like to spring on inexperienced PMs and she fell for it.
Then to hell with her
You've got to bear in mind Truss enjoyed being fucked.
You don't know that. She might only have consummated her marriage twice for all you can tell from fact. You only believe her to be an S and M sex monster because Leon told you. How the f*** does he know from a necklace.
How often do you have to be told this? It has been confirmed multiple times and in different ways
Tho I demur at the word “monster”, that’s out of order. So she likes a bit of spicy sex, good luck to her, it probably makes her more interesting. It is not “monstrous”
I wasn't referring to "monster" in a Fred West context more like a T-Rex that couldn't get enough of whatever they were consuming.
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
And that's the difference between him and Blair. Blair would have just laughed the whole discussion off and told the commonwealth nations to get back in their box because he fundamentally loved this country. Starmer very clearly doesn't, he sees us as part of the evil colonialist axis as so many lefties were indoctrinated to believe when they went to university by Marxist professors.
Might there also be a difference between QEII and KCIII?
Charles is a Cambridge graduate, after all...
Oh, forgot to tell everyone, when I was in Cambridge earlier this week, I saw that the local buses display the message "THIS BUS IS A SAFE SPACE", alternating with the route number/destination!
Of all the things that are *not* a safe space, buses must be one of them
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
You voted for him.
And you have no excuses - he's your MP and you know full well that type of person.
And you still want to destroy the Conservative party even though they're the only was to remove Labour from government.
I cordially despise your party because of the last 14 years and eighty five trillion immigrants and I will continue to do so until you express proper contrition for that, and ALSO a serious plan to tilt the country to the right
I’m not ruling it out, at least you have gone for the two right wing candidates, But they have an awful lot of work to do, to win back people like me
If the pictures coming out of today’s Georgian election are accurate and not staged, then it’s…looking like a Government win. Another domino falls to the authoritarians.
I would like @MaxPB to substantiate his claim that Liz Truss opened negotiations on Chagos. Liz Truss met the PM of Mauritius when they both attented a meeting (I think in America). As far as I know, we have no minutes of the conversation, and the bland statement after it said absolutely nothing about any negotiations, or any follow up talks.
Even if you are able to provide any evidence of intentionality on Truss's part, and I highly doubt you can, the actual opening of negotiations happened *after* Liz Truss left office, so even if she had been desperately itching to give the Islands away, it would have made fuck all difference given that she had already been swept from power. When the actual negotiations opened, Sunak was the Prime Minister, so it appears very like Liz Truss is being landed with the blame for policy decisions that were made when she wasn't even in power. Quite bizarre but par for the course with Truss on here.
And it started so well with a thought provoking piece by MaxPB.
In the runup to 1997, there was a strand on the Conservative right that looked at opposition as a fun sabbatical. A few years out of office, we can do the punching for a bit.
I don't recall it being said so much this year- the party basically died some time ago, and the undertaker arrived to carry off the decaying stiff on July 4.
The thing is, opposition is fun, punching is fun, especially when it's someone as punchable as Sir Kier. But it doesn't actually make a difference. For the next four and a bit years, what the Conservatives do in Parliament is basically irrelevant. And, for all the noise, Labour remains ahead on the polls.
Punch a punchbag as much as you like, it won't respond. And, as anyone who has been systematically blanked knows, the lack of response is the most annoying thing on the world.
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
And that's the difference between him and Blair. Blair would have just laughed the whole discussion off and told the commonwealth nations to get back in their box because he fundamentally loved this country. Starmer very clearly doesn't, he sees us as part of the evil colonialist axis as so many lefties were indoctrinated to believe when they went to university by Marxist professors.
Might there also be a difference between QEII and KCIII?
Charles is a Cambridge graduate, after all...
Oh, forgot to tell everyone, when I was in Cambridge earlier this week, I saw that the local buses display the message "THIS BUS IS A SAFE SPACE", alternating with the route number/destination!
I haven't seen that.
When I was in Cambridge this morning, I saw some hippy art around three trees that are apparently under threat of being cut down.
The tosserificness of the 'display' made me want to hire a chainsaw...
And it started so well with a thought provoking piece by MaxPB.
In the runup to 1997, there was a strand on the Conservative right that looked at opposition as a fun sabbatical. A few years out of office, we can do the punching for a bit.
I don't recall it being said so much this year- the party basically died some time ago, and the undertaker arrived to carry off the decaying stiff on July 4.
The thing is, opposition is fun, punching is fun, especially when it's someone as punchable as Sir Kier. But it doesn't actually make a difference. For the next four and a bit years, what the Conservatives do in Parliament is basically irrelevant. And, for all the noise, Labour remains ahead on the polls.
Punch a punchbag as much as you like, it won't respond. And, as anyone who has been systematically blanked knows, the lack of response is the most annoying thing on the world.
And yet PB is full of lefties whining that we are all being mean about the government. You aren’t “blanking” us, at all
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
You voted for him.
And you have no excuses - he's your MP and you know full well that type of person.
And you still want to destroy the Conservative party even though they're the only was to remove Labour from government.
I cordially despise your party because of the last 14 years and eighty five trillion immigrants and I will continue to do so until you express proper contrition for that, and ALSO a serious plan to tilt the country to the right
I’m not ruling it out, at least you have gone for the two right wing candidates, But they have an awful lot of work to do, to win back people like me
Fair point. I'm on board with tilting to that and challenging some shibboleths to make that happen.
But, you have to commit to voting to defeat Labour and the LDs at the next election to bring it about
It’s also on Spotify, Apple, Google, Amazon podcasts etc.
Also tens of millions of hits on various clips on Twitter and other similar platforms, plus loads of podcasters and commentators doing reviews and watch-alongs.
That video doesn't show much. What happened before? (I'm guessing from the way it starts that it has been edited/cut. and that, as always, is suspicious.)
Max’s piece is fine as far as it goes, but below the line he is reduced to pleading for more cookery lessons.
The last government near-bankrupted the country. Osborne starved infrastructure (and is now said to regret it), and the Tories wasted years down a Brexit wank-hole. Sunak was simply inept, and he and Hunt left a frankly impossible set of forward projections.
Starmer and Reeves don’t inspire much, but it’s also fair to say they’ve been left with the worst inheritance of any government since the 1970s. And the forthcoming NI rise merely reverse Hunt’s unaffordable cuts.
You don’t like it, I don’t like it, but taxes must increase given the demographic of the country. It’s true in the UK and it’s true around the world. Only the US is really able to keep printing debt to avoid that trade-off, and even there reality will one day will catch up with them.
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
You voted for him.
And you have no excuses - he's your MP and you know full well that type of person.
And you still want to destroy the Conservative party even though they're the only was to remove Labour from government.
I cordially despise your party because of the last 14 years and eighty five trillion immigrants and I will continue to do so until you express proper contrition for that, and ALSO a serious plan to tilt the country to the right
I’m not ruling it out, at least you have gone for the two right wing candidates, But they have an awful lot of work to do, to win back people like me
I've got it!
You're just trolling EVERYONE.
I knew you weren't a globetrotting jetsetter just a retired geography teacher and Lib Dem Councillor from Tupsley who gets his jollies by winding gullible people up on 'tinternet.
Comments
I hope Labour get obliterated.
https://x.com/TkeMedia/status/1850145125583749540
Possibly a bit too linked to the last government on the public's mind- the capital is different to the rest of the nation, and a Conservative who wants to win there probably needs to lean into that.
But the Conservatives could, and probably will, do a lot worse.
Just take students out of the migration figures and improve our balance of payments. And build not just near universities but everywhere where homes are needed.
We might even have re-joined the European Union by then.....something to which you can look forward.
China would have viewed it as a win-win. Either make Britain a cuck, whilst still keeping its Caribbean vassals in check, or sow the wind for its destruction.
A future right-wing government is simply going to rip this up, and totally disengage.
She may have been a bat-crap crazy kinkster but I never doubted that she was patriotic and actually wanted the best for British people and Britain, she just had mistimed ideas
Starmer wants what’s best for 1 his personal vanity and 2 anyone APART from the British especially if they are from “the global south”
We have much more information now than we did on 4th July.
"Where Wizards Stay Up Late
And the state of the internet in 1972"
https://www.neilobrien.co.uk/p/where-wizards-stay-up-late
It would be surprising if some don't. 46% of the UK want "a strong leader who doesn't have to bother with parliament/elections". Very close to Trumps numbers in the US.
He loved it.
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
I’d totally remove planning constraints for campus universities, let them build what they want where they want. More difficult for city-based unis, but there should be a presumption in favour of expanding housing when proposed.
They also need to note that accommodation for family groups looks quite different from accomodation for large numbers of singles.
Chaps cussing the reds and working themselves up into a right old lather.
The checks and balances of a democratic system aren't just about elections and voting - we see even in countries like Poland how the judiciary and the broadcast media cease to be independent of the Government and become supine servants.
IF, for example, the current Government banned the Daily Mail and shut down GB News, that would be considered by many to be anti-democratic. Being a supporter of democracy means tolerating opposition and dissent (within the law of course) and resisting the temptation to counter. Some Governments, either through insecurity, fear or simply because they like having the power, can't or don't resist.
The whole world now will view Starmer as meek prey, because he is.
Watch out for him offering everything to Spain on Gibraltar. They won't be able to believe their luck.
[And, no, they won't use vaseline]
"Trinny and Susannah’s daughters say pair ‘would be cancelled’ if show made now
Lyla Elichaoff and Esme Bertelsen tell Tatler they have never watched What Not to Wear, with Elichaoff saying: ‘you can’t really speak to people like that now’"
https://www.theguardian.com/fashion/2024/oct/23/trinny-and-susannah-daughters-say-pair-would-be-cancelled-if-what-not-to-wear-made-now
I can totally see why so many people have quietly left or stopped posting when the debate is at the level of calling politicians the c word.
I come to this site to discuss with people that don’t share my views as I think it’s important that I get a perspective which isn’t “leftie centrist dad”. But at this point I do begin to question if there might be better places to discuss opposing views to mine in a productive and interesting way.
Hopefully it is just a phase and this is the inevitable result of a government changing and over time we will go back to discussing issues in a more mature way. For now though I think I will leave others to it.
Anyhoo, paging @TSE, who I am sure could headline this with his customary subtlety.
Liberal MLA Ed Cocks has won the final undecided seat from last week’s ACT election, being elected to the fifth seat in Murrumbidgee...
https://bsky.app/profile/6newsau.bsky.social/post/3l7fgets4ys2o
https://kyivindependent.com/georgians-head-out-to-vote-in-parliamentary-elections-tensions-run-high-at-some-polling-stations/
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
What do you expect? Decorum?
How to fuck Britain around the world in 80 days.
His vulgarity looks like authenticity
Christopher Caldwell"
“Bizarrely Trump seems like the only sincere political figure in an otherwise rigidly scripted system.”
https://unherd.com/2024/10/donald-trumps-strange-sincerity/
Benefit deductions are taken automatically for a range of debts, including Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) benefit advances, historical child tax credit overpayments, rent and council tax arrears, and water and utility bill debts.
The move would in effect allow claimants to repay debts over a longer period. It is unclear how much this will cost the Treasury.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2024/oct/26/more-than-1m-households-to-get-420-budget-boost-in-universal-credit-change
I'm taping it to add to my playlist.
They are all so….. STUPID. Blair was clearly very bright
I see no sign of any significant intellect in Labour whatsoever. None. Lammy is an actual fool who thinks Henry VII came after Henry VIII and that Marie Antoinette discovered radioactivity. Starmer and Reeves are polytechnic lecturers, and not especially good ones
Who, on the Labour benches, has real intellectual heft?
All kinds of bizarre reactions - a queue of idiot politicians claiming it was demeaning or something. Diane Abbott especially vocal, IIRC
On publication day, queues round the block, from every walk of life….
Tho I demur at the word “monster”, that’s out of order. So she likes a bit of spicy sex, good luck to her, it probably makes her more interesting. It is not “monstrous”
And you have no excuses - he's your MP and you know full well that type of person.
And you still want to destroy the Conservative party even though they're the only was to remove Labour from government.
If only you knew a travel writer who could revisit in his footsteps. I'll try that Simon Calder. Do reckon I'll get a commission?
And it started so well with a thought provoking piece by MaxPB.
Hicks Hudson: "Why don't you put her in charge??"
I’m not ruling it out, at least you have gone for the two right wing candidates, But they have an awful lot of work to do, to win back people like me
https://x.com/mikiashvili_m/status/1850130716241043628?s=46
Even if you are able to provide any evidence of intentionality on Truss's part, and I highly doubt you can, the actual opening of negotiations happened *after* Liz Truss left office, so even if she had been desperately itching to give the Islands away, it would have made fuck all difference given that she had already been swept from power. When the actual negotiations opened, Sunak was the Prime Minister, so it appears very like Liz Truss is being landed with the blame for policy decisions that were made when she wasn't even in power. Quite bizarre but par for the course with Truss on here.
I don't recall it being said so much this year- the party basically died some time ago, and the undertaker arrived to carry off the decaying stiff on July 4.
The thing is, opposition is fun, punching is fun, especially when it's someone as punchable as Sir Kier. But it doesn't actually make a difference. For the next four and a bit years, what the Conservatives do in Parliament is basically irrelevant. And, for all the noise, Labour remains ahead on the polls.
Punch a punchbag as much as you like, it won't respond. And, as anyone who has been systematically blanked knows, the lack of response is the most annoying thing on the world.
When I was in Cambridge this morning, I saw some hippy art around three trees that are apparently under threat of being cut down.
The tosserificness of the 'display' made me want to hire a chainsaw...
edit: this is it:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-67297975
Labour MP alleged to have assaulted a constituent
https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1850162823139148284?t=spLKqF8ogfVn0fEsNU142Q&s=19
But, you have to commit to voting to defeat Labour and the LDs at the next election to bring it about
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBMoPUAeLnY
It’s also on Spotify, Apple, Google, Amazon podcasts etc.
Also tens of millions of hits on various clips on Twitter and other similar platforms, plus loads of podcasters and commentators doing reviews and watch-alongs.
Internet well and truly broken.
Max’s piece is fine as far as it goes, but below the line he is reduced to pleading for more cookery lessons.
The last government near-bankrupted the country.
Osborne starved infrastructure (and is now said to regret it), and the Tories wasted years down a Brexit wank-hole. Sunak was simply inept, and he and Hunt left a frankly impossible set of forward projections.
Starmer and Reeves don’t inspire much, but it’s also fair to say they’ve been left with the worst inheritance of any government since the 1970s. And the forthcoming NI rise merely reverse Hunt’s unaffordable cuts.
You don’t like it, I don’t like it, but taxes must increase given the demographic of the country. It’s true in the UK and it’s true around the world. Only the US is really able to keep printing debt to avoid that trade-off, and even there reality will one day will catch up with them.
You're just trolling EVERYONE.
I knew you weren't a globetrotting jetsetter just a retired geography teacher and Lib Dem Councillor from Tupsley who gets his jollies by winding gullible people up on 'tinternet.