Fuck you and your concern, Susan Collins. You voted for this shit.
https://thehill.com/policy/international/5144026-trump-ukraine-peace-talks/ ...Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), who occasionally bucks Trump’s positions and is strongly aligned with Kyiv, said she is concerned about Ukraine’s fate. “This was an unprovoked, unjustified invasion. I appreciate that the president is trying to achieve peace, but we have to make sure that Ukraine does not get the short end of a deal,” she said. ..
It's rather unedifying logging on and seeing lots of pb regulars dropping the f-bomb on anyone associated with Trump.
Are we going to have a full 4 years of this?
It’s deranged
are you suggesting that there is any tact or tast involved in the trumpist style of politics that should be catered to?
Er, yeah?
I approve 100% of all his anti-woke orders. I approve in his destruction of DEI. I approve of his banning of trans men from women’s sports. I approve of his hard action at the US border. I approve of his mass deportations. I approve of him telling Europe to shape up and stop sponging
Do I need to go on?
A large number of PBers find it impossible to comprehend that anyone can hold firm right wing opinions and REALLY believe them
Do you approve of him deleting the CDC’s database or copying the federal payments database?
Trump’s EO on making America healthy again mandates open data. You are falling for anti-Trump propaganda.
CNN being remarkably generous about the Trump plan for Ukraine
"Clumsy in delivery but potentially good in outcomr"
Not if one looks at the bigger, longer term picture and Putin, on the brink of defeat now has the opportunity to regroup, rearm and consolidate his gains next year or the year after.
"...Putin, on the brink of defeat now..."
Have you been watching your video games again for analysis on the SMO.
Putin was expecting to control Kyiv in three days. Three years later he was still making slow progress with casualties in the hundreds of thousands. Now Trump has offered him an opt out.
The Conservatives lost over 60 seats to the LibDems, including 6 here in leafy Surrey (12,000 majority in my constituency). I’m struggling to see how a pact with Reform will entice those defectors back into the blue fold.
Ditto here in South Cambridgeshire / St Neots constituencies. Once true blue.
The Tories aren't going to win those types of seat back.
Then they will never form a majority government.
Never is a long time. I remember people saying Labour would never win another election not that long ago. The electorate is uniquely volatile and disaligned from party identification. This is not a particularly good thing - stability and institutional memory matters and too much disalignment is almost as bad as too much partisanship - but it is where we are.
Apologies if wrong and not a dig, but are you not on your third party since 2019?
I'm also on my third party since 1995. But my defections are, in their own small way, a measure of the volatility on the centre-right. If the Tories were still sensibly conservative, I'd still be there. For that matter, had the Lib Dems had a more democratic (and politically viable) Brexit policy in 2019, I'd have moved directly across. And if the YP could have been made more functional and if the wider British and international picture wasn't so acute, I'd still be working there too - but it isn't and time is too critical to take the chance. Anyway, my objection to the Lib Dems is now in the past.
To be clear, I don't blame the electorate for being politically promiscuous: I blame the parties for not giving a solid, consistent, values-based programme.
I'm completely in agreement with you on that.
You're probably more attached to the idea of party than I am - I've had no interest in being a member of one for the last four decades - but while my views might have changed over the years, my values have done so far less than those of any of the parties.
Ukraine's best chance to win the war was in the summer of 2022, but the delayed counteroffensive at the behest of the US gave Russia chance to reinforce their defences and make it all but impossible.
Bringing down Boris Johnson at that moment was the biggest gift to Putin imaginable.
No it wasn't. Sunak was equally robust over Ukraine.
He was in a way; but Johnson did a lot of work in those early days to try and build support for Ukraine internationally. Macron also deserves some credit - and I've changed my view on that *a lot* as more information has come out.
Trump's strategy is to be as confusing as possible so his opponents never quite know where he stands. Where does he stand on Ukraine? It's difficult to tell.
My guess is that he is trying to impose a deal, as for Israel/Hamas.
He is threatening both sides to get them to sign *something*. My guesstimate is a ceasefire in place.
I think a ceasefire in place is most likely. That was in effect the position between 2014 and 2022, with a fair number of ceasefire violations.
It is possible for such ceasefire to endure (Korea and China/Taiwan for example) but they are inherently unstable. A ceasefire is different to a lasting peace treaty.
Both sides would re-arm and prepare for the next round. Ukraine would bind itself into the EU economic system, but probably not NATO. Russia would agitate for sanctions to drop.
So, wait, you’re saying iits going to end up as a Korea style armistice?
If only we’d listened to that pb-er who told us all this 18 months ago; unfortunately I believe he was shouted down as a “Putinist shill” and a “fucking appeaser”
It is appeasement. Just because it might happen doesn't make it any less appeasement. And all it will mean is that Russia rearm, reorganise and come back for another go in a few years. Anyone who supports this is indeed a fucking appeaser. Putin wins. Ukraine and Europe - inluding the UK - lose.
Having a view on the outcome of a conflict doesn't make one an appeaser or anything else. It makes one an analyst.
'Supporting' is not just analysis.
Where is the support bit in wot he wrote:
“I disagree. Putin and Russia are all in. Russia will not be defeated like this, ie with total Ukrainian victory
OTOH I can’t see how Russia wins, either. I predict a long bloody stalemate that ends with a Korean style partition and an exhausted armistice”
The Russian oil industry is now "all in" because the bulk of it is situated west of the Urals and now in range of Ukraine drone strikes. There could perhaps have been back channel chats to keep power and oil facilities "off limits" to both sides. But that hasn't happened. The latest Ukrainian strikes on oil refining and storage capacity are taking it off-line for months. Maybe longer, as Russia doesn't have access to spares embargoed by the West. Whilst chips for missiles might get smuggled in from various of the Stans, trying to smuggle in a number of distillation towers isn't possible. So the capacity to refine crude oil is reducing at an alarming rate for Russia.
If it can't refine the oil, it has to store it until it can sell it. As sales to India are the latest to have ended, there's more need for storage - which storage the Ukrainians are destroying. If it can't store it, Russia has to stop production. Stopping production can be terminal to oil wells continuing production. It means they have to be reworked when production recommences. This process is very expensive and can take years - as was shown when the Soviet Union collapsed.
If Ukraine isn't leant on to stop hitting the Russian refining and storage capacity, it's hand in the negotaition gets stronger and stronger over time. No Russian oil = no money for Russia = no Russian army in Ukraine. Russia has planned its war on the expectation that Trump will step in to call for a ceasefire that fixes the current de facto borders. Russia is absolutely at the limit of holding its gains in Ukraine. Stockpiles of Soviet-era tanks and infantry fighting vehicles are largely gone; Russian production is a fraction of losses on the battlefield. Its infantry are now trying to get to the Ukrainian lines in comandeered cars. Few make it. Many more months of this will expose the Russian army for the hollowed out entity that remains.
Ukraine's best chance to win the war was in the summer of 2022, but the delayed counteroffensive at the behest of the US gave Russia chance to reinforce their defences and make it all but impossible.
Bringing down Boris Johnson at that moment was the biggest gift to Putin imaginable.
No it wasn't. Sunak was equally robust over Ukraine.
No he wasn’t. It was noted at the time by Ukraine.
Rubbish! Sunak was often commended for his support by Zelensky. The Johnson cynics amongst us might suggest Johnson's enthusiasm was a last throw of the dice to bolster his waning popularity. Now that thought may be as disingenuous as yours was regarding Sunak.
More of a desperate gambit to distract from his previous Russian connections including putting Putinists in the Lords
“I disagree. Putin and Russia are all in. Russia will not be defeated like this, ie with total Ukrainian victory
OTOH I can’t see how Russia wins, either. I predict a long bloody stalemate that ends with a Korean style partition and an exhausted armistice”
From.. February 2023
TWO YEARS AGO
I guess you’d better add Ukraine to the long long long list of things I got right - major things - which mightily annoys everyone else therefore I’m not allowed to talk about them any more
The moment the west stood idly by and allowed the Russians to take this land in 2014 made this inevitable.
I don’t think the potential Ukraine deal has much in common with the appeasement policies of the 1930s. There are many calling it a Putin victory and yes, Russia will be the most pleased.
Let us remember though that Russia has sustained a huge number of losses, its economy is on the brink, and it has not achieved its initial war aims.
Putin wanted either a total annexation of Ukraine or a pliant satellite state run from Kyiv. He will not get either of those things. He’ll leave with the Donbass, in all likelihood, and a formal recognition of Russian sovereignty in Crimea. He will have expended much more to get those things than he ever imagined he would need to.
The great crime will not be ending the Ukraine war. I wish we did not have to and were able to help Ukraine to victory, just as I wish Putin had failed and been overthrown. The realpolitik of the situation means that a deal must be struck now. The great crime of our age will be committed if we do not now seize the small window we have available to create a European security apparatus to deter Putin from trying again in a few years’ time. If European politicians cannot rise to that challenge, they’ll be the “guilty men” of our age.
Russia gets to keep Crimea. Ukraine and UNSC recognise Crimea as Russian. Ukraine gets the other lands back, but some referendums are planned for some future point for those regions. Referendums result in these regions staying Ukranian. NATO issue is fudged in the deal. Ukraine is not banned from joining but never actually joins - or not in the medium term anyway.
Anyone else?
Russian assets in the west are noisily acknowledged to be Russian but held in blocked accounts and the interest paid to Ukraine in reconstruction
Fuck you and your concern, Susan Collins. You voted for this shit.
https://thehill.com/policy/international/5144026-trump-ukraine-peace-talks/ ...Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), who occasionally bucks Trump’s positions and is strongly aligned with Kyiv, said she is concerned about Ukraine’s fate. “This was an unprovoked, unjustified invasion. I appreciate that the president is trying to achieve peace, but we have to make sure that Ukraine does not get the short end of a deal,” she said. ..
It's rather unedifying logging on and seeing lots of pb regulars dropping the f-bomb on anyone associated with Trump.
Are we going to have a full 4 years of this?
It’s deranged
are you suggesting that there is any tact or tast involved in the trumpist style of politics that should be catered to?
Er, yeah?
I approve 100% of all his anti-woke orders. I approve in his destruction of DEI. I approve of his banning of trans men from women’s sports. I approve of his hard action at the US border. I approve of his mass deportations. I approve of him telling Europe to shape up and stop sponging
Do I need to go on?
A large number of PBers find it impossible to comprehend that anyone can hold firm right wing opinions and REALLY believe them
Do you approve of him deleting the CDC’s database or copying the federal payments database?
Trump’s EO on making America healthy again mandates open data. You are falling for anti-Trump propaganda.
Strangely, this "anti-Trump propaganda" seems to allign with what the courts consider legal activity - unlike the actions of Trump and his minions, who are losing case after case across a range of states.
New from 404 Media: anyone can push updates to the http://Doge.gov site. Two sources independently found the issue, one made their own decision to deface the site. "THESE 'EXPERTS' LEFT THEIR DATABASE OPEN."
Ukraine's best chance to win the war was in the summer of 2022, but the delayed counteroffensive at the behest of the US gave Russia chance to reinforce their defences and make it all but impossible.
Bringing down Boris Johnson at that moment was the biggest gift to Putin imaginable.
No it wasn't. Sunak was equally robust over Ukraine.
No he wasn’t. It was noted at the time by Ukraine.
Rubbish! Sunak was often commended for his support by Zelensky. The Johnson cynics amongst us might suggest Johnson's enthusiasm was a last throw of the dice to bolster his waning popularity. Now that thought may be as disingenuous as yours was regarding Sunak.
More of a desperate gambit to distract from his previous Russian connections including putting Putinists in the Lords
Good point.
If you're going to take that attitude, then you should ask why Starmer has made someone with massive Russian business connections ambassador to the United States...
What's more, someone who was forced to resign from government twice.
Ukraine's best chance to win the war was in the summer of 2022, but the delayed counteroffensive at the behest of the US gave Russia chance to reinforce their defences and make it all but impossible.
Bringing down Boris Johnson at that moment was the biggest gift to Putin imaginable.
No it wasn't. Sunak was equally robust over Ukraine.
No he wasn’t. It was noted at the time by Ukraine.
Rubbish! Sunak was often commended for his support by Zelensky. The Johnson cynics amongst us might suggest Johnson's enthusiasm was a last throw of the dice to bolster his waning popularity. Now that thought may be as disingenuous as yours was regarding Sunak.
More of a desperate gambit to distract from his previous Russian connections including putting Putinists in the Lords
Good point.
If you're going to take that attitude, then you should ask why Starmer has made someone with massive Russian business connections ambassador to the United States...
What's more, someone who was forced to resign from government twice.
Where have I supported Starmer's installation of Mandelson as Ambassador?
I am outraged that Johnson as Foreign Secretary shed his minders to go to a party thrown by KGB operative Lebedev.
Even if we consider the Mandelson appointment unacceptable, Johnson, the Foreign Secretary no less, allegedly alone and "tired and emotional " on a Northern Italian station is on a different scale.
I don’t think the potential Ukraine deal has much in common with the appeasement policies of the 1930s. There are many calling it a Putin victory and yes, Russia will be the most pleased.
Let us remember though that Russia has sustained a huge number of losses, its economy is on the brink, and it has not achieved its initial war aims.
Putin wanted either a total annexation of Ukraine or a pliant satellite state run from Kyiv. He will not get either of those things. He’ll leave with the Donbass, in all likelihood, and a formal recognition of Russian sovereignty in Crimea. He will have expended much more to get those things than he ever imagined he would need to.
The great crime will not be ending the Ukraine war. I wish we did not have to and were able to help Ukraine to victory, just as I wish Putin had failed and been overthrown. The realpolitik of the situation means that a deal must be struck now. The great crime of our age will be committed if we do not now seize the small window we have available to create a European security apparatus to deter Putin from trying again in a few years’ time. If European politicians cannot rise to that challenge, they’ll be the “guilty men” of our age.
Yes I largely agree
That’s where we are now. Ukraine has bought us time - with blood. So we must use it. Defence spend has to go up to 3% - the same as the USA
But along with that we need a much more ruthless pursuit of the national and western interests. Which means no more Chagos nonsense and much less undermining ourselves via migration
Ukraine's best chance to win the war was in the summer of 2022, but the delayed counteroffensive at the behest of the US gave Russia chance to reinforce their defences and make it all but impossible.
Bringing down Boris Johnson at that moment was the biggest gift to Putin imaginable.
No it wasn't. Sunak was equally robust over Ukraine.
No he wasn’t. It was noted at the time by Ukraine.
Rubbish! Sunak was often commended for his support by Zelensky. The Johnson cynics amongst us might suggest Johnson's enthusiasm was a last throw of the dice to bolster his waning popularity. Now that thought may be as disingenuous as yours was regarding Sunak.
More of a desperate gambit to distract from his previous Russian connections including putting Putinists in the Lords
Good point.
If you're going to take that attitude, then you should ask why Starmer has made someone with massive Russian business connections ambassador to the United States...
What's more, someone who was forced to resign from government twice.
Where have I supported Starmer's installation of Mandelson as Ambassador?
I am outraged that Johnson as Foreign Secretary shed his minders to go to a party thrown by KGB operative Lebedev.
Even if we consider the Mandelson appointment unacceptable, Johnson, the Foreign Secretary no less, allegedly alone and hungover on a Northern Italian station is on a different scale.
It really is not on a different scale. Mandelson should be nowhere near public office, but he gets a free pass whilst Johnson is damned forever.
CNN being remarkably generous about the Trump plan for Ukraine
"Clumsy in delivery but potentially good in outcomr"
Not if one looks at the bigger, longer term picture and Putin, on the brink of defeat now has the opportunity to regroup, rearm and consolidate his gains next year or the year after.
"...Putin, on the brink of defeat now..."
Have you been watching your video games again for analysis on the SMO.
Putin was expecting to control Kyiv in three days. Three years later he was still making slow progress with casualties in the hundreds of thousands. Now Trump has offered him an opt out.
There is of course a discussion to be had around what constitutes "defeat" and it is ofc a valid view that he (Putin) has been losing since he began the whole thing.
But "on the brink of..." sounds like some event whereafter that will be that he will be defeated once and for all.
It is precisely because this is unlikely that Trump is getting involved.
The Conservatives lost over 60 seats to the LibDems, including 6 here in leafy Surrey (12,000 majority in my constituency). I’m struggling to see how a pact with Reform will entice those defectors back into the blue fold.
Ditto here in South Cambridgeshire / St Neots constituencies. Once true blue.
The Tories aren't going to win those types of seat back.
Then they will never form a majority government.
Never is a long time. I remember people saying Labour would never win another election not that long ago. The electorate is uniquely volatile and disaligned from party identification. This is not a particularly good thing - stability and institutional memory matters and too much disalignment is almost as bad as too much partisanship - but it is where we are.
Apologies if wrong and not a dig, but are you not on your third party since 2019?
I'm also on my third party since 1995. But my defections are, in their own small way, a measure of the volatility on the centre-right. If the Tories were still sensibly conservative, I'd still be there. For that matter, had the Lib Dems had a more democratic (and politically viable) Brexit policy in 2019, I'd have moved directly across. And if the YP could have been made more functional and if the wider British and international picture wasn't so acute, I'd still be working there too - but it isn't and time is too critical to take the chance. Anyway, my objection to the Lib Dems is now in the past.
To be clear, I don't blame the electorate for being politically promiscuous: I blame the parties for not giving a solid, consistent, values-based programme.
Thanks. Certainly we cannot blame the public for being promiscuous when our politicians are flipping from party to party, sometimes for pure opportunism.
There's a reason people like Anna Soubry (Con-SDP-Con-Ind Grp-Change-Lab) or Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh (Con-Lab-SNP-Alba) aren't taken seriously.
The 'unique volatility' I would largely put at the door of politicians moving parties at a rate we haven't really experienced for a long time.
I don’t think the potential Ukraine deal has much in common with the appeasement policies of the 1930s. There are many calling it a Putin victory and yes, Russia will be the most pleased.
Let us remember though that Russia has sustained a huge number of losses, its economy is on the brink, and it has not achieved its initial war aims.
Putin wanted either a total annexation of Ukraine or a pliant satellite state run from Kyiv. He will not get either of those things. He’ll leave with the Donbass, in all likelihood, and a formal recognition of Russian sovereignty in Crimea. He will have expended much more to get those things than he ever imagined he would need to.
The great crime will not be ending the Ukraine war. I wish we did not have to and were able to help Ukraine to victory, just as I wish Putin had failed and been overthrown. The realpolitik of the situation means that a deal must be struck now. The great crime of our age will be committed if we do not now seize the small window we have available to create a European security apparatus to deter Putin from trying again in a few years’ time. If European politicians cannot rise to that challenge, they’ll be the “guilty men” of our age.
Europe has to do that if America are butting out. Not much choice in the matter.
As for who's winning here I draw a distinction between Russia and Putin. Russia hasn't won. They've paid a price in money and lives out of all proportion to the gains. Putin however has won. He's been sat there in Moscow the whole time doing no fighting whatsoever and spending not a cent of his own money. It's all gains for him.
Trump's strategy is to be as confusing as possible so his opponents never quite know where he stands. Where does he stand on Ukraine? It's difficult to tell.
My guess is that he is trying to impose a deal, as for Israel/Hamas.
He is threatening both sides to get them to sign *something*. My guesstimate is a ceasefire in place.
I think a ceasefire in place is most likely. That was in effect the position between 2014 and 2022, with a fair number of ceasefire violations.
It is possible for such ceasefire to endure (Korea and China/Taiwan for example) but they are inherently unstable. A ceasefire is different to a lasting peace treaty.
Both sides would re-arm and prepare for the next round. Ukraine would bind itself into the EU economic system, but probably not NATO. Russia would agitate for sanctions to drop.
So, wait, you’re saying iits going to end up as a Korea style armistice?
If only we’d listened to that pb-er who told us all this 18 months ago; unfortunately I believe he was shouted down as a “Putinist shill” and a “fucking appeaser”
It is appeasement. Just because it might happen doesn't make it any less appeasement. And all it will mean is that Russia rearm, reorganise and come back for another go in a few years. Anyone who supports this is indeed a fucking appeaser. Putin wins. Ukraine and Europe - inluding the UK - lose.
Having a view on the outcome of a conflict doesn't make one an appeaser or anything else. It makes one an analyst.
'Supporting' is not just analysis.
Where is the support bit in wot he wrote:
“I disagree. Putin and Russia are all in. Russia will not be defeated like this, ie with total Ukrainian victory
OTOH I can’t see how Russia wins, either. I predict a long bloody stalemate that ends with a Korean style partition and an exhausted armistice”
The Russian oil industry is now "all in" because the bulk of it is situated west of the Urals and now in range of Ukraine drone strikes. There could perhaps have been back channel chats to keep power and oil facilities "off limits" to both sides. But that hasn't happened. The latest Ukrainian strikes on oil refining and storage capacity are taking it off-line for months. Maybe longer, as Russia doesn't have access to spares embargoed by the West. Whilst chips for missiles might get smuggled in from various of the Stans, trying to smuggle in a number of distillation towers isn't possible. So the capacity to refine crude oil is reducing at an alarming rate for Russia.
If it can't refine the oil, it has to store it until it can sell it. As sales to India are the latest to have ended, there's more need for storage - which storage the Ukrainians are destroying. If it can't store it, Russia has to stop production. Stopping production can be terminal to oil wells continuing production. It means they have to be reworked when production recommences. This process is very expensive and can take years - as was shown when the Soviet Union collapsed.
If Ukraine isn't leant on to stop hitting the Russian refining and storage capacity, it's hand in the negotaition gets stronger and stronger over time. No Russian oil = no money for Russia = no Russian army in Ukraine. Russia has planned its war on the expectation that Trump will step in to call for a ceasefire that fixes the current de facto borders. Russia is absolutely at the limit of holding its gains in Ukraine. Stockpiles of Soviet-era tanks and infantry fighting vehicles are largely gone; Russian production is a fraction of losses on the battlefield. Its infantry are now trying to get to the Ukrainian lines in comandeered cars. Few make it. Many more months of this will expose the Russian army for the hollowed out entity that remains.
Naturally I didn't read your post (keep it pithy would be my advice).
But if it says something like just one more push/Russia is going to run out of XYZ/any minute now he will fail/etc then give over.
CNN being remarkably generous about the Trump plan for Ukraine
"Clumsy in delivery but potentially good in outcomr"
Not if one looks at the bigger, longer term picture and Putin, on the brink of defeat now has the opportunity to regroup, rearm and consolidate his gains next year or the year after.
"...Putin, on the brink of defeat now..."
Have you been watching your video games again for analysis on the SMO.
Putin was expecting to control Kyiv in three days. Three years later he was still making slow progress with casualties in the hundreds of thousands. Now Trump has offered him an opt out.
There is of course a discussion to be had around what constitutes "defeat" and it is ofc a valid view that he (Putin) has been losing since he began the whole thing.
But "on the brink of..." sounds like some event whereafter that will be that he will be defeated once and for all.
It is precisely because this is unlikely that Trump is getting involved.
Or Trump is getting involved because Putin still has photos of an alleged golden shower incident.
I expect after the last 3 bruising years that Putin will take a break from Ukraine for a while. He has Belarusian Anschluss, consolidating control of Georgia, undermining the leadership of Kazakhstan and some nibbling at Moldova and the Baltics to keep the empire occupied until Russia’s military is sufficiently rebuilt to go again into Ukraine.
I'm not sure what you mean by nibbling but usually it means taking a chunk of something. So you think Russia led by Putin is quite soon going to invade NATO countries' territories so as to keep its oar in, and while rebuilding its armed forces, until it invades western Ukraine?
With what aim? Something to do with Mordor, is it?
It is interesting to note that for the last decade the UK electorate have been voting to make themselves poorer. From Brexit to Johnson and now Labour. The idea that switching resources from the productive private sector to the unproductive public sector will get you growth on its own is laughable. The old tricks of the government such as bringing in foreign labour or selling off assets no longer work. The only way to get growth back is when we decide to focus our resources on investnents with good returns not humanity or DEI objectives.
The richest people in the country are the most negative on Labour and I fall into this category. I am already planning for a sterling crash keeping more money offshore. I am cutting back on my labour budget and looking only at opportunities with rapid returns. The reality is there are many opportunities as so many of my competitors have been sold off to overseas multinationals.
The middle class prefer to ponder about Gaza and Ukraine where we can do little than the chaos in our streets. As such I doubt much will change immediately. However at some point Reform or some incarnation of it will take power. The only question is is this going to happen soon or in many years.
The Conservatives lost over 60 seats to the LibDems, including 6 here in leafy Surrey (12,000 majority in my constituency). I’m struggling to see how a pact with Reform will entice those defectors back into the blue fold.
Ditto here in South Cambridgeshire / St Neots constituencies. Once true blue.
The Tories aren't going to win those types of seat back.
Then they will never form a majority government.
Never is a long time. I remember people saying Labour would never win another election not that long ago. The electorate is uniquely volatile and disaligned from party identification. This is not a particularly good thing - stability and institutional memory matters and too much disalignment is almost as bad as too much partisanship - but it is where we are.
Apologies if wrong and not a dig, but are you not on your third party since 2019?
I'm also on my third party since 1995. But my defections are, in their own small way, a measure of the volatility on the centre-right. If the Tories were still sensibly conservative, I'd still be there. For that matter, had the Lib Dems had a more democratic (and politically viable) Brexit policy in 2019, I'd have moved directly across. And if the YP could have been made more functional and if the wider British and international picture wasn't so acute, I'd still be working there too - but it isn't and time is too critical to take the chance. Anyway, my objection to the Lib Dems is now in the past.
To be clear, I don't blame the electorate for being politically promiscuous: I blame the parties for not giving a solid, consistent, values-based programme.
Thanks. Certainly we cannot blame the public for being promiscuous when our politicians are flipping from party to party, sometimes for pure opportunism.
There's a reason people like Anna Soubry (Con-SDP-Con-Ind Grp-Change-Lab) or Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh (Con-Lab-SNP-Alba) aren't taken seriously.
The 'unique volatility' I would largely put at the door of politicians moving parties at a rate we haven't really experienced for a long time.
I think that's back-to-front, to be honest. Politicians are switching parties because the parties have increasingly lacked consistency and put forward platforms that have moved well beyond the bounds they traditionally operated in, not the other way round.
I expect after the last 3 bruising years that Putin will take a break from Ukraine for a while. He has Belarusian Anschluss, consolidating control of Georgia, undermining the leadership of Kazakhstan and some nibbling at Moldova and the Baltics to keep the empire occupied until Russia’s military is sufficiently rebuilt to go again into Ukraine.
I'm not sure what you mean by nibbling but usually it means taking a chunk of something. So you think Russia led by Putin is quite soon going to invade NATO countries' territories so as to keep its oar in, and while rebuilding its armed forces, until it invades western Ukraine?
With what aim? Something to do with Mordor, is it?
FFS, the shite I read on the internet...
Top tip, you can avoid that by not proof reading your posts.
then you should ask why Starmer has made someone with massive Russian business connections ambassador to the United States...
I didn't actually know that. Not been reported on much in the media - should it have been ? Seems a big story to me.
He has lots of links, going back a long way. e.g. from wiki:
"In October 2008 Mandelson was reported to have maintained private contacts over several years with Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska, most recently on holiday in August 2008 on Deripaska's yacht at Taverna Agni on the Greek island of Corfu.[125] News of the contacts sparked criticism because, as European Union Trade Commissioner, Mandelson had been responsible for two decisions to cut aluminium tariffs that had benefited Deripaska's United Company Rusal"
And he has had significant business interests with Russia. But for some reason Labour-leaning posters tend to screech about Johnson, who at least has come out very vocally and strongly against Russia's actions and Putin.
A genuine question: what statements has Mandelson made about the war?
Ukraine's best chance to win the war was in the summer of 2022, but the delayed counteroffensive at the behest of the US gave Russia chance to reinforce their defences and make it all but impossible.
Bringing down Boris Johnson at that moment was the biggest gift to Putin imaginable.
I don’t think the potential Ukraine deal has much in common with the appeasement policies of the 1930s. There are many calling it a Putin victory and yes, Russia will be the most pleased.
Let us remember though that Russia has sustained a huge number of losses, its economy is on the brink, and it has not achieved its initial war aims.
Putin wanted either a total annexation of Ukraine or a pliant satellite state run from Kyiv. He will not get either of those things. He’ll leave with the Donbass, in all likelihood, and a formal recognition of Russian sovereignty in Crimea. He will have expended much more to get those things than he ever imagined he would need to.
The great crime will not be ending the Ukraine war. I wish we did not have to and were able to help Ukraine to victory, just as I wish Putin had failed and been overthrown. The realpolitik of the situation means that a deal must be struck now. The great crime of our age will be committed if we do not now seize the small window we have available to create a European security apparatus to deter Putin from trying again in a few years’ time. If European politicians cannot rise to that challenge, they’ll be the “guilty men” of our age.
Europe has to do that if America are butting out. Not much choice in the matter.
As for who's winning here I draw a distinction between Russia and Putin. Russia hasn't won. They've paid a price in money and lives out of all proportion to the gains. Putin however has won. He's been sat there in Moscow the whole time doing no fighting whatsoever and spending not a cent of his own money. It's all gains for him.
His windows are more dangerous than they were at the start of the Ukrainian comedy. Especially the ones in his bunker.
His credibility has been massively dented.
The Wagner Group incident showed that there is far from an instant reaction to defend Putin and his works. In his own court.
It is interesting to note that for the last decade the UK electorate have been voting to make themselves poorer. From Brexit to Johnson and now Labour. The idea that switching resources from the productive private sector to the unproductive public sector will get you growth on its own is laughable. The old tricks of the government such as bringing in foreign labour or selling off assets no longer work. The only way to get growth back is when we decide to focus our resources on investnents with good returns not humanity or DEI objectives.
The richest people in the country are the most negative on Labour and I fall into this category. I am already planning for a sterling crash keeping more money offshore. I am cutting back on my labour budget and looking only at opportunities with rapid returns. The reality is there are many opportunities as so many of my competitors have been sold off to overseas multinationals.
The middle class prefer to ponder about Gaza and Ukraine where we can do little than the chaos in our streets. As such I doubt much will change immediately. However at some point Reform or some incarnation of it will take power. The only question is is this going to happen soon or in many years.
How those who want an eventuality and are struggling to bring it about love to hear it said that asking how to prevent it is a complete waste of time, because it's a foregone conclusion.
Would a government under Labour or the Conservatives making and fulfilling all the promises now being made by Reform count as an incarnation of Reform taking power? It's not as if political parties are juggernauts. All that's required is money.
The Conservatives lost over 60 seats to the LibDems, including 6 here in leafy Surrey (12,000 majority in my constituency). I’m struggling to see how a pact with Reform will entice those defectors back into the blue fold.
Ditto here in South Cambridgeshire / St Neots constituencies. Once true blue.
The Tories aren't going to win those types of seat back.
Then they will never form a majority government.
Never is a long time. I remember people saying Labour would never win another election not that long ago. The electorate is uniquely volatile and disaligned from party identification. This is not a particularly good thing - stability and institutional memory matters and too much disalignment is almost as bad as too much partisanship - but it is where we are.
Apologies if wrong and not a dig, but are you not on your third party since 2019?
I'm also on my third party since 1995. But my defections are, in their own small way, a measure of the volatility on the centre-right. If the Tories were still sensibly conservative, I'd still be there. For that matter, had the Lib Dems had a more democratic (and politically viable) Brexit policy in 2019, I'd have moved directly across. And if the YP could have been made more functional and if the wider British and international picture wasn't so acute, I'd still be working there too - but it isn't and time is too critical to take the chance. Anyway, my objection to the Lib Dems is now in the past.
To be clear, I don't blame the electorate for being politically promiscuous: I blame the parties for not giving a solid, consistent, values-based programme.
Thanks. Certainly we cannot blame the public for being promiscuous when our politicians are flipping from party to party, sometimes for pure opportunism.
There's a reason people like Anna Soubry (Con-SDP-Con-Ind Grp-Change-Lab) or Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh (Con-Lab-SNP-Alba) aren't taken seriously.
The 'unique volatility' I would largely put at the door of politicians moving parties at a rate we haven't really experienced for a long time.
I think that's back-to-front, to be honest. Politicians are switching parties because the parties have increasingly lacked consistency and put forward platforms that have moved well beyond the bounds they traditionally operated in, not the other way round.
Indeed. The Conservatives are the least conservative, Labour focus on people not working ahead of those who do, the LibDems are not particularly Liberal, and the Greens have been taken over by the Corbynites. Finally Reform actually want to take us back to the 1850s. At least they are true to the Refukers bit.
It is interesting to note that for the last decade the UK electorate have been voting to make themselves poorer. From Brexit to Johnson and now Labour. The idea that switching resources from the productive private sector to the unproductive public sector will get you growth on its own is laughable. The old tricks of the government such as bringing in foreign labour or selling off assets no longer work. The only way to get growth back is when we decide to focus our resources on investnents with good returns not humanity or DEI objectives.
The richest people in the country are the most negative on Labour and I fall into this category. I am already planning for a sterling crash keeping more money offshore. I am cutting back on my labour budget and looking only at opportunities with rapid returns. The reality is there are many opportunities as so many of my competitors have been sold off to overseas multinationals.
The middle class prefer to ponder about Gaza and Ukraine where we can do little than the chaos in our streets. As such I doubt much will change immediately. However at some point Reform or some incarnation of it will take power. The only question is is this going to happen soon or in many years.
Quite strong "Mayfair 70s gaming club" energy here.
It is interesting to note that for the last decade the UK electorate have been voting to make themselves poorer. From Brexit to Johnson and now Labour. The idea that switching resources from the productive private sector to the unproductive public sector will get you growth on its own is laughable. The old tricks of the government such as bringing in foreign labour or selling off assets no longer work. The only way to get growth back is when we decide to focus our resources on investnents with good returns not humanity or DEI objectives.
The richest people in the country are the most negative on Labour and I fall into this category. I am already planning for a sterling crash keeping more money offshore. I am cutting back on my labour budget and looking only at opportunities with rapid returns. The reality is there are many opportunities as so many of my competitors have been sold off to overseas multinationals.
The middle class prefer to ponder about Gaza and Ukraine where we can do little than the chaos in our streets. As such I doubt much will change immediately. However at some point Reform or some incarnation of it will take power. The only question is is this going to happen soon or in many years.
Quite strong "Mayfair 70s gaming club" energy here.
It is interesting to note that for the last decade the UK electorate have been voting to make themselves poorer. From Brexit to Johnson and now Labour. The idea that switching resources from the productive private sector to the unproductive public sector will get you growth on its own is laughable. The old tricks of the government such as bringing in foreign labour or selling off assets no longer work. The only way to get growth back is when we decide to focus our resources on investnents with good returns not humanity or DEI objectives.
The richest people in the country are the most negative on Labour and I fall into this category. I am already planning for a sterling crash keeping more money offshore. I am cutting back on my labour budget and looking only at opportunities with rapid returns. The reality is there are many opportunities as so many of my competitors have been sold off to overseas multinationals.
The middle class prefer to ponder about Gaza and Ukraine where we can do little than the chaos in our streets. As such I doubt much will change immediately. However at some point Reform or some incarnation of it will take power. The only question is is this going to happen soon or in many years.
Reform cannot be trusted on either defence or national security. Both issues are going to balloon in importance over the coming years. Both Labour and the Tories should be hammering this point home.
It is interesting to note that for the last decade the UK electorate have been voting to make themselves poorer. From Brexit to Johnson and now Labour. The idea that switching resources from the productive private sector to the unproductive public sector will get you growth on its own is laughable. The old tricks of the government such as bringing in foreign labour or selling off assets no longer work. The only way to get growth back is when we decide to focus our resources on investnents with good returns not humanity or DEI objectives.
The richest people in the country are the most negative on Labour and I fall into this category. I am already planning for a sterling crash keeping more money offshore. I am cutting back on my labour budget and looking only at opportunities with rapid returns. The reality is there are many opportunities as so many of my competitors have been sold off to overseas multinationals.
The middle class prefer to ponder about Gaza and Ukraine where we can do little than the chaos in our streets. As such I doubt much will change immediately. However at some point Reform or some incarnation of it will take power. The only question is is this going to happen soon or in many years.
Are you forecasting the Sterling crash after Farage takes power?
His plans make the Truss Kamikwase budget look credible, so highly likely.
It is interesting to note that for the last decade the UK electorate have been voting to make themselves poorer. From Brexit to Johnson and now Labour. The idea that switching resources from the productive private sector to the unproductive public sector will get you growth on its own is laughable. The old tricks of the government such as bringing in foreign labour or selling off assets no longer work. The only way to get growth back is when we decide to focus our resources on investnents with good returns not humanity or DEI objectives.
The richest people in the country are the most negative on Labour and I fall into this category. I am already planning for a sterling crash keeping more money offshore. I am cutting back on my labour budget and looking only at opportunities with rapid returns. The reality is there are many opportunities as so many of my competitors have been sold off to overseas multinationals.
The middle class prefer to ponder about Gaza and Ukraine where we can do little than the chaos in our streets. As such I doubt much will change immediately. However at some point Reform or some incarnation of it will take power. The only question is is this going to happen soon or in many years.
Quite strong "Mayfair 70s gaming club" energy here.
Indeed. I think I’ve found an ally. Gonna DM him
He's not so universally sordid as you. His post implies he voted Remain.
It is interesting to note that for the last decade the UK electorate have been voting to make themselves poorer. From Brexit to Johnson and now Labour. The idea that switching resources from the productive private sector to the unproductive public sector will get you growth on its own is laughable. The old tricks of the government such as bringing in foreign labour or selling off assets no longer work. The only way to get growth back is when we decide to focus our resources on investnents with good returns not humanity or DEI objectives.
The richest people in the country are the most negative on Labour and I fall into this category. I am already planning for a sterling crash keeping more money offshore. I am cutting back on my labour budget and looking only at opportunities with rapid returns. The reality is there are many opportunities as so many of my competitors have been sold off to overseas multinationals.
The middle class prefer to ponder about Gaza and Ukraine where we can do little than the chaos in our streets. As such I doubt much will change immediately. However at some point Reform or some incarnation of it will take power. The only question is is this going to happen soon or in many years.
Quite strong "Mayfair 70s gaming club" energy here.
In my little corner of the world, DOGE has claimed that the US Patent and Trademark Office costs the American taxpayer $2 billion a year in wages. This couldn’t be more wrong. The USPTO costs the US taxpayer nothing. It is self-funding. In fact, in the past it has subsidised other parts of the US government via fee diversion. What’s more, a large proportion of the revenue the office generates comes from outside the US, in application, registration and renewal charges paid by foreign entities. If DOGE is so obviously wrong about this, what else is it wrong about?
It is interesting to note that for the last decade the UK electorate have been voting to make themselves poorer. From Brexit to Johnson and now Labour. The idea that switching resources from the productive private sector to the unproductive public sector will get you growth on its own is laughable. The old tricks of the government such as bringing in foreign labour or selling off assets no longer work. The only way to get growth back is when we decide to focus our resources on investnents with good returns not humanity or DEI objectives.
The richest people in the country are the most negative on Labour and I fall into this category. I am already planning for a sterling crash keeping more money offshore. I am cutting back on my labour budget and looking only at opportunities with rapid returns. The reality is there are many opportunities as so many of my competitors have been sold off to overseas multinationals.
The middle class prefer to ponder about Gaza and Ukraine where we can do little than the chaos in our streets. As such I doubt much will change immediately. However at some point Reform or some incarnation of it will take power. The only question is is this going to happen soon or in many years.
Brexit was a F*** you vote by those who were poor and didn’t think the Government was doing anything for them.
The 2017 election was a lost vote due to May screwing up the election.
2019 was Bozo saying he will implement Brexit and getting elected by the have nots to implement it.
2024 was the consequences of Bozo and co failing to give the have nots what he promised
2028/9 is likely to be the same with the have nots voting for someone else to delivery the impossible - nothing is going to change because most of the have nots are never going to be better off - it’s just not possible to fix the problems they have
It is interesting to note that for the last decade the UK electorate have been voting to make themselves poorer. From Brexit to Johnson and now Labour. The idea that switching resources from the productive private sector to the unproductive public sector will get you growth on its own is laughable. The old tricks of the government such as bringing in foreign labour or selling off assets no longer work. The only way to get growth back is when we decide to focus our resources on investnents with good returns not humanity or DEI objectives.
The richest people in the country are the most negative on Labour and I fall into this category. I am already planning for a sterling crash keeping more money offshore. I am cutting back on my labour budget and looking only at opportunities with rapid returns. The reality is there are many opportunities as so many of my competitors have been sold off to overseas multinationals.
The middle class prefer to ponder about Gaza and Ukraine where we can do little than the chaos in our streets. As such I doubt much will change immediately. However at some point Reform or some incarnation of it will take power. The only question is is this going to happen soon or in many years.
Reform cannot be trusted on either defence or national security. Both issues are going to balloon in importance over the coming years. Both Labour and the Tories should be hammering this point home.
There may come a time but right now Trump and Reform are headline news and everything else is drowned out
It is interesting to note that for the last decade the UK electorate have been voting to make themselves poorer. From Brexit to Johnson and now Labour. The idea that switching resources from the productive private sector to the unproductive public sector will get you growth on its own is laughable. The old tricks of the government such as bringing in foreign labour or selling off assets no longer work. The only way to get growth back is when we decide to focus our resources on investnents with good returns not humanity or DEI objectives.
The richest people in the country are the most negative on Labour and I fall into this category. I am already planning for a sterling crash keeping more money offshore. I am cutting back on my labour budget and looking only at opportunities with rapid returns. The reality is there are many opportunities as so many of my competitors have been sold off to overseas multinationals.
The middle class prefer to ponder about Gaza and Ukraine where we can do little than the chaos in our streets. As such I doubt much will change immediately. However at some point Reform or some incarnation of it will take power. The only question is is this going to happen soon or in many years.
Quite strong "Mayfair 70s gaming club" energy here.
Hmmmm
perhaps you mean -
????
I was thinking Lucky, Jimmy, Aspers, Taki, all that scene.
Perhaps a bit unfair on Hamilton since he voted Remain.
It is interesting to note that for the last decade the UK electorate have been voting to make themselves poorer. From Brexit to Johnson and now Labour. The idea that switching resources from the productive private sector to the unproductive public sector will get you growth on its own is laughable. The old tricks of the government such as bringing in foreign labour or selling off assets no longer work. The only way to get growth back is when we decide to focus our resources on investnents with good returns not humanity or DEI objectives.
The richest people in the country are the most negative on Labour and I fall into this category. I am already planning for a sterling crash keeping more money offshore. I am cutting back on my labour budget and looking only at opportunities with rapid returns. The reality is there are many opportunities as so many of my competitors have been sold off to overseas multinationals.
The middle class prefer to ponder about Gaza and Ukraine where we can do little than the chaos in our streets. As such I doubt much will change immediately. However at some point Reform or some incarnation of it will take power. The only question is is this going to happen soon or in many years.
Quite strong "Mayfair 70s gaming club" energy here.
Indeed. I think I’ve found an ally. Gonna DM him
He's not so universally sordid as you. His post implies he voted Remain.
Ooh. “Universally sordid”. I’m gonna take that as a compliment. Can I quote you and describe you as a closeted gay retired golf playing accountant?
In my little corner of the world, DOGE has claimed that the US Patent and Trademark Office costs the American taxpayer $2 billion a year in wages. This couldn’t be more wrong. The USPTO costs the US taxpayer nothing. It is self-funding. In fact, in the past it has subsidised other parts of the US government via fee diversion. What’s more, a large proportion of the revenue the office generates comes from outside the US, in application, registration and renewal charges paid by foreign entities. If DOGE is so obviously wrong about this, what else is it wrong about?
I'm still waiting for a claim from DOGE that is something vaguely resembling accurate or true.
It is interesting to note that for the last decade the UK electorate have been voting to make themselves poorer. From Brexit to Johnson and now Labour. The idea that switching resources from the productive private sector to the unproductive public sector will get you growth on its own is laughable. The old tricks of the government such as bringing in foreign labour or selling off assets no longer work. The only way to get growth back is when we decide to focus our resources on investnents with good returns not humanity or DEI objectives.
The richest people in the country are the most negative on Labour and I fall into this category. I am already planning for a sterling crash keeping more money offshore. I am cutting back on my labour budget and looking only at opportunities with rapid returns. The reality is there are many opportunities as so many of my competitors have been sold off to overseas multinationals.
The middle class prefer to ponder about Gaza and Ukraine where we can do little than the chaos in our streets. As such I doubt much will change immediately. However at some point Reform or some incarnation of it will take power. The only question is is this going to happen soon or in many years.
Brexit was a F*** you vote by those who were poor and didn’t think the Government was doing anything for them.
The 2017 election was a lost vote due to May screwing up the election.
2019 was Bozo saying he will implement Brexit and getting elected by the have nots to implement it.
2024 was the consequences of Bozo and co failing to give the have nots what he promised
2028/9 is likely to be the same with the have nots voting for someone else to delivery the impossible - nothing is going to change because most of the have nots are never going to be better off - it’s just not possible to fix the problems they have
There is a lot of truth in that
Indeed successive politicians not telling the truth because it is politically toxic is why I see no end to it, unless it is taken out of their control by the IMF at sometime in the future
It is interesting to note that for the last decade the UK electorate have been voting to make themselves poorer. From Brexit to Johnson and now Labour. The idea that switching resources from the productive private sector to the unproductive public sector will get you growth on its own is laughable. The old tricks of the government such as bringing in foreign labour or selling off assets no longer work. The only way to get growth back is when we decide to focus our resources on investnents with good returns not humanity or DEI objectives.
The richest people in the country are the most negative on Labour and I fall into this category. I am already planning for a sterling crash keeping more money offshore. I am cutting back on my labour budget and looking only at opportunities with rapid returns. The reality is there are many opportunities as so many of my competitors have been sold off to overseas multinationals.
The middle class prefer to ponder about Gaza and Ukraine where we can do little than the chaos in our streets. As such I doubt much will change immediately. However at some point Reform or some incarnation of it will take power. The only question is is this going to happen soon or in many years.
Quite strong "Mayfair 70s gaming club" energy here.
Hmmmm
perhaps you mean -
????
I was thinking Lucky, Jimmy, Aspers, Taki, all that scene.
Perhaps a bit unfair on Hamilton since he voted Remain.
The character of Sir Edward Matheson, played with gusto by Stewart Granger, is exactly who those people *wanted* to be.
Bush I - the guy who got the Israelis and the Arabs to fight on the same side?
Who international presence and power was such, in his presidency, that when he *suggested* that force wasn't entirely ruled out, Quaddafi destroyed his poison gas plant the next day. And promised to be a good boy and eat his dinner properly and everything.
'Concerns are growing the UK could be hit with higher US trade taxes after President Donald Trump announced he would target VAT in his latest move.
Trump has instructed his staff to develop custom "reciprocal tariffs" - charging the same amount as levies imposed on American exports - for each country.
The UK's trading relationship with US had suggested it would be less exposed to tariffs than others, but the surprise inclusion of VAT to calculate potential tariffs has prompted questions over the impact on British businesses.
Analysts have suggested tariffs of 20% or more could be placed on the UK as well as the European Union.'
It is interesting to note that for the last decade the UK electorate have been voting to make themselves poorer. From Brexit to Johnson and now Labour. The idea that switching resources from the productive private sector to the unproductive public sector will get you growth on its own is laughable. The old tricks of the government such as bringing in foreign labour or selling off assets no longer work. The only way to get growth back is when we decide to focus our resources on investnents with good returns not humanity or DEI objectives.
The richest people in the country are the most negative on Labour and I fall into this category. I am already planning for a sterling crash keeping more money offshore. I am cutting back on my labour budget and looking only at opportunities with rapid returns. The reality is there are many opportunities as so many of my competitors have been sold off to overseas multinationals.
The middle class prefer to ponder about Gaza and Ukraine where we can do little than the chaos in our streets. As such I doubt much will change immediately. However at some point Reform or some incarnation of it will take power. The only question is is this going to happen soon or in many years.
Quite strong "Mayfair 70s gaming club" energy here.
Hmmmm
perhaps you mean -
????
I was thinking Lucky, Jimmy, Aspers, Taki, all that scene.
Perhaps a bit unfair on Hamilton since he voted Remain.
I didn't detect a murdering one's children's nanny vibe at all.
Dominic "What happened to my Startup Party or was it the People's Action Party?" Cummings reckons "Trump seems to be sticking to his promise to publish the remaining CIA files on Oswald. I guarantee you will be shocked by revelations about the Zapruder film being taken to the CIA’s classified photo lab, NPIC, the weekend after the assassination. The truth is so extraordinary it would struggle to get past Hollywood scriptwriters."
He should publish what he thinks. He publishes so many other thoughts that bounce around in his head.
I was always taught that the rule of law and liberal democracy were fundamental European and US values. It seems, though, that owning the libs is now what matters most. All else must be sacrificed to secure that aim.
'Concerns are growing the UK could be hit with higher US trade taxes after President Donald Trump announced he would target VAT in his latest move.
Trump has instructed his staff to develop custom "reciprocal tariffs" - charging the same amount as levies imposed on American exports - for each country.
The UK's trading relationship with US had suggested it would be less exposed to tariffs than others, but the surprise inclusion of VAT to calculate potential tariffs has prompted questions over the impact on British businesses.
Analysts have suggested tariffs of 20% or more could be placed on the UK as well as the European Union.'
Trump's focus on VAT displays a jaw dropping level of economic illiteracy. VAT is designed to be completely non-disctiminatory between domestic production and imports. Either his team is completely ignorant or this is simply a smokescreen designed to justify punitive US tariffs under the guise of reciprocity.
It is interesting to note that for the last decade the UK electorate have been voting to make themselves poorer. From Brexit to Johnson and now Labour. The idea that switching resources from the productive private sector to the unproductive public sector will get you growth on its own is laughable. The old tricks of the government such as bringing in foreign labour or selling off assets no longer work. The only way to get growth back is when we decide to focus our resources on investnents with good returns not humanity or DEI objectives.
The richest people in the country are the most negative on Labour and I fall into this category. I am already planning for a sterling crash keeping more money offshore. I am cutting back on my labour budget and looking only at opportunities with rapid returns. The reality is there are many opportunities as so many of my competitors have been sold off to overseas multinationals.
The middle class prefer to ponder about Gaza and Ukraine where we can do little than the chaos in our streets. As such I doubt much will change immediately. However at some point Reform or some incarnation of it will take power. The only question is is this going to happen soon or in many years.
Reform cannot be trusted on either defence or national security. Both issues are going to balloon in importance over the coming years. Both Labour and the Tories should be hammering this point home.
There may come a time but right now Trump and Reform are headline news and everything else is drowned out
The time is rapidly approaching thanks to Trump's alliance with Putin, Farage being a huge fan of both of them, of course.
It is interesting to note that for the last decade the UK electorate have been voting to make themselves poorer. From Brexit to Johnson and now Labour. The idea that switching resources from the productive private sector to the unproductive public sector will get you growth on its own is laughable. The old tricks of the government such as bringing in foreign labour or selling off assets no longer work. The only way to get growth back is when we decide to focus our resources on investnents with good returns not humanity or DEI objectives.
The richest people in the country are the most negative on Labour and I fall into this category. I am already planning for a sterling crash keeping more money offshore. I am cutting back on my labour budget and looking only at opportunities with rapid returns. The reality is there are many opportunities as so many of my competitors have been sold off to overseas multinationals.
The middle class prefer to ponder about Gaza and Ukraine where we can do little than the chaos in our streets. As such I doubt much will change immediately. However at some point Reform or some incarnation of it will take power. The only question is is this going to happen soon or in many years.
Quite strong "Mayfair 70s gaming club" energy here.
Indeed. I think I’ve found an ally. Gonna DM him
He's not so universally sordid as you. His post implies he voted Remain.
Ooh. “Universally sordid”. I’m gonna take that as a compliment. Can I quote you and describe you as a closeted gay retired golf playing accountant?
That provenance somehow makes it even better
I guess if I'd worked harder at school I could by now have been an ageing hack with a flat in Camden. But there's no point in regrets.
I was always that that the rule of law and liberal democracy were fundamental European and US values. It seems, though, that owning the libs is now what matters most. All else must be sacrificed to secure that aim.
Because you libs have basically destroyed our countries we are left with no choice
I was always that that the rule of law and liberal democracy were fundamental European and US values. It seems, though, that owning the libs is now what matters most. All else must be sacrificed to secure that aim.
Trump's politics are indistinguishable from those of a centrist Democrat c. 1990. Arguably he is saving liberalism from the radical progressives who have been driving it off the cliff for the last few decades.
In my little corner of the world, DOGE has claimed that the US Patent and Trademark Office costs the American taxpayer $2 billion a year in wages. This couldn’t be more wrong. The USPTO costs the US taxpayer nothing. It is self-funding. In fact, in the past it has subsidised other parts of the US government via fee diversion. What’s more, a large proportion of the revenue the office generates comes from outside the US, in application, registration and renewal charges paid by foreign entities. If DOGE is so obviously wrong about this, what else is it wrong about?
I read an interesting open letter from a chap who used to be besties with Elon and they were in business together. An interesting part was that apparently Elon hates patents as the actual inventor has to be named and as he doesn’t actually do any of the inventing he doesn’t want it to be so obvious. So USPTO was always going to suffer.
I was always that that the rule of law and liberal democracy were fundamental European and US values. It seems, though, that owning the libs is now what matters most. All else must be sacrificed to secure that aim.
Because you libs have basically destroyed our countries we are left with no choice
Of course. The way to way to treasure values such as the rule of law, liberal democracy and freedom of speech is to destroy them.
NATO is (was?!) built on the assumption that if the Russians invaded Europe then the Americans would move troops and materiel to Europe to counter-attack. That is what the old REFORGER exercises were and the Exercise Steadfast Defender exercises are. If USA decides to just not turn up, then NATO is over.
Whilst asserting that the USA is some kind of democratic paragon with no interference, and in a regime making a full out attack on the rule of law - often personally.
He asserts that a senior official being concerned about a similar event in Germany is an *intention* to do the same thing.
He a twunt so far up his own rabbit hole that only the soles of his feet are visible.
He may of course know exactly what he is doing, and be cynical about it.
I was always that that the rule of law and liberal democracy were fundamental European and US values. It seems, though, that owning the libs is now what matters most. All else must be sacrificed to secure that aim.
Trump's politics are indistinguishable from those of a centrist Democrat c. 1990. Arguably he is saving liberalism from the radical progressives who have been driving it off the cliff for the last few decades.
He absolutely is. The only way to save liberalism is to destroy it.
It is interesting to note that for the last decade the UK electorate have been voting to make themselves poorer. From Brexit to Johnson and now Labour. The idea that switching resources from the productive private sector to the unproductive public sector will get you growth on its own is laughable. The old tricks of the government such as bringing in foreign labour or selling off assets no longer work. The only way to get growth back is when we decide to focus our resources on investnents with good returns not humanity or DEI objectives.
The richest people in the country are the most negative on Labour and I fall into this category. I am already planning for a sterling crash keeping more money offshore. I am cutting back on my labour budget and looking only at opportunities with rapid returns. The reality is there are many opportunities as so many of my competitors have been sold off to overseas multinationals.
The middle class prefer to ponder about Gaza and Ukraine where we can do little than the chaos in our streets. As such I doubt much will change immediately. However at some point Reform or some incarnation of it will take power. The only question is is this going to happen soon or in many years.
Quite strong "Mayfair 70s gaming club" energy here.
Hmmmm
perhaps you mean -
????
I was thinking Lucky, Jimmy, Aspers, Taki, all that scene.
Perhaps a bit unfair on Hamilton since he voted Remain.
I didn't detect a murdering one's children's nanny vibe at all.
Yes, that too. He voted Remain and showed no inclination to violence against domestic staff.
I was always that that the rule of law and liberal democracy were fundamental European and US values. It seems, though, that owning the libs is now what matters most. All else must be sacrificed to secure that aim.
Trump's politics are indistinguishable from those of a centrist Democrat c. 1990. Arguably he is saving liberalism from the radical progressives who have been driving it off the cliff for the last few decades.
He absolutely is. The only way to save liberalism is to destroy it.
Progressivism is incompatible with liberalism. It's progressivism that must be destroyed to save liberalism.
I was always that that the rule of law and liberal democracy were fundamental European and US values. It seems, though, that owning the libs is now what matters most. All else must be sacrificed to secure that aim.
Trump's politics are indistinguishable from those of a centrist Democrat c. 1990. Arguably he is saving liberalism from the radical progressives who have been driving it off the cliff for the last few decades.
He absolutely is. The only way to save liberalism is to destroy it.
Progressivism is incompatible with liberalism. It's progressivism that must be destroyed to save liberalism.
Got it - and free speech, free trade, the rule of law and liberal democracy are progressive so have to be have to be destroyed. I can see it now. Cheers!
In my little corner of the world, DOGE has claimed that the US Patent and Trademark Office costs the American taxpayer $2 billion a year in wages. This couldn’t be more wrong. The USPTO costs the US taxpayer nothing. It is self-funding. In fact, in the past it has subsidised other parts of the US government via fee diversion. What’s more, a large proportion of the revenue the office generates comes from outside the US, in application, registration and renewal charges paid by foreign entities. If DOGE is so obviously wrong about this, what else is it wrong about?
I read an interesting open letter from a chap who used to be besties with Elon and they were in business together. An interesting part was that apparently Elon hates patents as the actual inventor has to be named and as he doesn’t actually do any of the inventing he doesn’t want it to be so obvious. So USPTO was always going to suffer.
Yep, he is an on the record hater of patents. They stop him doing stuff he wants to do - like nicking other people's ideas.
I was always that that the rule of law and liberal democracy were fundamental European and US values. It seems, though, that owning the libs is now what matters most. All else must be sacrificed to secure that aim.
Trump's politics are indistinguishable from those of a centrist Democrat c. 1990. Arguably he is saving liberalism from the radical progressives who have been driving it off the cliff for the last few decades.
He absolutely is. The only way to save liberalism is to destroy it.
Progressivism is incompatible with liberalism. It's progressivism that must be destroyed to save liberalism.
Got it - and free speech, free trade, the rule of law and liberal democracy are progressive so have to be have to be destroyed. I can see it now. Cheers!
The most anti-democratic current of thought in the West at the moment is the idea that the winner of an election should be prevented from implementing his policies and it's not Trump who is promoting it.
I was always that that the rule of law and liberal democracy were fundamental European and US values. It seems, though, that owning the libs is now what matters most. All else must be sacrificed to secure that aim.
Trump's politics are indistinguishable from those of a centrist Democrat c. 1990.
The centrist Democrat in the 1990s was Bill Clinton. They are plainly different people with different policies
'Concerns are growing the UK could be hit with higher US trade taxes after President Donald Trump announced he would target VAT in his latest move.
Trump has instructed his staff to develop custom "reciprocal tariffs" - charging the same amount as levies imposed on American exports - for each country.
The UK's trading relationship with US had suggested it would be less exposed to tariffs than others, but the surprise inclusion of VAT to calculate potential tariffs has prompted questions over the impact on British businesses.
Analysts have suggested tariffs of 20% or more could be placed on the UK as well as the European Union.'
Trump's focus on VAT displays a jaw dropping level of economic illiteracy. VAT is designed to be completely non-disctiminatory between domestic production and imports. Either his team is completely ignorant or this is simply a smokescreen designed to justify punitive US tariffs under the guise of reciprocity.
Hmm - in theory. In practice the EU's VAT arrangement acts as an impediment to outside trade if you're outside the bloc. Our german accountants reckon it'll take a year+ to recover some MwSt owed to us on a B2B intra EU transaction. It was much easier inside the EU to recover German VAT (I did it myself), but now we're back of the queue. And yes, that is because of Brexit. Tbh that was the main reason for my remain vote, to remain part of the effective VAT area. It's a pain in the arse being outside it.
I was always that that the rule of law and liberal democracy were fundamental European and US values. It seems, though, that owning the libs is now what matters most. All else must be sacrificed to secure that aim.
Trump's politics are indistinguishable from those of a centrist Democrat c. 1990. Arguably he is saving liberalism from the radical progressives who have been driving it off the cliff for the last few decades.
Bill Clinton and Gore backed NAFTA not tariff wars and were more open to immigration than Trump too and backed a 2 state solution in the Middle East and NATO
It is interesting to note that for the last decade the UK electorate have been voting to make themselves poorer. From Brexit to Johnson and now Labour. The idea that switching resources from the productive private sector to the unproductive public sector will get you growth on its own is laughable. The old tricks of the government such as bringing in foreign labour or selling off assets no longer work. The only way to get growth back is when we decide to focus our resources on investnents with good returns not humanity or DEI objectives.
The richest people in the country are the most negative on Labour and I fall into this category. I am already planning for a sterling crash keeping more money offshore. I am cutting back on my labour budget and looking only at opportunities with rapid returns. The reality is there are many opportunities as so many of my competitors have been sold off to overseas multinationals.
The middle class prefer to ponder about Gaza and Ukraine where we can do little than the chaos in our streets. As such I doubt much will change immediately. However at some point Reform or some incarnation of it will take power. The only question is is this going to happen soon or in many years.
Brexit was a F*** you vote by those who were poor and didn’t think the Government was doing anything for them.
The 2017 election was a lost vote due to May screwing up the election.
2019 was Bozo saying he will implement Brexit and getting elected by the have nots to implement it.
2024 was the consequences of Bozo and co failing to give the have nots what he promised
2028/9 is likely to be the same with the have nots voting for someone else to delivery the impossible - nothing is going to change because most of the have nots are never going to be better off - it’s just not possible to fix the problems they have
There is a lot of truth in that
Indeed successive politicians not telling the truth because it is politically toxic is why I see no end to it, unless it is taken out of their control by the IMF at sometime in the future
It isn't really true, The leave voting block was predominantly retired and thus generally home owning and less credentialed. The 'poor' by whatever metrics were much more likely to not vote.
The most distinctive split in the last few elections is between the working age groups and those who are older. If we excluded the over 65s IMO Labour would have won every election since 2017. I will agree that Reform are now muddying the waters but I do not believe Nigel will sway even a plurality of the working age groups.
NATO is (was?!) built on the assumption that if the Russians invaded Europe then the Americans would move troops and materiel to Europe to counter-attack. That is what the old REFORGER exercises were and the Exercise Steadfast Defender exercises are. If USA decides to just not turn up, then NATO is over.
Accepting 16 new members since 1999 may soon seem like overreach, especially now the leading country in NATO is saying its contributions are too expensive. I don't feel sympathy with the compradores at all.
I was always that that the rule of law and liberal democracy were fundamental European and US values. It seems, though, that owning the libs is now what matters most. All else must be sacrificed to secure that aim.
Trump's politics are indistinguishable from those of a centrist Democrat c. 1990. Arguably he is saving liberalism from the radical progressives who have been driving it off the cliff for the last few decades.
He absolutely is. The only way to save liberalism is to destroy it.
Progressivism is incompatible with liberalism. It's progressivism that must be destroyed to save liberalism.
Got it - and free speech, free trade, the rule of law and liberal democracy are progressive so have to be have to be destroyed. I can see it now. Cheers!
There's an interesting point here.
It's not that progressivism is incompatible with liberalism. It is compatible.
What is incompatible is the conception that the law can be used to end-run democracy. That gets you Caesarism.
'Concerns are growing the UK could be hit with higher US trade taxes after President Donald Trump announced he would target VAT in his latest move.
Trump has instructed his staff to develop custom "reciprocal tariffs" - charging the same amount as levies imposed on American exports - for each country.
The UK's trading relationship with US had suggested it would be less exposed to tariffs than others, but the surprise inclusion of VAT to calculate potential tariffs has prompted questions over the impact on British businesses.
Analysts have suggested tariffs of 20% or more could be placed on the UK as well as the European Union.'
Trump's focus on VAT displays a jaw dropping level of economic illiteracy. VAT is designed to be completely non-disctiminatory between domestic production and imports. Either his team is completely ignorant or this is simply a smokescreen designed to justify punitive US tariffs under the guise of reciprocity.
Hmm - in theory. In practice the EU's VAT arrangement acts as an impediment to outside trade if you're outside the bloc. Our german accountants reckon it'll take a year+ to recover some MwSt owed to us on a B2B intra EU transaction. It was much easier inside the EU to recover German VAT (I did it myself), but now we're back of the queue. And yes, that is because of Brexit. Tbh that was the main reason for my remain vote, to remain part of the effective VAT area. It's a pain in the arse being outside it.
That’s a fairly niche area though - 99.9% of the time it’s just a sales tax carefully designed to maximize tax take
And your problem there probably is the fact Germany is involved if something can be made complex they will find a way to do so
It is interesting to note that for the last decade the UK electorate have been voting to make themselves poorer. From Brexit to Johnson and now Labour. The idea that switching resources from the productive private sector to the unproductive public sector will get you growth on its own is laughable. The old tricks of the government such as bringing in foreign labour or selling off assets no longer work. The only way to get growth back is when we decide to focus our resources on investnents with good returns not humanity or DEI objectives.
The richest people in the country are the most negative on Labour and I fall into this category. I am already planning for a sterling crash keeping more money offshore. I am cutting back on my labour budget and looking only at opportunities with rapid returns. The reality is there are many opportunities as so many of my competitors have been sold off to overseas multinationals.
The middle class prefer to ponder about Gaza and Ukraine where we can do little than the chaos in our streets. As such I doubt much will change immediately. However at some point Reform or some incarnation of it will take power. The only question is is this going to happen soon or in many years.
Brexit was a F*** you vote by those who were poor and didn’t think the Government was doing anything for them.
The 2017 election was a lost vote due to May screwing up the election.
2019 was Bozo saying he will implement Brexit and getting elected by the have nots to implement it.
2024 was the consequences of Bozo and co failing to give the have nots what he promised
2028/9 is likely to be the same with the have nots voting for someone else to delivery the impossible - nothing is going to change because most of the have nots are never going to be better off - it’s just not possible to fix the problems they have
There is a lot of truth in that
Indeed successive politicians not telling the truth because it is politically toxic is why I see no end to it, unless it is taken out of their control by the IMF at sometime in the future
It isn't really true, The leave voting block was predominantly retired and thus generally home owning and less credentialed. The 'poor' by whatever metrics were much more likely to not vote.
The most distinctive split in the last few elections is between the working age groups and those who are older. If we excluded the over 65s IMO Labour would have won every election since 2017. I will agree that Reform are now muddying the waters but I do not believe Nigel will sway even a plurality of the working age groups.
Except most voters over 45 not 65 voted Leave in 2016 and Reform do best with 50-70s in most polls not pensioners
'Concerns are growing the UK could be hit with higher US trade taxes after President Donald Trump announced he would target VAT in his latest move.
Trump has instructed his staff to develop custom "reciprocal tariffs" - charging the same amount as levies imposed on American exports - for each country.
The UK's trading relationship with US had suggested it would be less exposed to tariffs than others, but the surprise inclusion of VAT to calculate potential tariffs has prompted questions over the impact on British businesses.
Analysts have suggested tariffs of 20% or more could be placed on the UK as well as the European Union.'
Trump's focus on VAT displays a jaw dropping level of economic illiteracy. VAT is designed to be completely non-disctiminatory between domestic production and imports. Either his team is completely ignorant or this is simply a smokescreen designed to justify punitive US tariffs under the guise of reciprocity.
Hmm - in theory. In practice the EU's VAT arrangement acts as an impediment to outside trade if you're outside the bloc. Our german accountants reckon it'll take a year+ to recover some MwSt owed to us on a B2B intra EU transaction. It was much easier inside the EU to recover German VAT (I did it myself), but now we're back of the queue. And yes, that is because of Brexit. Tbh that was the main reason for my remain vote, to remain part of the effective VAT area. It's a pain in the arse being outside it.
That’s a fairly niche area though - 99.9% it’s just a sales tax carefully designed to maximize tax take
It's relevant if you're operating big contracts within the EU. Us (And the US) are at a disadvantage compared to EU firms on this one. We've mitigated it by the use of various within EU VAT registrations and accountants but it's still there as a post Brexit issue.
I was always that that the rule of law and liberal democracy were fundamental European and US values. It seems, though, that owning the libs is now what matters most. All else must be sacrificed to secure that aim.
Trump's politics are indistinguishable from those of a centrist Democrat c. 1990.
The centrist Democrat in the 1990s was Bill Clinton. They are plainly different people with different policies
No, that was before Clinton transformed the Democrats into a party of corporate interests.
Trump's strategy is to be as confusing as possible so his opponents never quite know where he stands. Where does he stand on Ukraine? It's difficult to tell.
My guess is that he is trying to impose a deal, as for Israel/Hamas.
He is threatening both sides to get them to sign *something*. My guesstimate is a ceasefire in place.
I think a ceasefire in place is most likely. That was in effect the position between 2014 and 2022, with a fair number of ceasefire violations.
It is possible for such ceasefire to endure (Korea and China/Taiwan for example) but they are inherently unstable. A ceasefire is different to a lasting peace treaty.
Both sides would re-arm and prepare for the next round. Ukraine would bind itself into the EU economic system, but probably not NATO. Russia would agitate for sanctions to drop.
So, wait, you’re saying iits going to end up as a Korea style armistice?
If only we’d listened to that pb-er who told us all this 18 months ago; unfortunately I believe he was shouted down as a “Putinist shill” and a “fucking appeaser”
It is appeasement. Just because it might happen doesn't make it any less appeasement. And all it will mean is that Russia rearm, reorganise and come back for another go in a few years. Anyone who supports this is indeed a fucking appeaser. Putin wins. Ukraine and Europe - inluding the UK - lose.
Having a view on the outcome of a conflict doesn't make one an appeaser or anything else. It makes one an analyst.
'Supporting' is not just analysis.
Where is the support bit in wot he wrote:
“I disagree. Putin and Russia are all in. Russia will not be defeated like this, ie with total Ukrainian victory
OTOH I can’t see how Russia wins, either. I predict a long bloody stalemate that ends with a Korean style partition and an exhausted armistice”
The Russian oil industry is now "all in" because the bulk of it is situated west of the Urals and now in range of Ukraine drone strikes. There could perhaps have been back channel chats to keep power and oil facilities "off limits" to both sides. But that hasn't happened. The latest Ukrainian strikes on oil refining and storage capacity are taking it off-line for months. Maybe longer, as Russia doesn't have access to spares embargoed by the West. Whilst chips for missiles might get smuggled in from various of the Stans, trying to smuggle in a number of distillation towers isn't possible. So the capacity to refine crude oil is reducing at an alarming rate for Russia.
If it can't refine the oil, it has to store it until it can sell it. As sales to India are the latest to have ended, there's more need for storage - which storage the Ukrainians are destroying. If it can't store it, Russia has to stop production. Stopping production can be terminal to oil wells continuing production. It means they have to be reworked when production recommences. This process is very expensive and can take years - as was shown when the Soviet Union collapsed.
If Ukraine isn't leant on to stop hitting the Russian refining and storage capacity, it's hand in the negotaition gets stronger and stronger over time. No Russian oil = no money for Russia = no Russian army in Ukraine. Russia has planned its war on the expectation that Trump will step in to call for a ceasefire that fixes the current de facto borders. Russia is absolutely at the limit of holding its gains in Ukraine. Stockpiles of Soviet-era tanks and infantry fighting vehicles are largely gone; Russian production is a fraction of losses on the battlefield. Its infantry are now trying to get to the Ukrainian lines in comandeered cars. Few make it. Many more months of this will expose the Russian army for the hollowed out entity that remains.
Naturally I didn't read your post (keep it pithy would be my advice).
But if it says something like just one more push/Russia is going to run out of XYZ/any minute now he will fail/etc then give over.
Just today, Ukraine have hit a steel mill that produces 20% of Russia's steel...
In my little corner of the world, DOGE has claimed that the US Patent and Trademark Office costs the American taxpayer $2 billion a year in wages. This couldn’t be more wrong. The USPTO costs the US taxpayer nothing. It is self-funding. In fact, in the past it has subsidised other parts of the US government via fee diversion. What’s more, a large proportion of the revenue the office generates comes from outside the US, in application, registration and renewal charges paid by foreign entities. If DOGE is so obviously wrong about this, what else is it wrong about?
They just pump out lies but those predisposed to believe can't see it.
I guess the good news is that they are moving so fast that for there's a decent chance that their disastrous management will catch up with them whilst they are still in office.
Whilst asserting that the USA is some kind of democratic paragon with no interference, and in a regime making a full out attack on the rule of law - often personally.
He asserts that a senior official being concerned about a similar event in Germany is an *intention* to do the same thing.
He a twunt so far up his own rabbit hole that only the soles of his feet are visible.
He may of course know exactly what he is doing, and be cynical about it.
Typo sorry.
Romanian -> Romanian election. He -> he's.
JD Vance can provoke. He might have a case if so much of his argument was not patent misrepresentation. Perhaps he gets it out of the Daily Express.
I think he perhaps needs to go home and reflect on why Usonians kill 50,000 of each other every year with their guns, then have a think about whether the Wild West is the best model for a modern society.
The stream is here, and I can't deep link. It was 14:30pm - count back from now.
Paul Krugman rightly highlighting the risk that Trump is going to cook the books to deny the inevitable coming inflation. Bad news if you bought treasury inflation protected securities. They only protect you against the inflation Trump thinks are happening.
In my little corner of the world, DOGE has claimed that the US Patent and Trademark Office costs the American taxpayer $2 billion a year in wages. This couldn’t be more wrong. The USPTO costs the US taxpayer nothing. It is self-funding. In fact, in the past it has subsidised other parts of the US government via fee diversion. What’s more, a large proportion of the revenue the office generates comes from outside the US, in application, registration and renewal charges paid by foreign entities. If DOGE is so obviously wrong about this, what else is it wrong about?
They just pump out lies but those predisposed to believe can't see it.
I guess the good news is that they are moving so fast that for there's a decent chance that their disastrous management will catch up with them whilst they are still in office.
But the damage will still be done and I think Musk is very much of the viewpoint break things and see what the end result looks like.
Musk is going to destroy a lot of things quickly -
It is interesting to note that for the last decade the UK electorate have been voting to make themselves poorer. From Brexit to Johnson and now Labour. The idea that switching resources from the productive private sector to the unproductive public sector will get you growth on its own is laughable. The old tricks of the government such as bringing in foreign labour or selling off assets no longer work. The only way to get growth back is when we decide to focus our resources on investnents with good returns not humanity or DEI objectives.
The richest people in the country are the most negative on Labour and I fall into this category. I am already planning for a sterling crash keeping more money offshore. I am cutting back on my labour budget and looking only at opportunities with rapid returns. The reality is there are many opportunities as so many of my competitors have been sold off to overseas multinationals.
The middle class prefer to ponder about Gaza and Ukraine where we can do little than the chaos in our streets. As such I doubt much will change immediately. However at some point Reform or some incarnation of it will take power. The only question is is this going to happen soon or in many years.
Brexit was a F*** you vote by those who were poor and didn’t think the Government was doing anything for them.
The 2017 election was a lost vote due to May screwing up the election.
2019 was Bozo saying he will implement Brexit and getting elected by the have nots to implement it.
2024 was the consequences of Bozo and co failing to give the have nots what he promised
2028/9 is likely to be the same with the have nots voting for someone else to delivery the impossible - nothing is going to change because most of the have nots are never going to be better off - it’s just not possible to fix the problems they have
There is a lot of truth in that
Indeed successive politicians not telling the truth because it is politically toxic is why I see no end to it, unless it is taken out of their control by the IMF at sometime in the future
It isn't really true, The leave voting block was predominantly retired and thus generally home owning and less credentialed. The 'poor' by whatever metrics were much more likely to not vote.
The most distinctive split in the last few elections is between the working age groups and those who are older. If we excluded the over 65s IMO Labour would have won every election since 2017. I will agree that Reform are now muddying the waters but I do not believe Nigel will sway even a plurality of the working age groups.
Except most voters over 45 not 65 voted Leave in 2016 and Reform do best with 50-70s in most polls not pensioners
Not most over 45, most somewhere between 45-65. Where that boundary lies who knows?
Its effectively evens between Cons and Reform at the 50-64 age range. No need to bring the older groups into it. A plurality of working age groups it is not.
It is interesting to note that for the last decade the UK electorate have been voting to make themselves poorer. From Brexit to Johnson and now Labour. The idea that switching resources from the productive private sector to the unproductive public sector will get you growth on its own is laughable. The old tricks of the government such as bringing in foreign labour or selling off assets no longer work. The only way to get growth back is when we decide to focus our resources on investnents with good returns not humanity or DEI objectives.
The richest people in the country are the most negative on Labour and I fall into this category. I am already planning for a sterling crash keeping more money offshore. I am cutting back on my labour budget and looking only at opportunities with rapid returns. The reality is there are many opportunities as so many of my competitors have been sold off to overseas multinationals.
The middle class prefer to ponder about Gaza and Ukraine where we can do little than the chaos in our streets. As such I doubt much will change immediately. However at some point Reform or some incarnation of it will take power. The only question is is this going to happen soon or in many years.
Brexit was a F*** you vote by those who were poor and didn’t think the Government was doing anything for them.
The 2017 election was a lost vote due to May screwing up the election.
2019 was Bozo saying he will implement Brexit and getting elected by the have nots to implement it.
2024 was the consequences of Bozo and co failing to give the have nots what he promised
2028/9 is likely to be the same with the have nots voting for someone else to delivery the impossible - nothing is going to change because most of the have nots are never going to be better off - it’s just not possible to fix the problems they have
There is a lot of truth in that
Indeed successive politicians not telling the truth because it is politically toxic is why I see no end to it, unless it is taken out of their control by the IMF at sometime in the future
It isn't really true, The leave voting block was predominantly retired and thus generally home owning and less credentialed. The 'poor' by whatever metrics were much more likely to not vote.
The most distinctive split in the last few elections is between the working age groups and those who are older. If we excluded the over 65s IMO Labour would have won every election since 2017. I will agree that Reform are now muddying the waters but I do not believe Nigel will sway even a plurality of the working age groups.
Except most voters over 45 not 65 voted Leave in 2016 and Reform do best with 50-70s in most polls not pensioners
Not most over 45, most somewhere between 45-65. Where that boundary lies who knows?
Its effectively evens between Cons and Reform at the 50-64 age range. No need to bring the older groups into it. A plurality of working age groups it is not.
Not that working age groups alone are decisive anyway, the median UK voter is now 50 not 30
I was always that that the rule of law and liberal democracy were fundamental European and US values. It seems, though, that owning the libs is now what matters most. All else must be sacrificed to secure that aim.
Trump's politics are indistinguishable from those of a centrist Democrat c. 1990.
The centrist Democrat in the 1990s was Bill Clinton. They are plainly different people with different policies
No, that was before Clinton transformed the Democrats into a party of corporate interests.
Comments
You're probably more attached to the idea of party than I am - I've had no interest in being a member of one for the last four decades - but while my views might have changed over the years, my values have done so far less than those of any of the parties.
If it can't refine the oil, it has to store it until it can sell it. As sales to India are the latest to have ended, there's more need for storage - which storage the Ukrainians are destroying. If it can't store it, Russia has to stop production. Stopping production can be terminal to oil wells continuing production. It means they have to be reworked when production recommences. This process is very expensive and can take years - as was shown when the Soviet Union collapsed.
If Ukraine isn't leant on to stop hitting the Russian refining and storage capacity, it's hand in the negotaition gets stronger and stronger over time. No Russian oil = no money for Russia = no Russian army in Ukraine. Russia has planned its war on the expectation that Trump will step in to call for a ceasefire that fixes the current de facto borders. Russia is absolutely at the limit of holding its gains in Ukraine. Stockpiles of Soviet-era tanks and infantry fighting vehicles are largely gone; Russian production is a fraction of losses on the battlefield. Its infantry are now trying to get to the Ukrainian lines in comandeered cars. Few make it. Many more months of this will expose the Russian army for the hollowed out entity that remains.
Let us remember though that Russia has sustained a huge number of losses, its economy is on the brink, and it has not achieved its initial war aims.
Putin wanted either a total annexation of Ukraine or a pliant satellite state run from Kyiv. He will not get either of those things. He’ll leave with the Donbass, in all likelihood, and a formal recognition of Russian sovereignty in Crimea. He will have expended much more to get those things than he ever imagined he would need to.
The great crime will not be ending the Ukraine war. I wish we did not have to and were able to help Ukraine to victory, just as I wish Putin had failed and been overthrown. The realpolitik of the situation means that a deal must be struck now. The great crime of our age will be committed if we do not now seize the small window we have available to create a European security apparatus to deter Putin from trying again in a few years’ time. If European politicians cannot rise to that challenge, they’ll be the “guilty men” of our age.
What's more, someone who was forced to resign from government twice.
The conclusion from us not being able to get what we want (if that's true) is that humanity is totally fucked.
I am outraged that Johnson as Foreign Secretary shed his minders to go to a party thrown by KGB operative Lebedev.
Even if we consider the Mandelson appointment unacceptable, Johnson, the Foreign Secretary no less, allegedly alone and "tired and emotional " on a Northern Italian station is on a different scale.
That’s where we are now. Ukraine has bought us time - with blood. So we must use it. Defence spend has to go up to 3% - the same as the USA
But along with that we need a much more ruthless pursuit of the national and western interests. Which means no more Chagos nonsense and much less undermining ourselves via migration
But "on the brink of..." sounds like some event whereafter that will be that he will be defeated once and for all.
It is precisely because this is unlikely that Trump is getting involved.
There's a reason people like Anna Soubry (Con-SDP-Con-Ind Grp-Change-Lab) or Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh (Con-Lab-SNP-Alba) aren't taken seriously.
The 'unique volatility' I would largely put at the door of politicians moving parties at a rate we haven't really experienced for a long time.
I didn't actually know that. Not been reported on much in the media - should it have been ? Seems a big story to me.
As for who's winning here I draw a distinction between Russia and Putin. Russia hasn't won. They've paid a price in money and lives out of all proportion to the gains. Putin however has won. He's been sat there in Moscow the whole time doing no fighting whatsoever and spending not a cent of his own money. It's all gains for him.
But if it says something like just one more push/Russia is going to run out of XYZ/any minute now he will fail/etc then give over.
With what aim? Something to do with Mordor, is it?
FFS, the shite I read on the internet...
The richest people in the country are the most negative on Labour and I fall into this category. I am already planning for a sterling crash keeping more money offshore. I am cutting back on my labour budget and looking only at opportunities with rapid returns. The reality is there are many opportunities as so many of my competitors have been sold off to overseas multinationals.
The middle class prefer to ponder about Gaza and Ukraine where we can do little than the chaos in our streets. As such I doubt much will change immediately. However at some point Reform or some incarnation of it will take power. The only question is is this going to happen soon or in many years.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/a-final-favour-how-mandelson-s-last-act-in-brussels-boosted-russian-oligarch-973813.html
"In October 2008 Mandelson was reported to have maintained private contacts over several years with Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska, most recently on holiday in August 2008 on Deripaska's yacht at Taverna Agni on the Greek island of Corfu.[125] News of the contacts sparked criticism because, as European Union Trade Commissioner, Mandelson had been responsible for two decisions to cut aluminium tariffs that had benefited Deripaska's United Company Rusal"
And he has had significant business interests with Russia. But for some reason Labour-leaning posters tend to screech about Johnson, who at least has come out very vocally and strongly against Russia's actions and Putin.
A genuine question: what statements has Mandelson made about the war?
His credibility has been massively dented.
The Wagner Group incident showed that there is far from an instant reaction to defend Putin and his works. In his own court.
Would a government under Labour or the Conservatives making and fulfilling all the promises now being made by Reform count as an incarnation of Reform taking power? It's not as if political parties are juggernauts. All that's required is money.
Business interests - yes, his business was called "Global Counsel". Undue influence via business interests - not a lot.
Unless there is hard evidence around.
His plans make the Truss Kamikwase budget look credible, so highly likely.
perhaps you mean -
????
The Guardian says “he left the room stunned”
The 2017 election was a lost vote due to May screwing up the election.
2019 was Bozo saying he will implement Brexit and getting elected by the have nots to implement it.
2024 was the consequences of Bozo and co failing to give the have nots what he promised
2028/9 is likely to be the same with the have nots voting for someone else to delivery the impossible - nothing is going to change because most of the have nots are never going to be better off - it’s just not possible to fix the problems they have
Perhaps a bit unfair on Hamilton since he voted Remain.
That provenance somehow makes it even better
Crickets ...
Indeed successive politicians not telling the truth because it is politically toxic is why I see no end to it, unless it is taken out of their control by the IMF at sometime in the future
Bush I - the guy who got the Israelis and the Arabs to fight on the same side?
Who international presence and power was such, in his presidency, that when he *suggested* that force wasn't entirely ruled out, Quaddafi destroyed his poison gas plant the next day. And promised to be a good boy and eat his dinner properly and everything.
Trump has instructed his staff to develop custom "reciprocal tariffs" - charging the same amount as levies imposed on American exports - for each country.
The UK's trading relationship with US had suggested it would be less exposed to tariffs than others, but the surprise inclusion of VAT to calculate potential tariffs has prompted questions over the impact on British businesses.
Analysts have suggested tariffs of 20% or more could be placed on the UK as well as the European Union.'
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c863zd9zz42o
He should publish what he thinks. He publishes so many other thoughts that bounce around in his head.
And the UK, Canada, Greenland, Panama and others watch in dismay
The only thing that is surprising is how surprised everyone is that Trump is doing exactly as he said he would and at an incredible rate
Vance suggests that the cancellation of the Romanian where there was clear evidence of manipulation by Russian agencies is in some way outrageous.
https://www.journalofdemocracy.org/online-exclusive/why-romania-just-canceled-its-presidential-election/
Whilst asserting that the USA is some kind of democratic paragon with no interference, and in a regime making a full out attack on the rule of law - often personally.
He asserts that a senior official being concerned about a similar event in Germany is an *intention* to do the same thing.
He a twunt so far up his own rabbit hole that only the soles of his feet are visible.
He may of course know exactly what he is doing, and be cynical about it.
I'm psyching up to issue a fullsome apology.
or maybe Weinstein's potted plant?
https://d3nkl3psvxxpe9.cloudfront.net/documents/EUFinalCall_Reweighted.pdf
The most distinctive split in the last few elections is between the working age groups and those who are older. If we excluded the over 65s IMO Labour would have won every election since 2017. I will agree that Reform are now muddying the waters but I do not believe Nigel will sway even a plurality of the working age groups.
It's not that progressivism is incompatible with liberalism. It is compatible.
What is incompatible is the conception that the law can be used to end-run democracy. That gets you Caesarism.
And your problem there probably is the fact Germany is involved if something can be made complex they will find a way to do so
Compare with Dukakis' anti-free trade rhetoric:
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1988-03-19-mn-1306-story.html
More Democrats voted against NAFTA than for it in both the Senate and House.
I guess the good news is that they are moving so fast that for there's a decent chance that their disastrous management will catch up with them whilst they are still in office.
Romanian -> Romanian election.
He -> he's.
JD Vance can provoke. He might have a case if so much of his argument was not patent misrepresentation. Perhaps he gets it out of the Daily Express.
I think he perhaps needs to go home and reflect on why Usonians kill 50,000 of each other every year with their guns, then have a think about whether the Wild West is the best model for a modern society.
The stream is here, and I can't deep link. It was 14:30pm - count back from now.
https://www.youtube.com/live/USTnbAMTUr8
Musk is going to destroy a lot of things quickly -
Its effectively evens between Cons and Reform at the 50-64 age range. No need to bring the older groups into it. A plurality of working age groups it is not.