OT, but I hear on the news that Sainsbury's are giving their staff a 5% pay rise following a strong Xmas performance. Baffling. I'm sure I'd read, here and elsewhere, that pay rises would be virtually non-existent this year as companies struggled to absorb the rises in employers' NI and the minimum wage.
Stupid post. Swallows and summers. The big companies (the only bit of the business world that Corporatist Labour relates to at all) that make huge profits may be able to absorb. It is the SMEs that struggle with it. As you are a Labour supporter you have almost certainly always worked in the public sector so you don't have a fucking clue!
Thanks. Utterly charming. Let's hope you don't have a customer-facing role, eh?
I doubt you could afford to be my customer, but sorry if you are offended, but dumbass comments like yours are insulting to many small businesses that are struggling to make ends meet, many of which are run by friends of mine. The muppet in the treasury and Mr Boring thought they were being oh so clever by piling more costs on to businesses so they could reward their public sector friends, well now their lies are coming back on them. Problem is it will be others rather than they that will really suffer.
OT, but I hear on the news that Sainsbury's are giving their staff a 5% pay rise following a strong Xmas performance. Baffling. I'm sure I'd read, here and elsewhere, that pay rises would be virtually non-existent this year as companies struggled to absorb the rises in employers' NI and the minimum wage.
Pretty good results but the shares down over 4%.
Presumably the markets were expecting even better profits.
OT, but I hear on the news that Sainsbury's are giving their staff a 5% pay rise following a strong Xmas performance. Baffling. I'm sure I'd read, here and elsewhere, that pay rises would be virtually non-existent this year as companies struggled to absorb the rises in employers' NI and the minimum wage.
Stupid post. Swallows and summers. The big companies (the only bit of the business world that Corporatist Labour relates to at all) that make huge profits may be able to absorb. It is the SMEs that struggle with it. As you are a Labour supporter you have almost certainly always worked in the public sector so you don't have a fucking clue!
Thanks. Utterly charming. Let's hope you don't have a customer-facing role, eh?
I doubt you could afford to be my customer, but sorry if you are offended, but dumbass comments like yours are insulting to many small businesses that are struggling to make ends meet, many of which are run by friends of mine. The muppet in the treasury and Mr Boring thought they were being oh so clever by piling more costs on to businesses so they could reward their public sector friends, well now their lies are coming back on them. Problem is it will be others rather than they that will really suffer.
No problem, as you're incapable of causing me offence. Your disdain for the public sector is, though, a bit depressing. Let's hope you've never needed kids educated, health needs or any of the myriad things that the public sector does.
OT, but I hear on the news that Sainsbury's are giving their staff a 5% pay rise following a strong Xmas performance. Baffling. I'm sure I'd read, here and elsewhere, that pay rises would be virtually non-existent this year as companies struggled to absorb the rises in employers' NI and the minimum wage.
Pretty good results but the shares down over 4%.
Presumably the markets were expecting even better profits.
The other obvious point that our Labour supporting/apologist friend overlooked (bless him he has obviously never been in business) that without Reeves NI raid Sainsbury's would have been in a position perhaps to award a more generous pay increase
OT, but I hear on the news that Sainsbury's are giving their staff a 5% pay rise following a strong Xmas performance. Baffling. I'm sure I'd read, here and elsewhere, that pay rises would be virtually non-existent this year as companies struggled to absorb the rises in employers' NI and the minimum wage.
Pretty good results but the shares down over 4%.
Presumably the markets were expecting even better profits.
May just be a reflection of overall market decline. Been a brutal day in the City. BT down 4% as example.
On the Chagos Deal, it makes me a shade happier that the plan is 'somewhat' to compensate the UK via. Trident discount, but for many reasons, it is hardly satisfactory. Do we still have billions of Trident costs to pay to the US which can be discounted by £9bn? Are the US obliged by Treaty to furnish us with this discount? Will Trump be happy to honour it? Does the discount get given out in dribs and drabs, assuming (or confirming) that we will be lumbered with Trident or its replacement for 99 years? It's deeply suspect. If the US wants a base from Mauritius, rent it from them. There is absolutely no need for us to be involved.
I am also deeply suspicious of the plan to bung them £9bn now.
OT, but I hear on the news that Sainsbury's are giving their staff a 5% pay rise following a strong Xmas performance. Baffling. I'm sure I'd read, here and elsewhere, that pay rises would be virtually non-existent this year as companies struggled to absorb the rises in employers' NI and the minimum wage.
Stupid post. Swallows and summers. The big companies (the only bit of the business world that Corporatist Labour relates to at all) that make huge profits may be able to absorb. It is the SMEs that struggle with it. As you are a Labour supporter you have almost certainly always worked in the public sector so you don't have a fucking clue!
Thanks. Utterly charming. Let's hope you don't have a customer-facing role, eh?
I doubt you could afford to be my customer, but sorry if you are offended, but dumbass comments like yours are insulting to many small businesses that are struggling to make ends meet, many of which are run by friends of mine. The muppet in the treasury and Mr Boring thought they were being oh so clever by piling more costs on to businesses so they could reward their public sector friends, well now their lies are coming back on them. Problem is it will be others rather than they that will really suffer.
OT, but I hear on the news that Sainsbury's are giving their staff a 5% pay rise following a strong Xmas performance. Baffling. I'm sure I'd read, here and elsewhere, that pay rises would be virtually non-existent this year as companies struggled to absorb the rises in employers' NI and the minimum wage.
Stupid post. Swallows and summers. The big companies (the only bit of the business world that Corporatist Labour relates to at all) that make huge profits may be able to absorb. It is the SMEs that struggle with it. As you are a Labour supporter you have almost certainly always worked in the public sector so you don't have a fucking clue!
Thanks. Utterly charming. Let's hope you don't have a customer-facing role, eh?
I doubt you could afford to be my customer, but sorry if you are offended, but dumbass comments like yours are insulting to many small businesses that are struggling to make ends meet, many of which are run by friends of mine. The muppet in the treasury and Mr Boring thought they were being oh so clever by piling more costs on to businesses so they could reward their public sector friends, well now their lies are coming back on them. Problem is it will be others rather than they that will really suffer.
No problem, as you're incapable of causing me offence. Your disdain for the public sector is, though, a bit depressing. Let's hope you've never needed kids educated, health needs or any of the myriad things that the public sector does.
I don't have disdain for the public sector, or necessarily most that work in it. Indeed, my father worked in the public sector all his life. What I do have disdain for is greedy bastards who think they have a right to featherbedded pension funds, safe jobs and then demand pay rises that are completely disproportionate to what those in equivalent jobs (if there are such things) in the private sector and go on strike causing misery to achieve it.
It is made worse by a Labour government that rolls over to give already very well paid doctors huge pay rises (and pension rises with it) when the people who will pay will be in the private sector! Yea, I get a bit cross about all of that. Pay rises should be for those that increase productivity.
OT, but I hear on the news that Sainsbury's are giving their staff a 5% pay rise following a strong Xmas performance. Baffling. I'm sure I'd read, here and elsewhere, that pay rises would be virtually non-existent this year as companies struggled to absorb the rises in employers' NI and the minimum wage.
Stupid post. Swallows and summers. The big companies (the only bit of the business world that Corporatist Labour relates to at all) that make huge profits may be able to absorb. It is the SMEs that struggle with it. As you are a Labour supporter you have almost certainly always worked in the public sector so you don't have a fucking clue!
Thanks. Utterly charming. Let's hope you don't have a customer-facing role, eh?
I doubt you could afford to be my customer, but sorry if you are offended, but dumbass comments like yours are insulting to many small businesses that are struggling to make ends meet, many of which are run by friends of mine. The muppet in the treasury and Mr Boring thought they were being oh so clever by piling more costs on to businesses so they could reward their public sector friends, well now their lies are coming back on them. Problem is it will be others rather than they that will really suffer.
Sainsbury's is a big Labour donor.
I think most of the supermarkets are big donors to both main parties over the years. Cash for influence. It is why there is never legislation on their disgraceful use of plastic packaging I expect.
On the Chagos Deal, it makes me a shade happier that the plan is 'somewhat' to compensate the UK via. Trident discount, but for many reasons, it is hardly satisfactory. Do we still have billions of Trident costs to pay to the US which can be discounted by £9bn? Are the US obliged by Treaty to furnish us with this discount? Will Trump be happy to honour it? Does the discount get given out in dribs and drabs, assuming (or confirming) that we will be lumbered with Trident or its replacement for 99 years? It's deeply suspect. If the US wants a base from Mauritius, rent it from them. There is absolutely no need for us to be involved.
I am also deeply suspicious of the plan to bung them £9bn now.
Technically, the UK doesn't own Polaris missiles at all. We lease them from the US Government. So presumably we pay a reduced rental for them.
Apparently, if you were born between 1930 and 1946 you are in just 1% of your generation still alive today
My wife and I feel very blessed to be in the 1%
My parents in law (1937/8) and my mum (1945) fall into this category while my dad (1947) falls just outside. All still with us and in decent health, considering, for which we are grateful every day. I am pretty sure the number must be a lot more than 1%, though.
Sands book exposes the cruelty that we inflicted on the Chagos Islands, and the long court case that recognised that the BIOT was illegally separated from Mauritius.
The deal should perhaps be revisited if that's what the Mauritian government wants, but we should remember that Mauritius is a democratic country and part of the Commonwealth. It is perhaps the most economically successful of our former African colonies, with strong institutions and rated very highly for economic policy. It also is delightfully and harmoniously multicultural. Mauritius is not an enemy state.
I think many people may be in favour of handing them back over. I think fewer people are in favour of handing them over at the price demanded.
As @FF43 has pointed out, we're not actually handing them back, in that they're not really British right now.
It also seems to me that the Chagossian people are now so dispersed, and few who are alive ever lived on the islands, that there is no real possibility of compensating them. And it further appears that Mauritius has little real claim to the islands either.
But this is all irrelevant, in that they are a US military base, and will remain a US military base, until the US no longer wants them.
The question is simply whether the US pays "rent" to the Mautitius government (which doesn't really have a claim) via the UK government, or not.
Looking very much forward to book publishers stopping backing away from publishing an author who might (even just remotely) upset delicate Tabatha from Rotten College, Oxbridge.
Apparently, if you were born between 1930 and 1946 you are in just 1% of your generation still alive today
My wife and I feel very blessed to be in the 1%
My parents in law (1937/8) and my mum (1945) fall into this category while my dad (1947) falls just outside. All still with us and in decent health, considering, for which we are grateful every day. I am pretty sure the number must be a lot more than 1%, though.
Sands book exposes the cruelty that we inflicted on the Chagos Islands, and the long court case that recognised that the BIOT was illegally separated from Mauritius.
The deal should perhaps be revisited if that's what the Mauritian government wants, but we should remember that Mauritius is a democratic country and part of the Commonwealth. It is perhaps the most economically successful of our former African colonies, with strong institutions and rated very highly for economic policy. It also is delightfully and harmoniously multicultural. Mauritius is not an enemy state.
I think many people may be in favour of handing them back over. I think fewer people are in favour of handing them over at the price demanded.
As @FF43 has pointed out, we're not actually handing them back, in that they're not really British right now.
It also seems to me that the Chagossian people are now so dispersed, and few who are alive ever lived on the islands, that there is no real possibility of compensating them. And it further appears that Mauritius has little real claim to the islands either.
But this is all irrelevant, in that they are a US military base, and will remain a US military base, until the US no longer wants them.
The question is simply whether the US pays "rent" to the Mautitius government (which doesn't really have a claim) via the UK government, or not.
You say that Mauritius doesn't have a claim, the UN Tribunal says it does.
The Chagos were administered as a dependency of Mauritius by our government until detached in 1965 when independence was imminent for Mauritius.
The fact that we deported the Chaggosians to Mauritius in the early Seventies suggests that we agreed that they were Mauritians.
Apparently, if you were born between 1930 and 1946 you are in just 1% of your generation still alive today
My wife and I feel very blessed to be in the 1%
My parents in law (1937/8) and my mum (1945) fall into this category while my dad (1947) falls just outside. All still with us and in decent health, considering, for which we are grateful every day. I am pretty sure the number must be a lot more than 1%, though.
My wife and I both feel into this category. We went to see a car retailer yesterday who offered us a lease-purchase deal that would take me almost to 90!
On the Chagos Deal, it makes me a shade happier that the plan is 'somewhat' to compensate the UK via. Trident discount, but for many reasons, it is hardly satisfactory. Do we still have billions of Trident costs to pay to the US which can be discounted by £9bn? Are the US obliged by Treaty to furnish us with this discount? Will Trump be happy to honour it? Does the discount get given out in dribs and drabs, assuming (or confirming) that we will be lumbered with Trident or its replacement for 99 years? It's deeply suspect. If the US wants a base from Mauritius, rent it from them. There is absolutely no need for us to be involved.
I am also deeply suspicious of the plan to bung them £9bn now.
Technically, the UK doesn't own Polaris missiles at all. We lease them from the US Government. So presumably we pay a reduced rental for them.
No.
We own x in a joint pool of *Trident* missiles. We make the warheads in the U.K. We then pay a share of the servicing costs for the missiles. Periodically they are sent back to the US, and exchanged for others in the joint stockpile.
Interestingly this got us a discount when the missiles were originally bought. Lockheed had offered the US Navy (then the sole purchaser) a discount on the whole buy, if they bought more than the original planned number.
After the U.K. bought in, the stockpile of missiles was increased. Much to Lockheed’s chagrin, the discount offer covered that. So we got a discount along with the US Navy.
Zuckerberg: "They pushed us super hard to take down things that were true... anything that says vaccines might have side effects you basically need to take down."
Sands book exposes the cruelty that we inflicted on the Chagos Islands, and the long court case that recognised that the BIOT was illegally separated from Mauritius.
The deal should perhaps be revisited if that's what the Mauritian government wants, but we should remember that Mauritius is a democratic country and part of the Commonwealth. It is perhaps the most economically successful of our former African colonies, with strong institutions and rated very highly for economic policy. It also is delightfully and harmoniously multicultural. Mauritius is not an enemy state.
I think many people may be in favour of handing them back over. I think fewer people are in favour of handing them over at the price demanded.
As @FF43 has pointed out, we're not actually handing them back, in that they're not really British right now.
It also seems to me that the Chagossian people are now so dispersed, and few who are alive ever lived on the islands, that there is no real possibility of compensating them. And it further appears that Mauritius has little real claim to the islands either.
But this is all irrelevant, in that they are a US military base, and will remain a US military base, until the US no longer wants them.
The question is simply whether the US pays "rent" to the Mautitius government (which doesn't really have a claim) via the UK government, or not.
You say that Mauritius doesn't have a claim, the UN Tribunal says it does.
The Chagos were administered as a dependency of Mauritius by our government until detached in 1965 when independence was imminent for Mauritius.
The fact that we deported the Chaggosians to Mauritius in the early Seventies suggests that we agreed that they were Mauritians.
It more suggests that we chucked them wherever we could.
Zuckerberg: "They pushed us super hard to take down things that were true... anything that says vaccines might have side effects you basically need to take down."
On the Chagos Deal, it makes me a shade happier that the plan is 'somewhat' to compensate the UK via. Trident discount, but for many reasons, it is hardly satisfactory. Do we still have billions of Trident costs to pay to the US which can be discounted by £9bn? Are the US obliged by Treaty to furnish us with this discount? Will Trump be happy to honour it? Does the discount get given out in dribs and drabs, assuming (or confirming) that we will be lumbered with Trident or its replacement for 99 years? It's deeply suspect. If the US wants a base from Mauritius, rent it from them. There is absolutely no need for us to be involved.
I am also deeply suspicious of the plan to bung them £9bn now.
Technically, the UK doesn't own Polaris missiles at all. We lease them from the US Government. So presumably we pay a reduced rental for them.
They are part of the US nuclear arsenal - it is they who should be paying us rent to house them in the UK.
Zuckerberg: "They pushed us super hard to take down things that were true... anything that says vaccines might have side effects you basically need to take down."
Are you by chance an early Saturday Russian bot?
Sadly I don't have any revelations about BA pilots.
Zuckerberg: "They pushed us super hard to take down things that were true... anything that says vaccines might have side effects you basically need to take down."
Are you by chance an early Saturday Russian bot?
Sadly I don't have any revelations about BA pilots.
On the Chagos Deal, it makes me a shade happier that the plan is 'somewhat' to compensate the UK via. Trident discount, but for many reasons, it is hardly satisfactory. Do we still have billions of Trident costs to pay to the US which can be discounted by £9bn? Are the US obliged by Treaty to furnish us with this discount? Will Trump be happy to honour it? Does the discount get given out in dribs and drabs, assuming (or confirming) that we will be lumbered with Trident or its replacement for 99 years? It's deeply suspect. If the US wants a base from Mauritius, rent it from them. There is absolutely no need for us to be involved.
I am also deeply suspicious of the plan to bung them £9bn now.
These are all very good questions.
Another question would be if Mauritius have the balls to demand (by proxy) £90million a year to rent a base, what the heck have we been charging? Or why haven't we already been getting the 'Trident discount'? We are so uniquely craven that a small island that could do little more than lob coconuts at the US is better at standing up for its interests against them than we are.
I want to see a poll on returning the South Sandwich Islands to Hawaii
BTW thanks for advice re postie seasonal gift. Managed to catch him belatedly the other day, something for him anbd something for his mate. As you forecast he wasn't complaining!
I got given a christmas tenner on Wednesday with an apology for the lateness, they'd been away
That reminds me, I still need to tip my window cleaner the next time he calls.
Zuckerberg: "They pushed us super hard to take down things that were true... anything that says vaccines might have side effects you basically need to take down."
Are you by chance an early Saturday Russian bot?
Sadly I don't have any revelations about BA pilots.
Some nice work on vaccine side effects mind.
Zuckerberg must be working for Putin as a side hustle.
On the Chagos Deal, it makes me a shade happier that the plan is 'somewhat' to compensate the UK via. Trident discount, but for many reasons, it is hardly satisfactory. Do we still have billions of Trident costs to pay to the US which can be discounted by £9bn? Are the US obliged by Treaty to furnish us with this discount? Will Trump be happy to honour it? Does the discount get given out in dribs and drabs, assuming (or confirming) that we will be lumbered with Trident or its replacement for 99 years? It's deeply suspect. If the US wants a base from Mauritius, rent it from them. There is absolutely no need for us to be involved.
I am also deeply suspicious of the plan to bung them £9bn now.
These are all very good questions.
Another question would be if Mauritius have the balls to demand (by proxy) £90million a year to rent a base, what the heck have we been charging? Or why haven't we already been getting the 'Trident discount'? We are so uniquely craven that a small island that could do little more than lob coconuts at the US is better at standing up for its interests against them than we are.
The Trident discount has been going for a long time.
On the Chagos Deal, it makes me a shade happier that the plan is 'somewhat' to compensate the UK via. Trident discount, but for many reasons, it is hardly satisfactory. Do we still have billions of Trident costs to pay to the US which can be discounted by £9bn? Are the US obliged by Treaty to furnish us with this discount? Will Trump be happy to honour it? Does the discount get given out in dribs and drabs, assuming (or confirming) that we will be lumbered with Trident or its replacement for 99 years? It's deeply suspect. If the US wants a base from Mauritius, rent it from them. There is absolutely no need for us to be involved.
I am also deeply suspicious of the plan to bung them £9bn now.
These are all very good questions.
Another question would be if Mauritius have the balls to demand (by proxy) £90million a year to rent a base, what the heck have we been charging? Or why haven't we already been getting the 'Trident discount'? We are so uniquely craven that a small island that could do little more than lob coconuts at the US is better at standing up for its interests against them than we are.
The Trident discount has been going for a long time.
On the Chagos Deal, it makes me a shade happier that the plan is 'somewhat' to compensate the UK via. Trident discount, but for many reasons, it is hardly satisfactory. Do we still have billions of Trident costs to pay to the US which can be discounted by £9bn? Are the US obliged by Treaty to furnish us with this discount? Will Trump be happy to honour it? Does the discount get given out in dribs and drabs, assuming (or confirming) that we will be lumbered with Trident or its replacement for 99 years? It's deeply suspect. If the US wants a base from Mauritius, rent it from them. There is absolutely no need for us to be involved.
I am also deeply suspicious of the plan to bung them £9bn now.
These are all very good questions.
Another question would be if Mauritius have the balls to demand (by proxy) £90million a year to rent a base, what the heck have we been charging? Or why haven't we already been getting the 'Trident discount'? We are so uniquely craven that a small island that could do little more than lob coconuts at the US is better at standing up for its interests against them than we are.
The Trident discount has been going for a long time.
No it hasn't. What is now being referred to is a specific discount devised to compensate the UK for agreeing to rent a base for 99 years on behalf of the USA. It has nothing to do with the job lot discount that Malmesbury has told us about, as interesting as that is.
On the Chagos Deal, it makes me a shade happier that the plan is 'somewhat' to compensate the UK via. Trident discount, but for many reasons, it is hardly satisfactory. Do we still have billions of Trident costs to pay to the US which can be discounted by £9bn? Are the US obliged by Treaty to furnish us with this discount? Will Trump be happy to honour it? Does the discount get given out in dribs and drabs, assuming (or confirming) that we will be lumbered with Trident or its replacement for 99 years? It's deeply suspect. If the US wants a base from Mauritius, rent it from them. There is absolutely no need for us to be involved.
I am also deeply suspicious of the plan to bung them £9bn now.
These are all very good questions.
Another question would be if Mauritius have the balls to demand (by proxy) £90million a year to rent a base, what the heck have we been charging? Or why haven't we already been getting the 'Trident discount'? We are so uniquely craven that a small island that could do little more than lob coconuts at the US is better at standing up for its interests against them than we are.
The Trident discount has been going for a long time.
On the Chagos Deal, it makes me a shade happier that the plan is 'somewhat' to compensate the UK via. Trident discount, but for many reasons, it is hardly satisfactory. Do we still have billions of Trident costs to pay to the US which can be discounted by £9bn? Are the US obliged by Treaty to furnish us with this discount? Will Trump be happy to honour it? Does the discount get given out in dribs and drabs, assuming (or confirming) that we will be lumbered with Trident or its replacement for 99 years? It's deeply suspect. If the US wants a base from Mauritius, rent it from them. There is absolutely no need for us to be involved.
I am also deeply suspicious of the plan to bung them £9bn now.
These are all very good questions.
Another question would be if Mauritius have the balls to demand (by proxy) £90million a year to rent a base, what the heck have we been charging? Or why haven't we already been getting the 'Trident discount'? We are so uniquely craven that a small island that could do little more than lob coconuts at the US is better at standing up for its interests against them than we are.
The Trident discount has been going for a long time.
No it hasn't. What is now being referred to is a specific discount devised to compensate the UK for agreeing to rent a base for 99 years on behalf of the USA. It has nothing to do with the job lot discount that Malmesbury has told us about, as interesting as that is.
The deal dates back to the 1970s. It's how we got access to MIRV technology.
Very interesting article in the Spectator question the urgent priority placed by Reeves on sucking up to the Chinese rather than dealing with her self made economic disaster at home:
The People’s Republic is only the UK’s fifth biggest trade partner, accounting for 5.1 per cent of trade. Ireland alone received £24 billion more of British exports than China in 2023.
Despite the fanfare (or worry, depending on your position) of Chinese investment in British infrastructure, from Heathrow Airport to Northumbrian Water, the amount held is actually relatively small. Take FDI stock, or the amount of inward investment made into the UK by another country over time. As of 2022, China’s FDI stock in the UK was just £4.3 billion, accounting for 0.2 per cent of the total. By comparison, France’s FDI stock in the UK was £91.6 billion (4.8 per cent of the total), and Germany’s £41.1 billion (2.2 per cent).
The article concludes that China isn't a great export market, or FDI partner, and its technological assistance comes with massive security issues, and that a wide range of other potential trading partners would be more fruitful targets for Reeves' outreach.
OT, but I hear on the news that Sainsbury's are giving their staff a 5% pay rise following a strong Xmas performance. Baffling. I'm sure I'd read, here and elsewhere, that pay rises would be virtually non-existent this year as companies struggled to absorb the rises in employers' NI and the minimum wage.
Sainsbury's is a large UK Company having enjoyed a successful year trading and good it is rewarding its workforce
However, there are many Companies and especially small businesses who are struggling and are seriously affected, especially in hospitality but also in the care sector
And of course this is the private sector, Reeves will not have any leeway in the public sector for above inflation wage increases
The change to minimum wage and employer NICs will effect large employers of low-wage staff like Sainsbury's more than any other type of business, once you take the effect of the employment allowance and change to the secondary threshold into account.
A tight labour market overrides much of the effect of these policy changes (particularly NMW). If you need staff, you need to pay for them. In the long term, you might find some firms invest a bit more in capital to replace these staff - otherwise known as productivity growth.
On the Chagos Deal, it makes me a shade happier that the plan is 'somewhat' to compensate the UK via. Trident discount, but for many reasons, it is hardly satisfactory. Do we still have billions of Trident costs to pay to the US which can be discounted by £9bn? Are the US obliged by Treaty to furnish us with this discount? Will Trump be happy to honour it? Does the discount get given out in dribs and drabs, assuming (or confirming) that we will be lumbered with Trident or its replacement for 99 years? It's deeply suspect. If the US wants a base from Mauritius, rent it from them. There is absolutely no need for us to be involved.
I am also deeply suspicious of the plan to bung them £9bn now.
These are all very good questions.
Another question would be if Mauritius have the balls to demand (by proxy) £90million a year to rent a base, what the heck have we been charging? Or why haven't we already been getting the 'Trident discount'? We are so uniquely craven that a small island that could do little more than lob coconuts at the US is better at standing up for its interests against them than we are.
The Trident discount has been going for a long time.
No it hasn't. What is now being referred to is a specific discount devised to compensate the UK for agreeing to rent a base for 99 years on behalf of the USA. It has nothing to do with the job lot discount that Malmesbury has told us about, as interesting as that is.
The deal dates back to the 1970s. It's how we got access to MIRV technology.
Right, so do I take it that the 'Trident discount' isn't even a new initiative, so will not offset the £9bn that we're looking to spaff at Mauritius at all?
Mark Zuckerberg explains to @joerogan how the Facebook fact check program spiraled out of control.
Sounds a fairly fundamental misunderstanding of the book 1984, which was about lies propagated by the "Ministry of Truth", not about checks on facts.
Unless he is copying The Party.
The point is that “fact checking” inevitably strays into areas where there is no simple true or false rating so it is inherently biased, including in the choice of what to “fact check”.
Very interesting article in the Spectator question the urgent priority placed by Reeves on sucking up to the Chinese rather than dealing with her self made economic disaster at home:
The People’s Republic is only the UK’s fifth biggest trade partner, accounting for 5.1 per cent of trade. Ireland alone received £24 billion more of British exports than China in 2023.
Despite the fanfare (or worry, depending on your position) of Chinese investment in British infrastructure, from Heathrow Airport to Northumbrian Water, the amount held is actually relatively small. Take FDI stock, or the amount of inward investment made into the UK by another country over time. As of 2022, China’s FDI stock in the UK was just £4.3 billion, accounting for 0.2 per cent of the total. By comparison, France’s FDI stock in the UK was £91.6 billion (4.8 per cent of the total), and Germany’s £41.1 billion (2.2 per cent).
The article concludes that China isn't a great export market, or FDI partner, and its technological assistance comes with massive security issues, and that a wide range of other potential trading partners would be more fruitful targets for Reeves' outreach.
Yes, the EU would make a much better trade partner, but beggars can't be choosers.
Very interesting article in the Spectator question the urgent priority placed by Reeves on sucking up to the Chinese rather than dealing with her self made economic disaster at home:
The People’s Republic is only the UK’s fifth biggest trade partner, accounting for 5.1 per cent of trade. Ireland alone received £24 billion more of British exports than China in 2023.
Despite the fanfare (or worry, depending on your position) of Chinese investment in British infrastructure, from Heathrow Airport to Northumbrian Water, the amount held is actually relatively small. Take FDI stock, or the amount of inward investment made into the UK by another country over time. As of 2022, China’s FDI stock in the UK was just £4.3 billion, accounting for 0.2 per cent of the total. By comparison, France’s FDI stock in the UK was £91.6 billion (4.8 per cent of the total), and Germany’s £41.1 billion (2.2 per cent).
The article concludes that China isn't a great export market, or FDI partner, and its technological assistance comes with massive security issues, and that a wide range of other potential trading partners would be more fruitful targets for Reeves' outreach.
Yes, the EU would make a much better trade partner, but beggars can't be choosers.
The EU *is* a trade partner with whom we have a very liberal FTA. The idea that we are some friendless castaways floating about on the ocean looking for someone to take us in is absurd.
OT, but I hear on the news that Sainsbury's are giving their staff a 5% pay rise following a strong Xmas performance. Baffling. I'm sure I'd read, here and elsewhere, that pay rises would be virtually non-existent this year as companies struggled to absorb the rises in employers' NI and the minimum wage.
Sainsbury's is a large UK Company having enjoyed a successful year trading and good it is rewarding its workforce
However, there are many Companies and especially small businesses who are struggling and are seriously affected, especially in hospitality but also in the care sector
And of course this is the private sector, Reeves will not have any leeway in the public sector for above inflation wage increases
The change to minimum wage and employer NICs will effect large employers of low-wage staff like Sainsbury's more than any other type of business, once you take the effect of the employment allowance and change to the secondary threshold into account.
A tight labour market overrides much of the effect of these policy changes (particularly NMW). If you need staff, you need to pay for them. In the long term, you might find some firms invest a bit more in capital to replace these staff - otherwise known as productivity growth.
I had to work out the cost of the Employer NI increase earlier today (because I needed to check if someone was correct) and if someone is working 37.5 hours on minimum wage the Employer NI increase is £1000 (+/- a quid or so).
Add on the £1500 extra they will receive in pay and employing someone on April 6th is £2500 more expensive than the week before..
Very interesting article in the Spectator question the urgent priority placed by Reeves on sucking up to the Chinese rather than dealing with her self made economic disaster at home:
The People’s Republic is only the UK’s fifth biggest trade partner, accounting for 5.1 per cent of trade. Ireland alone received £24 billion more of British exports than China in 2023.
Despite the fanfare (or worry, depending on your position) of Chinese investment in British infrastructure, from Heathrow Airport to Northumbrian Water, the amount held is actually relatively small. Take FDI stock, or the amount of inward investment made into the UK by another country over time. As of 2022, China’s FDI stock in the UK was just £4.3 billion, accounting for 0.2 per cent of the total. By comparison, France’s FDI stock in the UK was £91.6 billion (4.8 per cent of the total), and Germany’s £41.1 billion (2.2 per cent).
The article concludes that China isn't a great export market, or FDI partner, and its technological assistance comes with massive security issues, and that a wide range of other potential trading partners would be more fruitful targets for Reeves' outreach.
Yes, the EU would make a much better trade partner, but beggars can't be choosers.
The EU *is* a trade partner with whom we have a very liberal FTA. The idea that we are some friendless castaways floating about on the ocean looking for someone to take us in is absurd.
Our goods exports to the EU are 11% down on 2019. Even a tariff free deal has a lot of Non tariff barriers.
We have to find other markets, and Trumpistan doesn't look a good bet.
Very interesting article in the Spectator question the urgent priority placed by Reeves on sucking up to the Chinese rather than dealing with her self made economic disaster at home:
The People’s Republic is only the UK’s fifth biggest trade partner, accounting for 5.1 per cent of trade. Ireland alone received £24 billion more of British exports than China in 2023.
Despite the fanfare (or worry, depending on your position) of Chinese investment in British infrastructure, from Heathrow Airport to Northumbrian Water, the amount held is actually relatively small. Take FDI stock, or the amount of inward investment made into the UK by another country over time. As of 2022, China’s FDI stock in the UK was just £4.3 billion, accounting for 0.2 per cent of the total. By comparison, France’s FDI stock in the UK was £91.6 billion (4.8 per cent of the total), and Germany’s £41.1 billion (2.2 per cent).
The article concludes that China isn't a great export market, or FDI partner, and its technological assistance comes with massive security issues, and that a wide range of other potential trading partners would be more fruitful targets for Reeves' outreach.
However there are a number of Chinese car companies who will be looking for a European base and you never know we may get 1 or 2 of those...
And given how they all are owned by the Chinese Government in 1 way or another you may as ask the organ grinder directly...
Sands book exposes the cruelty that we inflicted on the Chagos Islands, and the long court case that recognised that the BIOT was illegally separated from Mauritius.
The deal should perhaps be revisited if that's what the Mauritian government wants, but we should remember that Mauritius is a democratic country and part of the Commonwealth. It is perhaps the most economically successful of our former African colonies, with strong institutions and rated very highly for economic policy. It also is delightfully and harmoniously multicultural. Mauritius is not an enemy state.
I think many people may be in favour of handing them back over. I think fewer people are in favour of handing them over at the price demanded.
As @FF43 has pointed out, we're not actually handing them back, in that they're not really British right now.
It also seems to me that the Chagossian people are now so dispersed, and few who are alive ever lived on the islands, that there is no real possibility of compensating them. And it further appears that Mauritius has little real claim to the islands either.
But this is all irrelevant, in that they are a US military base, and will remain a US military base, until the US no longer wants them.
The question is simply whether the US pays "rent" to the Mautitius government (which doesn't really have a claim) via the UK government, or not.
If that was the case, the 'value' would be easy to set. Instead, the Mauritian government seems to rather (ahem) over-value how much we should give them for decades.
It's a grim afternoon for the economy on multiple fronts:
* Traders now pricing in just *one* interest rate cut this year. A few months ago there were hopes of as many as four
* The cost of government borrowing has risen to the highest level in 30 years for the third day in a row
* The pound has again slumped to a 14-month low against the dollar in the wake of the stronger than expected jobs data from the US
* The price of oil has risen to its highest level since October
Rachel "Liz Truss" Reeves.
We may find you are insulting Liz Truss there - because at least she was going to try something different rather than more of the same until the inevitable happened.
Jeez. Myanmar blocks all VPNs with such vigour if you even have one on your phone it’s an issue. And esims don’t work. And UK sims don’t work in Myanmar. And many wifi networks don’t actually work. Also TwiX is entirely blocked
The only way I’m getting this message out to you is coz I persuaded a nice girl on Reception to give me the password to the hotel staff wifi. Which works intermittently
I’m essentially like an RAF pilot, in an attic, in Occupied France, tapping out messages to you on some decrepit morse code machine at the risk of my very life. But with a pillow selection
Very interesting article in the Spectator question the urgent priority placed by Reeves on sucking up to the Chinese rather than dealing with her self made economic disaster at home:
The People’s Republic is only the UK’s fifth biggest trade partner, accounting for 5.1 per cent of trade. Ireland alone received £24 billion more of British exports than China in 2023.
Despite the fanfare (or worry, depending on your position) of Chinese investment in British infrastructure, from Heathrow Airport to Northumbrian Water, the amount held is actually relatively small. Take FDI stock, or the amount of inward investment made into the UK by another country over time. As of 2022, China’s FDI stock in the UK was just £4.3 billion, accounting for 0.2 per cent of the total. By comparison, France’s FDI stock in the UK was £91.6 billion (4.8 per cent of the total), and Germany’s £41.1 billion (2.2 per cent).
The article concludes that China isn't a great export market, or FDI partner, and its technological assistance comes with massive security issues, and that a wide range of other potential trading partners would be more fruitful targets for Reeves' outreach.
Yes, the EU would make a much better trade partner, but beggars can't be choosers.
The EU *is* a trade partner with whom we have a very liberal FTA. The idea that we are some friendless castaways floating about on the ocean looking for someone to take us in is absurd.
Our goods exports to the EU are 11% down on 2019. Even a tariff free deal has a lot of Non tariff barriers.
We have to find other markets, and Trumpistan doesn't look a good bet.
Why doesn't it look a good bet? Because it makes you feel icky?
Very interesting article in the Spectator question the urgent priority placed by Reeves on sucking up to the Chinese rather than dealing with her self made economic disaster at home:
The People’s Republic is only the UK’s fifth biggest trade partner, accounting for 5.1 per cent of trade. Ireland alone received £24 billion more of British exports than China in 2023.
Despite the fanfare (or worry, depending on your position) of Chinese investment in British infrastructure, from Heathrow Airport to Northumbrian Water, the amount held is actually relatively small. Take FDI stock, or the amount of inward investment made into the UK by another country over time. As of 2022, China’s FDI stock in the UK was just £4.3 billion, accounting for 0.2 per cent of the total. By comparison, France’s FDI stock in the UK was £91.6 billion (4.8 per cent of the total), and Germany’s £41.1 billion (2.2 per cent).
The article concludes that China isn't a great export market, or FDI partner, and its technological assistance comes with massive security issues, and that a wide range of other potential trading partners would be more fruitful targets for Reeves' outreach.
Yes, the EU would make a much better trade partner, but beggars can't be choosers.
The EU *is* a trade partner with whom we have a very liberal FTA. The idea that we are some friendless castaways floating about on the ocean looking for someone to take us in is absurd.
Our goods exports to the EU are 11% down on 2019. Even a tariff free deal has a lot of Non tariff barriers.
We have to find other markets, and Trumpistan doesn't look a good bet.
Why doesn't it look a good bet? Because it makes you feel icky?
Archbishop of Canterbury no longer world Anglican leader in shake-up plan
There are proposals for a ‘rotating’ leadership of the global Anglican Communion, with the archbishop sharing duties with foreign church leaders
The Archbishop of Canterbury will no longer be the de facto head and sole “face” of the world’s 85 million Anglicans under official proposals for a “post-colonial” shake-up.
For the first time since the formation of the Anglican Communion in 1867, as a fellowship of Anglican churches across 165 countries worldwide, its most senior figure would not automatically be the Archbishop of Canterbury, under plans deemed likely to pass, published in a report commissioned by global church leaders.
Instead, the role would be a rotating one, with Anglican archbishops and “primates” from around the globe elected to convene and preside over the communion’s most important body, the Anglican Consultative Council (ACC).
There are 42 Anglican provinces globally and tens of millions of Anglicans in Africa, with the largest number in Nigeria.
Ending the presumption that the Archbishop of Canterbury is always the sole face of the world’s Anglicans would “fit with the identity and ideals of the Anglican Communion in a post-colonial era”, a report notes, adding: “The leadership of the Communion should look like the Communion.”
OT, but I hear on the news that Sainsbury's are giving their staff a 5% pay rise following a strong Xmas performance. Baffling. I'm sure I'd read, here and elsewhere, that pay rises would be virtually non-existent this year as companies struggled to absorb the rises in employers' NI and the minimum wage.
Sainsbury's is a large UK Company having enjoyed a successful year trading and good it is rewarding its workforce
However, there are many Companies and especially small businesses who are struggling and are seriously affected, especially in hospitality but also in the care sector
And of course this is the private sector, Reeves will not have any leeway in the public sector for above inflation wage increases
The change to minimum wage and employer NICs will effect large employers of low-wage staff like Sainsbury's more than any other type of business, once you take the effect of the employment allowance and change to the secondary threshold into account.
A tight labour market overrides much of the effect of these policy changes (particularly NMW). If you need staff, you need to pay for them. In the long term, you might find some firms invest a bit more in capital to replace these staff - otherwise known as productivity growth.
I had to work out the cost of the Employer NI increase earlier today (because I needed to check if someone was correct) and if someone is working 37.5 hours on minimum wage the Employer NI increase is £1000 (+/- a quid or so).
Add on the £1500 extra they will receive in pay and employing someone on April 6th is £2500 more expensive than the week before..
Yep - at the bottom of the labour market, there is no way to squeeze wages so employers will have to suck it up or reduce headcount. If that's the case, we could see significant increases in measured productivity but an increase in unemployment as a result.
But I think more likely that a tight labour market will see the market wage for shelf stackers materially higher than the NMW, and therefore most of the effect will be passed on through wage decreases elsewhere rather than through unemployment.
This is an extension of the phenomenon where, since 2008, economic trouble largely does not materialise in unemployment anymore. This is possibly linked with our rubbish productivity growth.
I can’t even think about Chagos because it is so obviously a terrible deal done for appallingly dim reasons that it makes me nearly weep
The polling merely confirms that most British people have an IQ well under 120 and can barely place Poland on a map let alone Mauritius, and probably think Chagos is some wooden totem pole we stole from Africa
Jeez. Myanmar blocks all VPNs with such vigour if you even have one on your phone it’s an issue. And esims don’t work. And UK sims don’t work in Myanmar. And many wifi networks don’t actually work. Also TwiX is entirely blocked
The only way I’m getting this message out to you is coz I persuaded a nice girl on Reception to give me the password to the hotel staff wifi. Which works intermittently
I’m essentially like an RAF pilot, in an attic, in Occupied France, tapping out messages to you on some decrepit morse code machine at the risk of my very life. But with a pillow selection
I can’t even think about Chagos because it is so obviously a terrible deal done for appallingly dim reasons that it makes me nearly weep
The polling merely confirms that most British people have an IQ well under 120 and can barely place Poland on a map let alone Mauritius, and probably think Chagos is some wooden totem pole we stole from Africa
You have an aneurism every time someone on the "left" accuses voters of being stupid for voting for Brexit etc. Do you realise how much of a hypocrite you are?
It's a grim afternoon for the economy on multiple fronts:
* Traders now pricing in just *one* interest rate cut this year. A few months ago there were hopes of as many as four
* The cost of government borrowing has risen to the highest level in 30 years for the third day in a row
* The pound has again slumped to a 14-month low against the dollar in the wake of the stronger than expected jobs data from the US
* The price of oil has risen to its highest level since October
Just as well we've decided to curtail the oil industry and put "Great British Energy" (no, me neither) in Aberdeen instead.
We’re leading by example.
Others will follow 👍
This is the worst, worst Net Zero lie. That other countries will be 'inspired by our example' rather than thinking 'Thank Christ we didn't do that'.
Whatever your opinions of "net zero" it is a fact that fossil fuels are the past not the future. It is foolish to pretend otherwise.
Tell China this. They're the only country that can make a real difference.
China already knows this. Hence it’s solar and electric car development.
China destroyed its own long term future with the one child policy, but might just have bought the world a couple of decades in the process.
You don't think that China getting its population growth under control is one of the factors behind its astonishing rise and in particular its divergence from India?
I can’t even think about Chagos because it is so obviously a terrible deal done for appallingly dim reasons that it makes me nearly weep
The polling merely confirms that most British people have an IQ well under 120 and can barely place Poland on a map let alone Mauritius, and probably think Chagos is some wooden totem pole we stole from Africa
You have an aneurism every time someone on the "left" accuses voters of being stupid for voting for Brexit etc. Do you realise how much of a hypocrite you are?
It is hardly surprising more Labour voters support the Labour government's decision to give the Chagos Islands to Mauritius as do LDs while more Tory and Reform voters oppose the Labour government's decision to give the Islands to Mauritius.
So just divides on partisan lines on the whole even if most voters give a shrug
Jeez. Myanmar blocks all VPNs with such vigour if you even have one on your phone it’s an issue. And esims don’t work. And UK sims don’t work in Myanmar. And many wifi networks don’t actually work. Also TwiX is entirely blocked
The only way I’m getting this message out to you is coz I persuaded a nice girl on Reception to give me the password to the hotel staff wifi. Which works intermittently
I’m essentially like an RAF pilot, in an attic, in Occupied France, tapping out messages to you on some decrepit morse code machine at the risk of my very life. But with a pillow selection
"TwiX is entirely blocked"
It is either going to become an Eden on Earth.
Or else Musk persuades Trump to bomb the shit out the place.
It's almost as if the government does things just in order to "annoy" its political adversaries, rather than because they're the right things to do on their own terms.
Speaking of Brits with no idea of geography, I had this conversation with my very bright older daughter over Christmas
Me: “so I’m hoping to go to Myanmar in January”
Her: “great dad. What’s that?”
Me: “it’s a country. Do you know where it is?”
Her: (after a very long pause) “… maybe Asia?”
Me: “brilliant. Do you know where in Asia? Asia is big”
Her: (shorter pause) “nope Dad. No idea. Where?”
Me: “between India and Thailand basically”
Her: “uhm….”
Me: head::desk
The startling nature of this dialogue is underlined by the fact she is now at St Andrews uni studying Classics and…. Geography
Anecdotes about young children becoming dependent on AI chatbots for everything the way people depend on calculators to do long division are quite scary.
Jeez. Myanmar blocks all VPNs with such vigour if you even have one on your phone it’s an issue. And esims don’t work. And UK sims don’t work in Myanmar. And many wifi networks don’t actually work. Also TwiX is entirely blocked
The only way I’m getting this message out to you is coz I persuaded a nice girl on Reception to give me the password to the hotel staff wifi. Which works intermittently
I’m essentially like an RAF pilot, in an attic, in Occupied France, tapping out messages to you on some decrepit morse code machine at the risk of my very life. But with a pillow selection
"TwiX is entirely blocked"
It is either going to become an Eden on Earth.
Or else Musk persuades Trump to bomb the shit out the place.
Shit wine - basic Jacob’s creek - is £15 a bott. It’s not Eden. But I did have an excellent Burmese chicken and potato curry for supper. Like a mix of Thai and Indian (perhaps unsurprisingly). So maybe demi-Eden
It's almost as if the government does things just in order to "annoy" its political adversaries, rather than because they're the right things to do on their own terms.
So at worst no different to the previous Tory governments?
I can’t even think about Chagos because it is so obviously a terrible deal done for appallingly dim reasons that it makes me nearly weep
The polling merely confirms that most British people have an IQ well under 120 and can barely place Poland on a map let alone Mauritius, and probably think Chagos is some wooden totem pole we stole from Africa
Surely by definition most people (including Brits) have an IQ below 120? I thought a big IQ guy would have known that.
Jeez. Myanmar blocks all VPNs with such vigour if you even have one on your phone it’s an issue. And esims don’t work. And UK sims don’t work in Myanmar. And many wifi networks don’t actually work. Also TwiX is entirely blocked
The only way I’m getting this message out to you is coz I persuaded a nice girl on Reception to give me the password to the hotel staff wifi. Which works intermittently
I’m essentially like an RAF pilot, in an attic, in Occupied France, tapping out messages to you on some decrepit morse code machine at the risk of my very life. But with a pillow selection
There are two ways to work around this:
(1) Tunnel over SSH. You literally have no idea what I'm talking about, but ChatGPT will help you out.
(2) Tailscale. Personally I think Tailscale is literally the greatest thing of all time, but the key thing is this... you can have a Raspberry Pi (or whatever) sitting at home, and you send all your traffic via your home Internet connection. It's (a) almost unblockable, and (b) fools even the most restrictive content sites that you are at home.
Speaking of Brits with no idea of geography, I had this conversation with my very bright older daughter over Christmas
Me: “so I’m hoping to go to Myanmar in January”
Her: “great dad. What’s that?”
Me: “it’s a country. Do you know where it is?”
Her: (after a very long pause) “… maybe Asia?”
Me: “brilliant. Do you know where in Asia? Asia is big”
Her: (shorter pause) “nope Dad. No idea. Where?”
Me: “between India and Thailand basically”
Her: “uhm….”
Me: head::desk
The startling nature of this dialogue is underlined by the fact she is now at St Andrews uni studying Classics and…. Geography
My son, who’s applied for geography at university, is at the opposite end of the spectrum. He’s a walking pub quiz team of geography trivia. The sort who can pinpoint Kiribati on the map and tell you the second longest river in Nicaragua. If only he could take that sort of focus to his exam revision.
I can’t even think about Chagos because it is so obviously a terrible deal done for appallingly dim reasons that it makes me nearly weep
The polling merely confirms that most British people have an IQ well under 120 and can barely place Poland on a map let alone Mauritius, and probably think Chagos is some wooden totem pole we stole from Africa
Surely by definition most people (including Brits) have an IQ below 120? I thought a big IQ guy would have known that.
That’s probably why I said this “merely confirms” the fact, rather than offering it as a startling insight
Speaking of Brits with no idea of geography, I had this conversation with my very bright older daughter over Christmas
Me: “so I’m hoping to go to Myanmar in January”
Her: “great dad. What’s that?”
Me: “it’s a country. Do you know where it is?”
Her: (after a very long pause) “… maybe Asia?”
Me: “brilliant. Do you know where in Asia? Asia is big”
Her: (shorter pause) “nope Dad. No idea. Where?”
Me: “between India and Thailand basically”
Her: “uhm….”
Me: head::desk
The startling nature of this dialogue is underlined by the fact she is now at St Andrews uni studying Classics and…. Geography
Anecdotes about young children becoming dependent on AI chatbots for everything the way people depend on calculators to do long division are quite scary.
Personally, I find kids are remarkably reluctant to use generative AI. Which I find spectacularly dumb.
It's a grim afternoon for the economy on multiple fronts:
* Traders now pricing in just *one* interest rate cut this year. A few months ago there were hopes of as many as four
* The cost of government borrowing has risen to the highest level in 30 years for the third day in a row
* The pound has again slumped to a 14-month low against the dollar in the wake of the stronger than expected jobs data from the US
* The price of oil has risen to its highest level since October
Just as well we've decided to curtail the oil industry and put "Great British Energy" (no, me neither) in Aberdeen instead.
We’re leading by example.
Others will follow 👍
This is the worst, worst Net Zero lie. That other countries will be 'inspired by our example' rather than thinking 'Thank Christ we didn't do that'.
Whatever your opinions of "net zero" it is a fact that fossil fuels are the past not the future. It is foolish to pretend otherwise.
Tell China this. They're the only country that can make a real difference.
China already knows this. Hence it’s solar and electric car development.
China destroyed its own long term future with the one child policy, but might just have bought the world a couple of decades in the process.
You don't think that China getting its population growth under control is one of the factors behind its astonishing rise and in particular its divergence from India?
I suspect the truly appalling Indian infrastructure is the biggest difference: simply, unless you are on the coast (where costs are almost as high as in the West), then it's impossible to get stuff out of India.
Speaking of Brits with no idea of geography, I had this conversation with my very bright older daughter over Christmas
Me: “so I’m hoping to go to Myanmar in January”
Her: “great dad. What’s that?”
Me: “it’s a country. Do you know where it is?”
Her: (after a very long pause) “… maybe Asia?”
Me: “brilliant. Do you know where in Asia? Asia is big”
Her: (shorter pause) “nope Dad. No idea. Where?”
Me: “between India and Thailand basically”
Her: “uhm….”
Me: head::desk
The startling nature of this dialogue is underlined by the fact she is now at St Andrews uni studying Classics and…. Geography
My son, who’s applied for geography at university, is at the opposite end of the spectrum. He’s a walking pub quiz team of geography trivia. The sort who can pinpoint Kiribati on the map and tell you the second longest river in Nicaragua. If only he could take that sort of focus to his exam revision.
I prefer your son’s take on geography
I don’t even understand how you can get a GCSE in Geography without having a basic world and UK map in your head. Surely that’s drummed in to you in year 1?
My daughter got not only GCSE Geography but an A* in Geography A Level and is now at a leading UK uni doing Geography. And she has no basic grasp of Geography
But she’s really good at writing essays on sustainable neighborhoods. But not as good as ChatGPT at the same
Archbishop of Canterbury no longer world Anglican leader in shake-up plan
There are proposals for a ‘rotating’ leadership of the global Anglican Communion, with the archbishop sharing duties with foreign church leaders
The Archbishop of Canterbury will no longer be the de facto head and sole “face” of the world’s 85 million Anglicans under official proposals for a “post-colonial” shake-up.
For the first time since the formation of the Anglican Communion in 1867, as a fellowship of Anglican churches across 165 countries worldwide, its most senior figure would not automatically be the Archbishop of Canterbury, under plans deemed likely to pass, published in a report commissioned by global church leaders.
Instead, the role would be a rotating one, with Anglican archbishops and “primates” from around the globe elected to convene and preside over the communion’s most important body, the Anglican Consultative Council (ACC).
There are 42 Anglican provinces globally and tens of millions of Anglicans in Africa, with the largest number in Nigeria.
Ending the presumption that the Archbishop of Canterbury is always the sole face of the world’s Anglicans would “fit with the identity and ideals of the Anglican Communion in a post-colonial era”, a report notes, adding: “The leadership of the Communion should look like the Communion.”
Firstly. That is entirely sensible. The Anglican Communion is now a global body of fellow Anglicans, particularly growing in Africa, not an offshoot of Empire as it was when created in the 19th century so makes sense to rotate its leadership amongst Archbishops from each province around the world. In much the same way the Prince of Wales has suggested he won't be head of the Commonwealth when he becomes King but the role should be rotated amongst Commonwealth heads of state.
It of course has sod all to do with disestablishment of the Church of England. Not least as the C of E became the English established church in the 16th century, 300 years before the Anglican Communion was even created!! I would have thought as a former historian you would at least have known that?
Speaking of Brits with no idea of geography, I had this conversation with my very bright older daughter over Christmas
Me: “so I’m hoping to go to Myanmar in January”
Her: “great dad. What’s that?”
Me: “it’s a country. Do you know where it is?”
Her: (after a very long pause) “… maybe Asia?”
Me: “brilliant. Do you know where in Asia? Asia is big”
Her: (shorter pause) “nope Dad. No idea. Where?”
Me: “between India and Thailand basically”
Her: “uhm….”
Me: head::desk
The startling nature of this dialogue is underlined by the fact she is now at St Andrews uni studying Classics and…. Geography
Anecdotes about young children becoming dependent on AI chatbots for everything the way people depend on calculators to do long division are quite scary.
Personally, I find kids are remarkably reluctant to use generative AI. Which I find spectacularly dumb.
It’s because it terrifies and saddens them because they know it is smarter than them and renders them literally useless. I have sympathy
Comments
Presumably the markets were expecting even better profits.
Steven Swinford
@Steven_Swinford
It's a grim afternoon for the economy on multiple fronts:
* Traders now pricing in just *one* interest rate cut this year. A few months ago there were hopes of as many as four
* The cost of government borrowing has risen to the highest level in 30 years for the third day in a row
* The pound has again slumped to a 14-month low against the dollar in the wake of the stronger than expected jobs data from the US
* The price of oil has risen to its highest level since October
My wife and I feel very blessed to be in the 1%
It is made worse by a Labour government that rolls over to give already very well paid doctors huge pay rises (and pension rises with it) when the people who will pay will be in the private sector! Yea, I get a bit cross about all of that. Pay rises should be for those that increase productivity.
https://www.axios.com/2025/01/10/meta-dei-memo-employees-programs
Is it time for Ed Balls?
It also seems to me that the Chagossian people are now so dispersed, and few who are alive ever lived on the islands, that there is no real possibility of compensating them. And it further appears that Mauritius has little real claim to the islands either.
But this is all irrelevant, in that they are a US military base, and will remain a US military base, until the US no longer wants them.
The question is simply whether the US pays "rent" to the Mautitius government (which doesn't really have a claim) via the UK government, or not.
Looking very much forward to book publishers stopping backing away from publishing an author who might (even just remotely) upset delicate Tabatha from Rotten College, Oxbridge.
However, we have lost many of our peers and others are struggling with long term health issues
#pedanticbetting.com
The Chagos were administered as a dependency of Mauritius by our government until detached in 1965 when independence was imminent for Mauritius.
The fact that we deported the Chaggosians to Mauritius in the early Seventies suggests that we agreed that they were Mauritians.
We own x in a joint pool of *Trident* missiles. We make the warheads in the U.K.
We then pay a share of the servicing costs for the missiles. Periodically they are sent back to the US, and exchanged for others in the joint stockpile.
Interestingly this got us a discount when the missiles were originally bought. Lockheed had offered the US Navy (then the sole purchaser) a discount on the whole buy, if they bought more than the original planned number.
After the U.K. bought in, the stockpile of missiles was increased. Much to Lockheed’s chagrin, the discount offer covered that. So we got a discount along with the US Navy.
Republicans against Trump
@RpsAgainstTrump
·
4h
Q. What are you hoping to get out of your visit to Mar-a-Lago with Donald Trump?
John Fetterman: “I demand that I need to be made Pope of Greenland."
https://x.com/RpsAgainstTrump/status/1877724282295357537
Zuckerberg: "They pushed us super hard to take down things that were true... anything that says vaccines might have side effects you basically need to take down."
https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/nuclear-vault/2021-07-16/british-bomb-and-united-states-part-two
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/does-britain-need-china/
Despite the fanfare (or worry, depending on your position) of Chinese investment in British infrastructure, from Heathrow Airport to Northumbrian Water, the amount held is actually relatively small. Take FDI stock, or the amount of inward investment made into the UK by another country over time. As of 2022, China’s FDI stock in the UK was just £4.3 billion, accounting for 0.2 per cent of the total. By comparison, France’s FDI stock in the UK was £91.6 billion (4.8 per cent of the total), and Germany’s £41.1 billion (2.2 per cent).
The article concludes that China isn't a great export market, or FDI partner, and its technological assistance comes with massive security issues, and that a wide range of other potential trading partners would be more fruitful targets for Reeves' outreach.
Others will follow 👍
My concern is Miliband doesn't understand how fast the tech can change in this area and is not responsive enough.
A tight labour market overrides much of the effect of these policy changes (particularly NMW). If you need staff, you need to pay for them. In the long term, you might find some firms invest a bit more in capital to replace these staff - otherwise known as productivity growth.
“It’s like something out of 1984.”
Mark Zuckerberg explains to @joerogan how the Facebook fact check program spiraled out of control.
Jeez, every time you look at this it gets worse.
Unless he is copying The Party.
Or is this the Graun mischief making.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/jan/10/reform-uk-councillors-to-resign-over-nigel-farage-leadership
Add on the £1500 extra they will receive in pay and employing someone on April 6th is £2500 more expensive than the week before..
We have to find other markets, and Trumpistan doesn't look a good bet.
And given how they all are owned by the Chinese Government in 1 way or another you may as ask the organ grinder directly...
The only way I’m getting this message out to you is coz I persuaded a nice girl on Reception to give me the password to the hotel staff wifi. Which works intermittently
I’m essentially like an RAF pilot, in an attic, in Occupied France, tapping out messages to you on some decrepit morse code machine at the risk of my very life. But with a pillow selection
The Dap Kings deserve a lot more credit than they ever got
https://youtu.be/kGB4DrQg9ho
Archbishop of Canterbury no longer world Anglican leader in shake-up plan
There are proposals for a ‘rotating’ leadership of the global Anglican Communion, with the archbishop sharing duties with foreign church leaders
The Archbishop of Canterbury will no longer be the de facto head and sole “face” of the world’s 85 million Anglicans under official proposals for a “post-colonial” shake-up.
For the first time since the formation of the Anglican Communion in 1867, as a fellowship of Anglican churches across 165 countries worldwide, its most senior figure would not automatically be the Archbishop of Canterbury, under plans deemed likely to pass, published in a report commissioned by global church leaders.
Instead, the role would be a rotating one, with Anglican archbishops and “primates” from around the globe elected to convene and preside over the communion’s most important body, the Anglican Consultative Council (ACC).
There are 42 Anglican provinces globally and tens of millions of Anglicans in Africa, with the largest number in Nigeria.
Ending the presumption that the Archbishop of Canterbury is always the sole face of the world’s Anglicans would “fit with the identity and ideals of the Anglican Communion in a post-colonial era”, a report notes, adding: “The leadership of the Communion should look like the Communion.”
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/religion/article/archbishop-of-canterbury-no-longer-world-anglican-leader-in-shake-up-plan-3ld60cqbr
But I think more likely that a tight labour market will see the market wage for shelf stackers materially higher than the NMW, and therefore most of the effect will be passed on through wage decreases elsewhere rather than through unemployment.
This is an extension of the phenomenon where, since 2008, economic trouble largely does not materialise in unemployment anymore. This is possibly linked with our rubbish productivity growth.
The polling merely confirms that most British people have an IQ well under 120 and can barely place Poland on a map let alone Mauritius, and probably think Chagos is some wooden totem pole we stole from Africa
It wouldn't surprise me if it's less than 1% for those born in 1930, while over it for those born in 1945, which averages to 1% across the class.
Me: “so I’m hoping to go to Myanmar in January”
Her: “great dad. What’s that?”
Me: “it’s a country. Do you know where it is?”
Her: (after a very long pause) “… maybe Asia?”
Me: “brilliant. Do you know where in Asia? Asia is big”
Her: (shorter pause) “nope Dad. No idea. Where?”
Me: “between India and Thailand basically”
Her: “uhm….”
Me: head::desk
The startling nature of this dialogue is underlined by the fact she is now at St Andrews uni studying Classics and…. Geography
So just divides on partisan lines on the whole even if most voters give a shrug
It is either going to become an Eden on Earth.
Or else Musk persuades Trump to bomb the shit out the place.
I thought a big IQ guy would have known that.
(1) Tunnel over SSH. You literally have no idea what I'm talking about, but ChatGPT will help you out.
(2) Tailscale. Personally I think Tailscale is literally the greatest thing of all time, but the key thing is this... you can have a Raspberry Pi (or whatever) sitting at home, and you send all your traffic via your home Internet connection. It's (a) almost unblockable, and (b) fools even the most restrictive content sites that you are at home.
I don’t even understand how you can get a GCSE in Geography without having a basic world and UK map in your head. Surely that’s drummed in to you in year 1?
My daughter got not only GCSE Geography but an A* in Geography A Level and is now at a leading UK uni doing Geography. And she has no basic grasp of Geography
But she’s really good at writing essays on sustainable neighborhoods. But not as good as ChatGPT at the same
They’re all doomed. Anyone under 40
It of course has sod all to do with disestablishment of the Church of England. Not least as the C of E became the English established church in the 16th century, 300 years before the Anglican Communion was even created!! I would have thought as a former historian you would at least have known that?
https://www.hants.gov.uk/News/01102025DevolutionPriorityProgramme